Tuned In

You Got Served: A Waiter’s-Eye View of Mitt Romney

  • Share
  • Read Later

There are plenty of people out there–too many, maybe–analyzing what Mitt Romney said in the secretly taped fundraiser video posted in full at the Mother Jones website: what his comments about “the 47%” say about his campaign, about his character, about his attitude toward the working class, about his base of voters and Barack Obama’s. Let the pundits and the policy analysts parse his words, whether they add up, whether they’ll work.

Me, I couldn’t stop looking at the waiters.

We often talk about how campaign controversies, gaffes and images are “framed.” But the most fascinating thing about the Romney video is how it’s literally framed. We’re watching Romney from what looks like the polished surface of the bar, the hidden camera surrounded by goblets, a decanter of wine and a glowing candle, tucked away behind the objects of service. We can hear him loud and clear, but we can see his head only as a tiny blur, and the backs of the heads of his $50,000-a-plate guests.

We see and hear everything, in other words, from the furtive vantage point of the help. As Romney talks tax policy and dependency, servers walk by in the foreground and rustle up ice cubes. As guests ask about the future of the stock market and why Romney doesn’t more aggressively assert pride in his money and success, white-gloved waiters quietly refill drinks. As donors loudly applaud a secondhand Marco Rubio story about aspiring to wealth through hard work, a waitress quietly asks for clean martini glasses.

All modern candidates, Republican and Democrat, spend time in banquet rooms indulging wealthy donors (at one point, Romney listens politely as a guest rails against the penny). We just don’t see it. So this may not be a fair picture to paint–but it’s a powerful one. Campaign embarrassments are often unfair, in the sense the same image or line will hurt one candidate more if it reinforces an existing narrative. Your geopolitical fumbles matter more if you were already cast as the inexperienced governor of Alaska. Your haircut matters more if you look like John Edwards than if you look like Bill Richardson.

(PHOTOS: Political Pictures of the Week, Sept. 7-14)

And if you are Mitt Romney, with Mitt Romney’s biography, resume and bankroll, there are certain things you don’t want to be filmed saying in a dining room full of toffs in a Boca Raton sex mansion.* The visual and class ironies couldn’t have been better laid out by the set designer for The Remains of the Day. As guests and candidates talk about their burden of resentment and the intractability of the dependent classes, cutlery clinks, stemware tinkles, a cork pops. You half expect someone to hoist a champagne flute in the air and declare, “A toast, gentlemen! To Industry!”

*Update: the “sex” reference in the original post referred to reports of a “sex party” thrown by the event’s host at a mansion in the Hamptons, not at this mansion in Florida.

I have no idea what the catering staff thinks of Romney or the election. I’m sure there are plenty of conservative-minded waiters out there. (I will note that whoever hid the camera must have been able to inconspicuously access the bar. I’m just putting that out there.) Maybe Romney’s message of striving and individual enterprise resonates with one of them who wants to own that mansion and sit at that table someday.

But in the most-replayed segment of the video, when Romney talks about the “entitled” 47% who don’t pay income tax, whom he says he could never convince to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives,” I’m thinking: So does a cater-waiter in south Florida, maybe with a couple kids, earn enough to owe federal income taxes after deductions? When a guest, setting up Romney’s answer, asks, “How are you going to do it, two months before the elections, convince everybody, ‘You’ve got to take care of yourself?’” I’m looking at the server grabbing barware and thinking: you think she’s got a health-insurance package? Does it not feel the least bit awkward up there? Because it sure does back here with the wine glasses.

(PHOTOS: The Rich History of Mitt Romney)

Now, that’s just me; the way I see this video is inevitably colored by my own background and politics.* Other people watch the footage and see Romney standing up for hard work and responsibility, and I don’t trust anyone who claims to know how, if at all, this video will affect the campaign. But if it has an effect at all, it will be the images that do it as much as the words. Whoever stashed that camera behind the serving crystal, and for whatever reason they did it, for one night the people who fund the multimillion-dollar election machine well and truly got served.

*Here, my standard disclosure: I voted for Obama in ’08 and plan to do so again in ’12. To paraphrase Walter Mondale: most people who write about politics have voting preferences—the difference is they won’t tell you theirs and I just did. To read my fuller thoughts on political writing and disclosure, click here.

69 comments
Adam
Adam

We have facts. You have "feelings." I'll take my actual, verifiable facts over your feelings any day of the week, bub.

Romney does not deserve to be elected dog catcher, let alone President.

Carolyn Blake
Carolyn Blake

Nice call...they don't even see the staff scrambling to make them comfortable...they are invisible, non entities.

toddcstratton
toddcstratton

James, thank you for opening my eyes to images I looked at, but had not SEEN.

jena1234
jena1234

If you want to pay higher taxes, go ahead and vote for Obama.  And you can't keep increasing the minimum wage if you want young people to work.  An employer isn't going to pay $15 /hr minimum wage to a teen when he can find someone older and with experience.  Give me, give me, give me is all I hear from the dems...you owe me, you owe me, you owe me, I deserve it, I deserve it, I deserve it.  Here's a little bomb shell for you dim-witted people...Go out and work hard and earn your money and be proud that you earned it.  Why would you wish the government be in anyone's wallet?   If you want to help the poor and needy, give to a good charitable organization or give to a church that is involved with charitable work,  or find a family that is in need and help them.  You decide where to spend your money instead of giving it back to the government and let them spend it for you.  Don't sit around and wish that the government would take ANYMORE of ANYONE'S money - either yours or your neighbors, or rich or poor, just to spend on some unnecessary program or to give to someone else!!    Obama talks about how little he had when he was young ( a lie, yet it is the story he espouses ) and how he achieved the American dream.  That is a republican story.  Yet, he is creating dependency on the government though his policies, and if you drink that kool-aid, you will always be dependent on someone,  Everyone, at every level of "class" is affected by what Obama is doing as president....just go to the grocery store and try to feed a family of 4 on the same amount of money that you were spending in 2009.  What about the gas prices - more than doubled since O took office...how is that working out for you?  And, it will only get worse.  He sure did set out to fundamentally change our country - into Europe.  How is his Muslim foreign policy working out for you?  He thought he could charm his way into friendship with the Islam world and just because he was Obama, things would be different.  So he slams our allies and charms the very people who want to kill Americans.  Wake up people!  Quit drinking his bathwater!   Why would you not want America to be dependent on our own oil?  Obama is creating a needy society.  When the money runs out, then what?   

JohnYuEsq
JohnYuEsq

"All the activists, party supporters and big donors should be pushing for change." - WSJ Noonan 

 

VOTE the DEMOCRATIC TICKET to TAKE BACK AMERICA, for AMERICA'S MIDDLE CLASS!

prestalex
prestalex

This editorial piece speaks directly to an issue that keeps irritating the heck out of me: Romney and Republicans in general will fight tooth and nail to prevent any increases in the minimum wage. I keep wondering how a man or woman, working 40 to 50 hours a week, earning that ridiculously low amount can possibly hope to raise a family these days.

Republicans want it both ways: keep the minimum wage low so that the rich can reap greater profits off the backs of those actually working for a living -- and continue to take nasty sniveling swipes at these hard-working wage earners who, through no fault of their own, will not likely end up paying Federal Income taxes...despite being taxed on their gasoline, internet access, toiletries and if they are so fortunate to own a place of their own, property taxes as well.

Romney, I suggest that you take a full-time job at McDonalds for one full year and after that experience, I do believe that you will re-register as a Democrat.

freudo
freudo like.author.displayName 1 Like

The Bane from Bain

Hey Mitt! What were you thinking?

Don’t you know that the middle-class has been shrinking,

While the fat-cats’ salaries and bonuses have become so enormous –

That they’ve started stinking!

Your remark about the “47 percent” must have been Heaven sent;

It clearly defines the type of people you and your kind strongly resent.

And what about those Mormon ‘values’ you publicly embrace?

Do you really feel that 47% of Americans are a disgrace?

Paul Ryan wasn’t lyin’ when he spoke about “moral clarity”;

But he failed to mention that to most modern Republicans,

The concept is such a rarity.

Sorry Mitt, but we all can’t be ‘one-percenters’ like you;

Clearly, all of those millions in your off-shore accounts

Have obscured your view.

From the difficulties facing average Americans that are hardly new,

Never forget what history has taught us about what happens

When so much wealth and power are in the hands of so few.

L H
L H

The only reason tax rates are so low for the working poor is because tax rates are TOO low on the wealthiest Americans.  Lowest in 70 years.  It was a devil's bargain and now the GOP is using it against the Dems. 

As a piece of film I see your point but the contrast, which goes unnoticed by the participants, just sickens me. 

Plenty of people worker harder than the toffs, but they weren't as smart or as lucky or as subsidized.

Talk about feeling entitled.

Ben_Plonie
Ben_Plonie

The  people who will vote for Obama are those who have something to gain by Obama winning.

The people who will vote against Obama are the people who have something to lose by Obama winning.

The  people who will vote for Romney are those who have something to gain by Romney winning.

The people who will vote against Romney are the people who have something to lose by Romney winning.

What was the question again?

JohnGrabowski
JohnGrabowski

@Ben_Plonie Lesse, the question was illustrate how the thinking of so many Americans has declined to such simplicities that they recite empty equivalences.You've won the contest.

gracetoday
gracetoday

 If you hate the crony capitalists then you need to also hate the loss of sovereignty resulting from government indebtedness. This plays right into the hands of this elite class who hold the debt and who benefit from our vulnerability to the markets from being so indebted. Should have supported Ron Paul, he understood this. Obama clearly does not, and Romney doesn`t care.

ERenger
ERenger

I agree, putting the politics aside, this is a fascinating piece of film. 

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

James Poniewozik

Suggestion: Maybe this hidden camera footage could be used in a sequel to the book called "The Help" by Kathryn Stockett, and to the  movie of the same name: "The Help".

Scene ONE: While the servers in their white gloves carefully distribute sparkling drinks and pass silver trayed caviar at his fundraiser, the Presidential candidate derides the working class, basically saying they are moochers, they are lazy.  He completely underestimates just what they might do in retaliation for this insult, for this derision.

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

Romney fundraiser held at the estate of hedge fund manager Mark Leder in Boca Raton, known for debauchery. Is this insulting to women voters?

Guest
Guest

Apparently not if they are friends of Sandra Fluke

Obamarrhoids
Obamarrhoids

Romney spoke the truth. Truth is an anathema to liberals / leftists. 

Stevie Nichts
Stevie Nichts

"...the secretly taped fundraiser video posted in full at the Mother Jones website..."

Point of order: it was not "posted in full". MoJo probably edited it to make Romney look bad. This was considered 'bad form' when whats-his-name did it to ACORN, so you'll obviously chastise MoJo too. Right? Right?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-J...

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

James Poniewozik

Thanks for letting us know this: "...be filmed saying in a dining room full of toffs in a Boca Raton sex mansion. " In my view, it didn't even matter what gaffe(s) or blunders or missteps may have been madea and filmed during the fundraiser for Romney. The biggest insult is that Mitt Romney was pandering in a place of ill repute in Boca Raton, in a very offensive venue. It shows very poor judgment. It reveals that Romney was either very naive or that he does not respect women and/or only gives lip service to cherishing family values. Women voters- please Go to that Gawker site and read about that Boca Raton sex mansion. Is this a place you want to be seen if you are running for President? Yikes! What a huge fumble. Boca Raton sex mansion.Read more: http://entertainment.time.com/...

Guest
Guest

Obama partying it up with Jay Z and Beyonce in a room with a wall of 800 dollar a bottle "gold" champagne bottles stacked - soo frivilous that he wouldnt even let the media take a photo of it- isnt over the top? Raising 4 mil dollars in one night, because fat cats donate 40,000. dollars just to hang out with him? I , and others would find that a wee bit offensive. 

There may not have been sex in the champagne room, but they sure tried to make it seem like there was. 

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

So I guess Obama hanging out at the 40/40 club this week for a fundraiser with Jay-Z (who notoriously berates women in his music) is ok with you? Btw- just because you call it a 'sex mansion' doesn't make it one. Fail.

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

So the basis of your defense of Romney is that Obama did it too (had fundraisers in inapproriate places) and so that makes it ok to do this? In my estimation this is not a good defense- Do two wrongs  make a right?

Perhaps the news reporter got it wrong where the fundraiser was held for Romney. Maybe it was all a bad dream. Maybe the  

Romney fundraiser was not held at the estate of hedge fund manager Mark Leder in Boca Raton, known for debauchery.

OH, by the way-I didn't say that it was a sex mansion. The Time Magazine news reporter said this. I was just thanking him for exposing this.

anon76returns
anon76returns

He's not a reporter.  He's an entertainment journalist (an opinion writer), and a very good one at that.

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

So you do not believe that the Romney fundraiser held at the estate of hedge fund manager Mark Leder in Boca Raton, known for debauchery? Is that your argument?

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

Maybe I musiunderstood something, but it seems as though a presidential fundraiser ought to be located at a place that seems classy and tasteful, especially if you are a leader in a religious community.

Guest
Guest

Oh like Jay Z's club? I get it now. 

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

The left thinks that being a waiter is a sustainable career path and not a stepping stone (during college, side job) to a higher education and higher paying job.  There's nothing wrong with being a waiter, there is something wrong with thinking that is the height of your potential.

Curious_Quiche
Curious_Quiche

The world needs pipe-fitters and ditch diggers too. We can't all be acupuncturists, so we might wanna concentrate on making these service industry jobs capable of supporting human dignity instead of telling people that there are a non-finite number of steady office jobs with benefits and pensions they can look forward to. There aren't. Mainly because the rightwing corporate aristocracy keeps cutting wages and bennies to the bone because there's no one to stop them. They cry about lack of skilled labor in a labor glut, and then disincentivize learning job skills with insulting compensation. They'd  rather grind three or four untrained poor folk to dust than invest in a solid long term employee. Inflation is up, prices are rising on necessities, and the right wing is complaining that service industry people are making too much noise aboutnot getting paid or "mooching". When you have a job and are on welfare, and you still can't make it. something is wrong with the system. It's not that you aren't working enough.

Yi Li
Yi Li

As a stereotypical member of “the left,” I don’t think that at all. But I also think we shouldn’t look down on waiters, even those who will never have a higher-paying job, as people who can’t take “personal responsibility” for their lives. 

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

 Romney may care not for the "47%"

but they are just as vital to the nation as any other percent is.

Imagine these 47% aren't there, doing the jobs they are doing-

cooking, cleaning, serving (one of them took this video of romney)

driving, building, stocking, flooring, tabling, and caretaking,

amongst many many others.

what would you do then?

no child care workers for your kids daycare.

no cashier at the drive thru window.

no short order cook to fry your food.

no attendant to sell you gas.

no crossing guard keeping the kids safe on the way to school.

no janitors to clean your office, and the bathroom.

no one to park your car. no security at the door on your way up.

its only noon.

what are you going to do?

all these people are among the "47%"

so you don't care for the 47. without them,

what are you gonna do- really?!?

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

Romney may care not for the "47%"

but they are just as vital to the nation as any other percent is.

 

Imagine these 47% aren't there, doing the jobs they are doing-

cooking, cleaning, serving (one of them took this video of romney)

driving, building, stocking, flooring, tabling, and caretaking,

amongst many many others.

 

what would you do then?

no child care workers for your kids daycare.

no cashier at the drive thru window.

no short order cook to fry your food.

no attendant to sell you gas.

no crossing guard keeping the kids safe on the way to school.

no janitors to clean your office, and the bathroom.

no one to park your car. no security at the door on your way up.

 

its only noon.

what are you going to do?

all these people are among the "47%"

so you don't care for the 47. without them,

what are you gonna do- really?!?

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

 these generations of people only exist in your head. accept the truth; it will set you free. right wing thought is a delusion and a mental imbalance.

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

Yes, the 49% of Americans who accept some for of government assistance is a fabric of everyone's imagination. That stat is made up I guess?

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

those are veterans, the retired, students, etc.

you are deluded into thinking there is this

group of people who just aspires to nothing but welfare.

that is a fabrication of your mind.

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

Doesn't matter if you 'aspire' to it or settle in to it for 10 or 20 years. The end result is the same.  You are whitewashing the entire problem with anomalies.

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

Romney may care not for the "47%"-

 

but they are just as vital to the nation as any other percent is.

Imagine these 47% aren't there, doing the jobs they are doing-

cooking, cleaning, serving (one of them took this video of romney)

driving, building, stocking, flooring, tabling, and caretaking,

amongst many many others.

what would you do then?

no child care workers for your kids daycare.

no cashier at the drive thru window. no short order cook to fry your food.

no attendant to sell you gas. no crossing guard keeping the kids safe on the way to school.

no janitors to clean your office, and the bathroom.

no one to park your car. no security at the door on your way up.

 

its only noon.

what are you going to do?

all these people are among the "47%"

so you don't care for the 47. without them,

what are you gonna do- really?!?

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

i instantly thought of the servers when i first heard this story.

if it was waiting tables there, and heard someone speaking so ill of me

the whole time, i would have done the same.

Dan Bruce
Dan Bruce

We see the waiters (and ourselves) from this side, as you describe. Romney doesn't seem to notice the waiters at all from his side. And, that's essentially what Romney said to those of us who make up the 47% , "I don't see you, and I won't see you if I'm elected!"

lucelucy
lucelucy

 I remember years ago a speech by Ronald Reagan in which he described the people he was working for, the people in his America.  I don't remember his precise words.  I do remember thinking that neither I nor anyone I knew resembled those remarks.

3B Birdy
3B Birdy

I thought the waiter did a fantastic job, keeping the glasses clean (on the camera lens).

#romneyencore #romcom2012

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

Romney may care not for the "47%"

but they are just as vital to the nation as any other percent is.

Imagine these 47% aren't there, doing the jobs they are doing-

cooking, cleaning, serving (one of them took this video of romney)

driving, building, stocking, flooring, tabling, and caretaking,

amongst many many others.what would you do then?

no child care workers for your kids daycare.

no cashier at the drive thru window. no short order cook to fry your food.

no attendant to sell you gas. no crossing guard keeping the kids safe on the way to school. no janitors to clean your office, and the bathroom. no one to park your car.

no security at the door on your way up.

its only noon.

what are you going to do?

all these people are among the "47%"

so you don't care for the 47. without them,

what are you gonna do- really?!?

maralp
maralp

And think about the kitchen staff who never make it into the dining room: how many of them make a decent wage, how many of them have health insurance,?

3B Birdy
3B Birdy

Looks like Romney is showing signs of CAM-PAIN, after all his fund-razing efforts.

lucelucy
lucelucy

 Read this morning that SuperPac money is now being funneled to the congressional races.  They've already written Romney off.  So the only way to eventually defeat anything Obama wants to do is to cut him off in the Congress.  So get out there and work, people.

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

Romney wasn't talking about the working class, he was referring to the entitled class where generations of families live on welfare, food stamps and public housing (or some combination of those) and have no desire to change, nor shame in taking the freebies.  Shame used to be a deterrent from taking free stuff from others, there is no shame anymore. 

Adam
Adam

Show me these mythical people. Guess what? Reagan lied. There are no welfare queens. 

akindependent
akindependent

Actually, he was talking about the working class--they are part of that 47%, as are many retirees, who worked all their lives.  That's what's dangerous about Romney: he doesn't see who these people are, he sees only moochers who "won't take responsibility for their lives."

ERenger
ERenger

If that is who he was talking about, then how did he come up with 47%? Half the country is not living generation to generation on government assistance. 

The fact is, he was talking about the working class, retired seniors and disabled people.

interested43
interested43

 If he was talking about the entitled class that you are referring to, then he would not have referred to them as "47%"

Jeffrey Geez Glavick
Jeffrey Geez Glavick

So 47 percent of the people in the country are entitled, and live on welfare etc. Really? and not only that you know that if they are members of that moocher class that they have no desire to change? How is it you know that, be specific, thanks.

SmilingSmartBlonde
SmilingSmartBlonde

I still wonder if Romney has all the facts straight. Hmmm...Did Romney  really say this?: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

 MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000

sandifjm
sandifjm

Quit trying to defend what was an outrageous, arrogant, condescending, and surprisingly for Romney - very honest look at how he views the country that he wants to govern. He WAS talking about the working poor, just like he was talking about the elderly on fixed incomes, or the disabled war veteran. The Republican archetype of the "welfare queen", who chooses not to work, while sitting at home collecting benefits, barely exists. In addition, many of the working poor are exempted from taxes due to Republican tax cuts, cuts that Mitt himself wants to extend. And even those that don't pay income taxes, still contribute through payroll and sales taxes.  The "53%" thing, is a Tea Party talking point that has been repeatedly discredited. But it is like red meat to the Republican base because it feeds in to several of their core perceptions, prejudices and resentments.

You don't get to make a blanket statement saying that 47% of Americans don't pay taxes and aren't responsible for their lives, and then later, pick and choose the ones that you were REALLY talking about. That's not how it works. Romney owns this now.

The way his campaign has been going, I'm beginning to think that Mitt is a closet Democrat, because why else would he constantly be sabotaging himself?

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

If the number of people who sit at home collecting benefits barely exists then you wouldn't have a problem with cleaning up the system so waste and fraud is eliminated entirely, right? Let's start with EBT/food stamps where anyone can buy beer, cigs, candy, chips or go get cash out of an ATM at a strip club.  That would be a good faith effort on those who wish to say the system is fine as it is.

lucelucy
lucelucy

 The only person I know who is currently receiving any sort of welfare - as distinguished from retirement or veteran's benefits - is a single mother who also works cleaning houses.  I am in the 47% myself, since I collect social security, for which I worked, and don't pay taxes - except for some capital gains taxes I made when my siblings and I sold our parents' old house that was in our names and therefore not an inheritance.

I do just sit at home - quit smoking, drink a little wine in the evening - writing.  I've self-published one novel and hope to have another one racked up by Christmas.  And if people would only go out and buy them in masses and droves, I would look *forward* to paying income tax once again.  If only I could!  :)

sandifjm
sandifjm

First, it's not possible to completely eliminate fraud and waste, but it's certainly an admirable goal, and one that I would be in favour of.  And once that's done, maybe we could tackle Wall Street, because let's face it - welfare fraud didn't nearly collapse the global financial system.

You're also missing the point. Nobody is denying that there are problems with the welfare system.  The point this article is making, and that you are choosing to miss, is that the right-wing battle cry of "47% OF AMERICANS DON'T PAY INCOME TAXES", which attempts to create a false dichotomy between "productive" Americans, and "moochers" is false, inaccurate and ironically, insulting to millions of Americans who might be inclined to vote Republican (ie. lower-middle and working class whites, the elderly and veterans).  It is a crass lie used to stoke the resentment of the Republican base by creating an imaginary class of people who willingly choose not to work, preferring to cash government checks.  The reality of the situation is that many of them get up every morning and go to work, sometimes at multiple jobs.  And most of them spent decades working, many defending America in the armed forces, the entire time paying into the system.  There are others who are students, who will spend the next few decades after graduation paying income taxes.

Finally, the irony of Mitt Romney making an issue out of income taxes is pretty rich.  What percentage of Americans only pay 13% (and who knows what he's hiding on the other returns) ?  Maybe THAT's a better question.

LosersEverywhere
LosersEverywhere

No he wasn't.  More than half of the 47% are the working class who pay payroll, social security, etc.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money... probably one of those sheep voting against your own self interest.  Mitt wouldn't stand a chance without the likes of you.

Daniel D. Coate
Daniel D. Coate

 itsnotatax-

these generations of people only exist in your head.

accept the truth; it will set you free.

Dan Bruce
Dan Bruce

You mean, "the entitled class, where generations live on inheritances, interests from investments, $100 million tax-free accounts in the Cayman Islands, and the privilege of having 'other priorities' when we have to defend the nation in war," don't you?

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

There is a big difference in people keeping their own money (tax cuts) and people taking other peoples money. I'd expect you to konw the difference, being a prophet and all.

Dan Bruce
Dan Bruce

I'm about as much a prophet as Mitt Romney is a serious presidential candidate.The difference is that I know I'm not a prophet, just a researcher.

Robert Houllahan
Robert Houllahan

 Romney barely pays taxes and he did not have a problem taking government handouts in the early nineties to prop up his failing company, Bain Capital. Those who live in glass houses and feed at the government trough to the tune of millions and even billions had better be careful where they throw stones.

Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL
Its_Not_A_Tax_LOL

If you call paying millions in taxes "barely paying" then that is a problem.

Commentonitall
Commentonitall

when you put things in perspective he is barely paying.  It is very simple math.  He makes millions and only pays 14%, I make 40,000 and pay 25%.  Basically compared to how much of my total income I have to give up compared to him, he is barely paying.  Why should I have to pay more when I make thousands and he has to pay less when he makes millions.  It comes down to fairness and a blind person can see that unfairness.