Couple of Romney statements in the news today, one getting a lot of attention, the other not so much:
Romney: Campaign ‘Not Concerned About the Very Poor’ – ABC News
“I’m in this race because I care about Americans,” Romney told CNN’s Soledad O’Brien this morning after his resounding victory in Florida on Tuesday. “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.”
And…
Romney supports automatic hikes in minimum wage – Boston.com
EAGAN, Minn.—Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney renewed his support Wednesday for automatic increases in the federal minimum wage to keep pace with inflation, a position sharply at odds with traditional GOP business allies, conservatives and the party’s senior lawmakers.
And, of course, he supports Romneycare and imposing individual mandates to purchase insurance on free citizens.
So what does all this tell us about the way “conservative” Mitt Romney thinks?
Several things. First, anent the lack of concern about the “very poor,” because they have a “safety net.” But the conservative position isn’t to provide the perverse incentives of a government ordered, taxpayer funded redistribution of wealth to the very poor. The conservative position is to provide opportunities for the very poor to amend their position through their own efforts, hard work, and prudent habits. But Romney, liberal, progressive statist that he is, instead opts for leaving the very poor wallowing in public housing, on public welfare, raising illegitimate public welfare babies, with no responsibilities and no opportunities to remove themselves from the social services safety net tar pit that has left four consecutive generations with a horrible life and no hope of bettering themselves.
His position on the minimum wage is more of the same. We know that the minimum wage is a job killer, and it especially targets the young and poor because it prices them out of the job market, removing the single most effective way of gaining the skills and habits that will assure they don’t remain poor. But never mind – once they are permanently unemployable, they can always rely on the Romney safety net he likes so much.
And, finally, Romneycare itself, a monstrous imposition on individual liberty, a statist solution imposed by a few legislators, signed into law by Romney himself, that will eventually destroy the Massachusetts health care system and bankrupt the state as well. Perhaps then everybody in Massachusetts can take advantage of the state safety net.
Romney is about as conservative as Joe Stalin or Adolf Hitler, both of whom provided safety nets for the very poor, and imposed all sorts of statist “solutions” that wreaked untold havoc on liberty and the body politic. Am I saying that Romney is a new Hitler or Stalin? No, only that they would probably nod at each other as they passed on the street. And this is the man the Gentry GOP Ruling Class tells us is our only option as a candidate for the White House.
Which tells us conservatives as much about them as it does about Romney himself.
Dude’s a regular New World Order populist miracle, isn’t he?…
/sarc
Really leaves you wondering: If he was actually trying to emulate the current (mis)administration, whilst maintaining a thin, entirely-verbal gloss of “Republicanism”, what would he be doing or saying differently?
The obvious answer being, of course: Absolutely nothing at all…
Bill’s been using that for some months and now JSB is using it. Excellent! I can’t believe I’m the one who first came up with that formulation, although I don’t recall having seen it before I started using it. But it doesn’t matter. It’s all part of my plan to get everyone thinking that way.
1. Get people using “if he were…what would he be doing differently?”
2. ???
3. Profit!
Romney/Obama Care
Democrat Timothy Cahill was Massachusetts’ State Treasurer. He said on 3/16/10:
=== ===
[edited] Implementing the MA health insurance reform nationwide will threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years.
Our experiment has nearly bankrupted Massachusetts. Only federal aid is sustaining our law. We’re being propped up so that Obama can drive a similar plan through Congress.
=== ===
If you ever get 2 figured out, let me know, wouldya? I figure Blogosphere alone would be enough to make me a billionaire.
Shouldn’t us “early adopters” get a piece of that Step 3.?
After all, gotta spread that ol’ wealth around, right?…
I went 3 years without a wage increase and then got 1.7% last year. I’m not complaining; I make a decent living. However, for anyone, least of all the possible GOP standard bearer, to support auto-wage increases for federal workers makes me want to vomit. Fuck him. I’m done. If the GOP wants him, they can have him. Darned if they’ll ever get my support again.
To update an observation I made last week to the new, SteveF approved format; If Romney, after 6 years of running for president, were actually trying to lose the race, what would he be doing differently?
Can I have a piece of the profits now?
Sorry, everyone, but my business consultants haven’t gotten back to me on that elusive Step 2. And it’ll probably be a while yet — they’re having too much fun stealing underpants to bother figuring it out.
(Link for anyone who doesn’t have a clue what I’m talking about.)
Well, I HAD a clue, thinking back of college fraternities staging pantie raids on sorority dorms, but that was obviously before your time. Dang kids with their cartoon references!
Eric Cartman would, obviously, approve -
Keep ‘em workin’ on that Step 2 – I’m outta work again, and I can use all the help I can get…