City Journal Autumn 2014

Current Issue:

Autumn 2014
Table of Contents
Subscribe
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Benjamin Domenech
Are You a Moocher? « Back to Story

View Comments (26)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.


 
Showing 26 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
I don't believe that all those on public assistance will vote for Obama. I don't believe all school teachers and their like will vote for Obama. I believe Obama has attacked the heart of America, that he has attacked who we are morally. I think that many of these (the 47%) Americans using the safety net, working for unions, working for the government, still love the idea of America and are patriotic. The safety net is humiliating to many, they want to be independent they want opportunity for their children. The the pitch should be opportunity and liberty.
I don't believe that all those on public assistance will vote for Obama. I don't believe all school teachers and their like will vote for Obama. I believe Obama has attacked the heart of America, that he has attacked who we are morally. I think that many of these (the 47%) Americans using the safety net, working for unions, working for the government, still love the idea of America and are patriotic. The safety net is humiliating to many, they want to be independent they want opportunity for their children. The the pitch should be opportunity and liberty.
I don't believe that all those on public assistance will vote for Obama. I don't believe all school teachers and their like will vote for Obama. I believe Obama has attacked the heart of America, that he has attacked who we are morally. I think that many of these (the 47%) Americans using the safety net, working for unions, working for the government, still love the idea of America and are patriotic. The safety net is humiliating to many, they want to be independent they want opportunity for their children. The the pitch should be opportunity and liberty.
Let's try for a fundamental ignorance of American demographics, coupled with Limbowegian self-pity.

-- 23% = working poor and students with jobs
-- 7% = working poor with children
-- 10% = retirees on Social Security
-- 6% = a combination of long-term physical and mental health disabilities, military disability, prisoners, vow-of-poverty nuns and monks with some income, some of the unemployed, and the roughly 2% on welfare.

All them "dependent" folks who don't care for their lives. Really???
So, for those people who ARE in the 47%, but don't think that Romney is talking about them, who do they think he is talking about? Who is that "modal moocher" of the mind? Is it just "welfare queens" – with all the racial toxicity that that implies? Be cause surely everyone is aware that welfare queens don't make up half the country...
Romney was right on with his remarks, and his 'tin ear' on such things as Jerusalem,Russia, and China (all correct) would be taken as refreshing candor and bluntness in reasonable company. Moochers come in insidious places. In the 80's, Rep. Claude Pepper stirred up a frenzy with the cry "Don't you dare touch my Social Security!" which made it difficult to discuss how inequitable that system really was, or how to solve deeper economic problems. Now that that last generation of dying geezers is largely gone, it remains to be seen whether the new generation of dying geezers is any more intelligent.

There are also the moochers George Soros, Warren Buffet and the like, who commend a mooch system on the rest of us although they appear to be beyond need of it themselves. They are apostles of big and muscular government, with a history of benefitting from subsidies, and no desire to direct their largess to directly benefitting the public in direct ways. Even Bill Gates has a more cultivated taste for benefitting the third world through UN type schemes (if anti-malarial mosquito netting is so cheap, the beneficiaries should be able to pay for it themselves)than to simply invest in the ordinary enterprises of ordinary Americans, by way of showing how much charity can be accomplished with almost no government at all.

The ultimate moochers are the beneficiaries of financial arbitrage, which might be an order of magnitude less without the Fed, US Treasury issue, and the housing/urban development lobbies sustaining it. So to paraphrase another Romney faux pas -- 'I'm not worried about the poor'-- I'm a lot less worried about the poor moochers, who are really transients in the system through unemployment insurance, workfare and such, than about the big daddies who are big tapeworms in disguise.
Another gaffe for telling the truth,is it?

Let's pull out those tapes of the women talking about getting their Obama Money (He got it in his stash, you know.) Or of the woman who said Obama was going to pay her mortgage. Or of the woman who begged Obama for help because she needed a new kitchen.

The truth is that the 43 months of 8-plus percent unemployment don't faze a not insignificant part of the population BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT A JOB. THEY WANT OBAMA MONEY.
What exactly did Romney say that wasnt true? 10% of the taxpayers pay 85% of the taxes. 47% of the people dont pay income taxes.
Probably 20% of the people in the US are drug addicts, thieves, criminals and bums who have no desire to do any honest work. 99.9999% of that 20% that can vote and do vote, vote for Democrats to continue their gravy train.

The MSM loves to spin but they just cant deal with the plain and simple facts as it makes Obama look bad.


I am retired, with a small private pension, Social Security and Medicare. I pay no federal income tax, but do not consider myself a mooch because I paid into those programs. The vast majority of my friends are in the same shape or worse.

We aren't stupid, even though the Democrats think we are. We understand what Mitt Romney meant and agree with the substance of his comments.

What we are really afraid of is that President Obama will continue to bankrupt the economy, weaken our defenses and devalue our currency. THEN WE WON'T HAVE THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT WE HAVE NOW.

It doesn't take an MBA to figure out that you can't keep spending 50% more than you take in and survive. You will wind up in prison.

Wake up America. NOBAMA 2012.
Big Government wants us ALL to be moochers...

http://piqscore.com/2012/06/economic-darwinism-and-the-lions-share/

... because that's the key to domesticating and then neutering the civilian population, in order to create the Utopian society.
I guess I am:

VA disability for combat wounds
Army retirement pay
Social Security

I feel that I earned the above benefits
I agree with Mr. Davis: if you let the lefty flame-throwers trick you into arguing about whether you beat your wife or not, you've already lost the argument.

American patriots -- those of us who hold our nation's ideals close to our hearts -- need to go on the attack against the Left. And that really is who we're dealing with.

And there's this: since Barack Hussein Obama took office in 2009, federal welfare spending has increased by 41% -- more than $193 Billion per year! That's nearly Double, folks. Yet the "poverty rate" remains where it was in 1965: at 15.1%

Remind me again what we're throwing our money away for? Some of the spending is due to the depression, but the BO Administration has expanded eligibility deliberately: income limits have risen twice as fast as inflation.
David Corn is a far-left activist who's been a flame-thrower for the Left before.

This video, moreover, was edited: cut immediately after Romney's "inflammatory" remark about the 47%. In fact, the crude splice cuts him off in mid-sentence. (See not-yet-europe dot com for the portion in question; there's also a post up on this at The Blaze and elsewhere.)

Question: What did Romney say immediately after the remark that would have undermined "Mother Jones'" argument? (Corn at first lied about it, then admitted the tape had a "gap," but he said it was a technical problem: if you see the video, though, it's obvious they cut and spliced it.)

I do disagree with Mitt saying that these people should be written off: a great many of them Do want jobs and Don't want to be on public assistance. They just don't see how to get out of the sandpit.

And finally: for the love of Mike, can Someone on the Republican team start making the case for the good old American Way? you know, that crazy set of ideas that propelled us to being the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world, in 200 years flat? That old stuff!
What did Romney say after this statement - the part deleted by whoever recorded this? Oh right, the tape machine went off "by mistake" - another example of Democratic lies - which conservative media falls for every time.

In fact, why can't conservatives take a page out of the Democratic campaign playbook and ignore pointless crap and irrelevancies like this? It seems like every time a Democratic commentator, pundit, reporter, journalista etc. like Chris Matthews or Bill Maher says something stupid or brings up something said by a Republican or conservative that they claim is controversial, all we hear is conservative talk radio and columnists endlessly repeating it - endlessly. Why? Why give credence to the statement and free publicity to those who made it or are claiming it is controversial?

After all, Democrats don't do when it something is said or pointed out by Republican or conservative commentators - unless it is to make phony charges of racism.

Anyone else wonder whether those in conservative media are serious, since it sometimes seems like it's a game, and like borscht belt comedians they roast and plug each other? But, it's all on one side, Democrats don't do it at all or rarely (and I listen to both). One really wonder sometimes - like when Gingrich was traveling around with Hillary Clinton, what was that about? I won't even mention the strange friendship between Bill Clinton and George W and George H Bush - twhich only enhanced Clinton and done nothing for either Bush (not that I could care less about George W. - without W's incompetence and Rove's cowardice we wouldn't have Obama - but that's another very long story).

The point is that the more discussion there is about these trivialities the more they matter - and in this campaign nothing should matter less.

It isn't as if anyone should be surprised that Democrats fight dirty and that Democratic media is biased - wasn't that abundantly clear from the last election? That Romney still caters to the traditional networks and Democratic media is a mystery - it's like establishment Republicans have a blind spot, they seem unable to comprehend that Democratic media has no interest in promoting them - just the opposite. So why patronize such media? - or does Romney want to depend on them to get his message out?

After all, shouldn't Romeny have learned about Democratic media from what happened to Palin, as in just why did Sarah Palin allow herself to be interviewed by Katie Couric? Couric was clearly gunning for her, heck she practically got a Pulitzer for the interview, but how could Republican strategists be stupid enough as to let her go on the show in the first place? maybe we make a mistake in thinking these people are really bright - jeez, you read Karl Rove's book and wonder how he could have successfully run an election for dog catcher.

Because if Romeny, even after the 2008 election, doesn't understand that Democratic media despises him and will do whatever it takes to ensure he loses the election, up to and including donating through nominees for the Obama campaign (yes I have no evidence for it - but give me a break, wasn't it Dan Rathers daughter who was a big Democratic fund raiser?) then maybe he shouldn't be running for President.

Because - seriously - if Romney can't figure out that he has no friends in the Democratic media then he may as well start writing his concession speech now. And anyone in his campaign who thinks it is a good idea to make "Good Morning America" appearances shold be fired on the spot.

Or maybe I'm wrong, but we should be able to agree that conservative media needs to get more serious, and the time has come for Republican candidates to accept reality and stay far far away from Democratic media - in fact, by going to Democratic media these candidates given this media much more power and credibility than they they should have. Conservative media is now pervasive enough to provide the support that candidates need.

In short, Romney must learn from McCain's mistakes, including the consequences of trying to play footsie with Democratic media.
You cannot have almost half of the country not contributing to the country's expenses. Back in the 1980s, it was just 15% exempted from federal income tax.

If people don't pay federal income tax, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to vote. No representation without taxation.

Benjamin, I believe you are way off the mark with this column. Of course, no one would come out and say they consider themselves a 'moocher' or very few would be proud of the fact that they survive off of so-called government entitlement programs. However, of the 47% that Romney was attacking, I'm sure there are a significant portion that are politically aware and represent an important voting bloc. I would like to think that those that are paying attention see Romney's comments for what they actually are. Whether or not they see themselves as 'moocher's', the people that are paying attention would realize that they are actually being called moocher's. It doesn't take an intellectual leap to put the two together and to suggest otherwise is an insult.
The Country is on a course of no return and has been for quite some time. Presidential elections have become reality shows, focused on who will take best care of us versus who can best fix us. We are breeding a Man that is wholly incompatible to survival in a competitive world, and doubling down. I have compassion for the land my ancestors help settle, but only remorse for the men who disrupted a very good and unique thing. Only few rightly understand the fragility of civilization.
What offended so many was that Romney seemed to imply seniors who had earned their retirement moneys were "moochers."
As one of the "47%", I am glad Candidate Romney made me and the rest of the U.S. aware of just how many of us retirees, etc. are getting money from the Government.

The negative, as I see it, is another example of Romney's non-presidential behavior. With all his business acumin, I question his wisdom to function well as president.
The real point here is that the wildly liberal media focuses on Romney bashing and ignores that Obama 'forgot' what the Bush debt was on the Letterman show last night. Either Obama lies or he is more inept than we have already have seen. And
how did you like the comment that the $16 trillion in debt is not a problem right now, yet the bad boy Bush was unpatriotic for much less. Obama ran on the issue that he would cut the deficit his first term, but Obama cannot remember what it is! OMG
But no one accuses him of being a talented economist, and we all agree that he is a terrific spinner. The fix for the economy is not too hard when your a socialist. Just turn over all your money to Uncle Sugar and let obama reward the cronies: don't try the MUCH harder task of growing the private sector and increasing the taxable base! You would need a Romney for that!
"The trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some [wealth] redistribution -- because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure that everybody's got a shot." by Obama
www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/obama-loyola-speech-leaked-redistribution_n_1894625.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012
Here is the math:
They are 310 million people
157million people file tax returns
Only 75 m of the 157 m pay ANY income taxes
The top 1% of the 157 million pay 40% of Income tax revenue.
So 1.57 million people carry the 310 million by paying 40% of tax revenue.
And of course 310 million less the 75 million who pay =235 million who pay NO income taxes
And those who pay NO income taxes and are illegal, get 4.2 billion in tax for the child tax credit-there is a free lunch!
bls, YOU are the one that seems to need a rudimentary arithmetic lesson.
"most Americans think of themselves as strivers"...ok, let's just pull a number out a hat, and define "most" as 70%. Still with me? Now "many" Americans (let's define "many" as 30%...that work for ya?)
think that "half of the country are lazy moochers". Where is the dichotomy? Maybe a breakdown will help:
70% of Americans SELF-DEFINE as "strivers"
30% of Americans think that HALF of the country are moochers"...that 30% can be part of the 70% that doesn't consider themselves moochers, or it can be part of the moocher-group themselves...or, mostly likely, some of each!...one set doesn't not automatically eliminate it's OWN MEMBERS from another set! Actually, 100% of Americans can THINK that half of the country are moochers, without violating any "mathematical rules"....both strivers AND moochers can THINK that.
Brian Richard Allen September 19, 2012 at 9:23 PM
.... Mr Romney’s comment is a reminder of his tin ear ....

And of the indisputable fact the current, gangster, "administration" has worked 24/7 since a couple of years before even it deemed itself "the office of the president-elect" to get the percentage above 50% of those of us who pay no taxes and/or who are are in whole or in part dependent on government largess.

And turn America fatally and irreversably into another Euro-peon Neo-Soviet-nanny-state-cloned Canada, Australia and/or New Zealand-like tyrannically-totalitarian state!
Benjamin W. Hartley September 19, 2012 at 9:13 PM
Blew the election? Bollocks on stilts! I'm one of those "moochers" on Social Security/Medicare, and I'm voting for Mitt Romney. He doesn't offend me one bit... his opponent, now... well...

Ben Hartley
(I write it, I sign it)
This article is just an example of whistling past the graveyard. Get used to it: Mitt is a callous jerk, and he is going to lose, and deserves to. Too bad this is not true of most of the Repubs in the House and Senate.
Half of America are lazy moochers? Really? With 2% of Americans on welfare?

Then I must say that seniors, conservatives, and those at the top are completely delusional as well as being just plain nasty, and I'm more thankful than ever that they won't be running the country anytime soon.

(Amazing the way people can rationalize anything away! The tortured logic here is pretty amazing in itself. Most Americans think of themselves as "strivers" - yet many Americans think that "half of the country are lazy moochers"? Do they just not know any part of the "most" Americans you just referred to?

Do the math, for heaven's sake....)