Mitt Romney Caught Buying Votes

Mitt Romney Steve Pearce event 057So that’s what’s so magic about Mormon underwear–it’s lined with $10′s and $20′s. I only hope that poor woman accepted it with a pair of boiled iron tongs. From CNN‘s Rachel Streitfeld:

Sumter, South Carolina (CNN) – Mitt Romney gave a handful of cash Saturday to a woman who had told him she was struggling financially after an event in Sumter, South Carolina.

An aide said the GOP candidate gave the supporter “what he had on him” – about $50 or $60.

The woman, Ruth Williams, met Romney earlier in the week and told him she was having trouble making ends meet. On Saturday, Romney recognized Williams while he was shaking hands with supporters after a rally, an aide said.

Romney spoke to the woman and handed her several bills.

“He was kind to me,” Williams said. “He held onto me and he made Gov. [Nikki] Haley and them come see about me.”

Williams told reporters that on Wednesday she had seen Romney’s campaign bus on the highway and followed it to an airport. Aides then invited her to come meet the former governor at an event in Columbia.

“I was on the highway praying and said, ‘God, tell me how to get [my] lights on, and I pulled up to a stop sign and his bus was there,’” Williams said.

Williams has been out of work since October and is caring for an ill son. She said that after meeting Romney she had also met South Carolina state treasurer and Romney supporter Curtis Loftis, and said he had given her money. She said she used the money to pay her light bill…

[continues at CNN]

, , , ,

87 Responses to Mitt Romney Caught Buying Votes

  1. Mike S January 16, 2012 at 12:31 pm #

    Well, this is the Republican model of welfare, you know. If you need help, you have to beg until a landed lord or lady takes pity on you. They have no obligation to help you whatsoever, but if you are pathetic enough, they may give you half a farthing.

  2. Mike S January 16, 2012 at 8:31 am #

    Well, this is the Republican model of welfare, you know. If you need help, you have to beg until a landed lord or lady takes pity on you. They have no obligation to help you whatsoever, but if you are pathetic enough, they may give you half a farthing.

    • Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 10:24 am #

      you’re right on… BUT you left out the critical point.  ”If you are pathetic enough AND PEOPLE ARE FILMING they may give you half a farthing.”  you think flip flop Mitt would have cared about that woman, if it wouldn’t help his campaign? I doubt it.  Furthermore… do you think Flip Flop Mitt would care at all, IF America were dumb enough to elect him?   ….  didn’t think so :)

      cheers.

      Ron Paul 2012, or watch America crumble

      • Ewop07 January 16, 2012 at 11:15 am #

        Not long ago, after hearing Ron Paul’s views on the
        Federal Reserve and the IRS, I decided to become a Ron Paul supporter.
         After doing some extensive research, I realized the President of the
        United States doesn’t have the power to do half the things Ron Paul claims he
        will do.  I also realized some of the things he would like to do, just
        wouldn’t work in the times we are living in now, for example, Social Security
        Benefits.  My mother worked hard for over 30yrs to receive a Pension she
        can barely live on.  If she didn’t have her Social Security Benefits she
        wouldn’t be able to keep the house she worked so hard to purchase years ago.
         A lot of Ron’s ideas work great if you’re wealthy, but for the average
        working class or elderly person, we would be homeless and starving.  For
        the first time sense I have been old enough to vote, I don’t think I will vote
        at all in the Presidential election this year.

        • Andrew January 16, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

          > After doing some extensive research, I realized the President of the United States doesn’t have the power to do half the things Ron Paul claims he will do.

          He’ll have to power to assassinate or indefinitely detain anyone who disagrees with him.

          • Jason33 January 16, 2012 at 12:35 pm #

            +1

            Couldn’t have said it better myself. 

        • Land of the slaves January 16, 2012 at 12:33 pm #

          I think your “extensive research” has failed you. But seeing this: ”
          For

          the first time sense I have been old enough to vote, I don’t think I will vote
          at all in the Presidential election this year.” explains why. 
          “A lot of Ron’s ideas work great if you’re wealthy, but for the average
          working class or elderly person, we would be homeless and starving.”
          That’s what’s going to happen if you don’t vote for him or if someone else gets elected. So your screwed either way I guess. Good luck! 

        • emc_0 January 16, 2012 at 12:45 pm #

          RP knows many people are dependent on social programs right now and says he will not cut funding for them. But he will cut other places to ensure there is money for those programs.

          Ron Paul is the only candidate who has submitted a serious plan to cut the budget, and thereby save the social safety nets that are in place like social security. He also knows that many of us have contributed to social security, and it wouldn’t make sense to cut benefits to people who have paid for them, whether they wanted SS or not.
          He wants young people to be able to opt out if they wish, so they can invest their money as they see fit.

          • Jin The Ninja January 16, 2012 at 1:56 pm #

            “Invest their money as they fit” in a corrupt (even more) de-regulated marketplace. Look at 401ks- didn’t turn out so well, that is exactly what SS will look like in the future under a marketeer model.

          • Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 8:45 pm #

            “Invest their money as they see fit”  could mean start a RRSP/GIC with a guarantee on their principal investment and modest interest return with their own bank or credit union. Or even buy precious metal bullion!  It doesn’t mean rather than invest their money into the Social Security system, they are just going to blindly invest into the stock market, like most 401k exposures….  It just gives people the CHOICE.  Hell, they can hide their money under their mattress if they want… and guess what?  It would have been better off there  than 80% of “investments” including social security! :)

        • colram January 16, 2012 at 1:10 pm #

          Ron Paul is the only one running who has a workable plan to SAVE SS and Medicare for those who have paid into it.  There is no money left in the coffers to pay benefits, so we have to cut spending elsewhere in order to have the needed funds.  And who is the ONLY candidate talking about cutting federal spending?  Ron Paul!!  And while he’s making sure that those who deserve benefits are receiving them, he’ll also change the current system to one of personal investment so that the government will never again have the chance to steal retirement funds from future generations.

          As for things that Dr. Paul claims he’ll do that the President of the United States doesn’t have the power to do, can you name a few?

          • Liam_McGonagle January 16, 2012 at 1:21 pm #

            Paul’s intentions may be good, but the man needs a little help.

            For instance, as immoral and disgusting as the bank bailouts are, they did not come out of the pool of payroll tax receipts, which funds SS. 

            The genius idea to undermine that through a tax “holiday” is all Obama’s.  I’m sure he’s very proud of that. We’re all celebrating. Even Paul, I think. Certainly haven’t heard him express any outrage on the subject.

            But the solution would be to adjust the 1960′s era withholding levels to something representing post-Neolithic levels of inflation.  Not to con gullible voters into pissing away their nest eggs on the Wall Street shell game.

            I would have thought that if Americans had learned nothing else since the Crash of ’08, it’s that “investment choice” is just a sham for the same old ‘churn and burn’ bullsh*t that brought the whole house down to begin with.

          • colram January 16, 2012 at 2:55 pm #

            The money for SS is gone regardless of where it was diverted, and it’s the federal government that stole it.  Yet your solution is to force taxpayers to give that same government a far greater portion of their money?  And your reasoning is that people aren’t smart enough to make wise investments, but that their money is safe with the government that stole everything they’ve been entrusted with so far?

            I think that the government should keep SS in place so people who feel as you do can ‘invest’ their money in it, and let the rest of us decide how to invest ours.

          • Jin The Ninja January 16, 2012 at 3:02 pm #

            401ks. please explain how that worked.

          • colram January 16, 2012 at 3:10 pm #

            My 401K is doing pretty well.  I take responsibility for it and I’m pretty proactive about where it’s invested.  I’ll definitely be getting money back from it, which I really can’t see happening with my SS.

          • Jin The Ninja January 16, 2012 at 3:21 pm #

            so those millions of other people who lost their corporate backed 401ks, were not in your opinion “personally responsible”? and thus you feel everyone should move to a privatised system?

          • emc_0 January 16, 2012 at 5:32 pm #

            Why did those people lose their 401ks, and lose on their investments?
            Because of the artificial boom and bust cycle and inflation created by the fed, that ron paul is trying to stop.

            With a stable currency the markets are much more predictable and fair to those who are investing and saving.

            If people want to keep their SS they can, if people want to start opting out of these programs they can. Where is the problem?

          • colram January 16, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

            As I said above, I think it would be ok for people to have the choice of putting their money into a government-run “investment plan”, but nobody should be forced to do so.  Neither should we be required to support the other if either of our choices fail us.  I personally would choose against a system which has accrued many, many trillions of dollars in current unfunded liabilities.  You should be allowed to choose for yourself as well.  Do you have a problem with that?

          • Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 8:55 pm #

            Liam’s basic assertion is that 401k’s got helped by the trillion dollar bailouts because those recipients of those trillions (the banks) re-invested some of the money in the market (A LOT of that “stimulus” was stolen)… however the money that was re-invested did inflate the stock market bubble (albeit momentarily) and this is the reason that a lot of the people saw their 401k “bounce back” and also why Liam calls it an “illusion.”

            So he’s right… the bailouts did help the 401k.  but only temporarily and at the cost of the theft of hundreds of billions now piled on as debt to the people.

            not a good trade off, if you ask me.

            Sound money is the only solution.  Not a debt based monetary system, with continuous “bail outs”  That is nothing but a transfer of wealth from poor to rich, and my proof is the wealth gap in the country now as compared to even 10, or 25 years ago…

          • Liam_McGonagle January 16, 2012 at 4:52 pm #

            There are many good reasons for voting for Ron Paul–his stances on civil liberties, ending imperialist wars, etc.  But Paul’s “profound understanding” of finance and economics isn’t one of them.

            The SS money is not part of the General Fund.  It is completely separate from other fiscal considerations.  That is a simple fact.  There is no diversion of SS funds.  I’m not going to gloss over that one.  That’s just a ground reality you’ll have to grasp before you can develop an effective strategy.

            In the near term SS is solvent.  The crisis begins to set in 10 to 20 years from now, when lop-sided demographic trends and failure to adjust withholding cutoffs on a timely basis begin to creep up on us.

            That’s because SS isn’t structured as an investment fund.  Current accumulated receipts fund curent benefits.  It’s not like your 401k or pension, where you gradually sell off the accumulated assets you’ve saved away and earned.  Benefits are paid directly from current cumulative withholdings.

            Something else you should probably understand about 401k’s–they’re huge beneficiaries of the bailouts.

            Anyone who thinks the number reported to them on their quarterly 401k statement is anything other than a shared illusion is kidding themselves.  Those balances are based on market quotes, in turn driven by certain accounting conventions.  It’s an estimate of the current perceived value of the assets within the most active markets–plus or minus some accounting and actuarial bullsh*t, as I HOPE Americans learned in 2008.

            Ironically, that 401k’s value would still be in th sh*tter today if not for QE2 and the other Fed bailout programs that provided liquidity to the investment markets.  That’s why Wall Street bonuses are still riding high while real employment (i.e., + ”discouraged”) is essentially the same as it was in January 2009.

            The problem is that this policy of bailout and tax cut is knocking the legs from under the single asset propping up this moribund economy–the tax base.

            The bailouts could have bought us time–but only if we had the brains to rebalance the tax codes closer to historical norms.  Especially capital gains.

            In 1965 the top marginal rate was 70%, unemployment was at 5%.  Today it’s 35% and 10%+ (in real terms).  The problem is that market “gains” aren’t making it to the real economy.  The wealthy are starving the real, productive economy of the capital it needs.

            To run a business you need customers, not tax breaks for already bloated plutocrats who don’t know how to spend it.

            I’ve got nothing against Paul, really.  Honest to God, I flirt with the idea of voting for him, from time to time.  But that’s a hard sell when the guy’s basic understanding of tax, economics and markets is so shakey.

          • Liam_McGonagle January 16, 2012 at 4:52 pm #

            There are many good reasons for voting for Ron Paul–his stances on civil liberties, ending imperialist wars, etc.  But Paul’s “profound understanding” of finance and economics isn’t one of them.

            The SS money is not part of the General Fund.  It is completely separate from other fiscal considerations.  That is a simple fact.  There is no diversion of SS funds.  I’m not going to gloss over that one.  That’s just a ground reality you’ll have to grasp before you can develop an effective strategy.

            In the near term SS is solvent.  The crisis begins to set in 10 to 20 years from now, when lop-sided demographic trends and failure to adjust withholding cutoffs on a timely basis begin to creep up on us.

            That’s because SS isn’t structured as an investment fund.  Current accumulated receipts fund curent benefits.  It’s not like your 401k or pension, where you gradually sell off the accumulated assets you’ve saved away and earned.  Benefits are paid directly from current cumulative withholdings.

            Something else you should probably understand about 401k’s–they’re huge beneficiaries of the bailouts.

            Anyone who thinks the number reported to them on their quarterly 401k statement is anything other than a shared illusion is kidding themselves.  Those balances are based on market quotes, in turn driven by certain accounting conventions.  It’s an estimate of the current perceived value of the assets within the most active markets–plus or minus some accounting and actuarial bullsh*t, as I HOPE Americans learned in 2008.

            Ironically, that 401k’s value would still be in th sh*tter today if not for QE2 and the other Fed bailout programs that provided liquidity to the investment markets.  That’s why Wall Street bonuses are still riding high while real employment (i.e., + ”discouraged”) is essentially the same as it was in January 2009.

            The problem is that this policy of bailout and tax cut is knocking the legs from under the single asset propping up this moribund economy–the tax base.

            The bailouts could have bought us time–but only if we had the brains to rebalance the tax codes closer to historical norms.  Especially capital gains.

            In 1965 the top marginal rate was 70%, unemployment was at 5%.  Today it’s 35% and 10%+ (in real terms).  The problem is that market “gains” aren’t making it to the real economy.  The wealthy are starving the real, productive economy of the capital it needs.

            To run a business you need customers, not tax breaks for already bloated plutocrats who don’t know how to spend it.

            I’ve got nothing against Paul, really.  Honest to God, I flirt with the idea of voting for him, from time to time.  But that’s a hard sell when the guy’s basic understanding of tax, economics and markets is so shakey.

        • Cgenosky January 16, 2012 at 1:45 pm #

          You know what , stop and quit being scared. First of all, we would all take care of each other. I would actually give 10% of my check to church, which I do and another 10% to charity. Without ever batting a eye or feeling like it is going in the wrong place. If you need help from the American people just ask. Hell if you were my neighbor I would shovel your walk for free, grocery shop for you and the list goes on. Ron Paul as President could easily do all the things you think he can’t. FDR created welfare, social security and ended prohibition. All Ron Paul supporters are saying is there has to be a better way. It doesn’t mean tomorrow you will wake up homeless and broke.

          • colram January 16, 2012 at 3:11 pm #

            Well said.

        • Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 8:37 pm #

          President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation with 13 HAND PICKED establishment members…

          But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 1 1 1 1 0 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

          Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

          As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

          Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

      • Ewop07 January 16, 2012 at 11:15 am #

        Not long ago, after hearing Ron Paul’s views on the
        Federal Reserve and the IRS, I decided to become a Ron Paul supporter.
         After doing some extensive research, I realized the President of the
        United States doesn’t have the power to do half the things Ron Paul claims he
        will do.  I also realized some of the things he would like to do, just
        wouldn’t work in the times we are living in now, for example, Social Security
        Benefits.  My mother worked hard for over 30yrs to receive a Pension she
        can barely live on.  If she didn’t have her Social Security Benefits she
        wouldn’t be able to keep the house she worked so hard to purchase years ago.
         A lot of Ron’s ideas work great if you’re wealthy, but for the average
        working class or elderly person, we would be homeless and starving.  For
        the first time sense I have been old enough to vote, I don’t think I will vote
        at all in the Presidential election this year.

    • Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 10:24 am #

      you’re right on… BUT you left out the critical point.  ”If you are pathetic enough AND PEOPLE ARE FILMING they may give you half a farthing.”  you think flip flop Mitt would have cared about that woman, if it wouldn’t help his campaign? I doubt it.  Furthermore… do you think Flip Flop Mitt would care at all, IF America were dumb enough to elect him?   ….  didn’t think so :)

      cheers.

      Ron Paul 2012, or watch America crumble

    • DeepCough January 16, 2012 at 1:16 pm #

      I can’t believe a Republican would even deign to give someone welfare in the first place, even out of his own pocket.

      • Jin The Ninja January 16, 2012 at 1:57 pm #

        normally they wouldn’t, but the angel moroni appeared to mitt in a dream, telling him what a great photo-op it would be…

        • Calypso_1 January 17, 2012 at 1:23 pm #

          Are you sure it wasn’t the 7ft tall quaker moon people?

  3. Mike S January 16, 2012 at 8:31 am #

    Well, this is the Republican model of welfare, you know. If you need help, you have to beg until a landed lord or lady takes pity on you. They have no obligation to help you whatsoever, but if you are pathetic enough, they may give you half a farthing.

  4. Chris Saccoccia January 16, 2012 at 2:24 pm #

    you’re right on… BUT you left out the critical point.  ”If you are pathetic enough AND PEOPLE ARE FILMING they may give you half a farthing.”  you think flip flop Mitt would have cared about that woman, if it wouldn’t help his campaign? I doubt it.  Furthermore… do you think Flip Flop Mitt would care at all, IF America were dumb enough to elect him?   ….  didn’t think so :)

    cheers.

    Ron Paul 2012, or watch America crumble

  5. Ewop07 January 16, 2012 at 3:15 pm #

    Not long ago, after hearing Ron Paul’s views on the
    Federal Reserve and the IRS, I decided to become a Ron Paul supporter.
     After doing some extensive research, I realized the President of the
    United States doesn’t have the power to do half the things Ron Paul claims he
    will do.  I also realized some of the things he would like to do, just
    wouldn’t work in the times we are living in now, for example, Social Security
    Benefits.  My mother worked hard for over 30yrs to receive a Pension she
    can barely live on.  If she didn’t have her Social Security Benefits she
    wouldn’t be able to keep the house she worked so hard to purchase years ago.
     A lot of Ron’s ideas work great if you’re wealthy, but for the average
    working class or elderly person, we would be homeless and starving.  For
    the first time sense I have been old enough to vote, I don’t think I will vote
    at all in the Presidential election this year.

  6. ScramblesTheDeathDealer January 16, 2012 at 3:20 pm #

    You mean Mitt Romney caught buying vote.

  7. ScramblesTheDeathDealer January 16, 2012 at 11:20 am #

    You mean Mitt Romney caught buying vote.

    • Liam_McGonagle January 16, 2012 at 12:28 pm #

      Well, CNN didn’t publish the receipt this woman would have given Romney, but I’m assuming there’s at least one other voter in her family.  Romney’s too shrewd a bargainer to pay $60 for only one vote.

      But then again, having your aide brag about blatant violations of elections law doesn’t show too many smarts either.

      Guess you don’t have to be particularly bright to be rich, just lucky:  “Laissez les bon tiemps rouler!  Thirty-two Red!”

  8. Andrew January 16, 2012 at 4:14 pm #

    > After doing some extensive research, I realized the President of the United States doesn’t have the power to do half the things Ron Paul claims he will do.

    He’ll have to power to assassinate or indefinitely detain anyone who disagrees with him.

  9. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    Well, CNN didn’t publish the receipt this woman would have given Romney, but I’m assuming there’s at least one other voter in her family.  Romney’s too shrewd a bargainer to pay $60 for only one vote.

    But then again, having your aide brag about blatant violations of elections law doesn’t show too many smarts either.

    Guess you don’t have to be particularly bright to be rich, just lucky:  “Laissez les bon tiemps roulez!  Thirty-two Red!”

  10. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    Well, CNN didn’t publish the receipt this woman would have given Romney, but I’m assuming there’s at least one other voter in her family.  Romney’s too shrewd a bargainer to pay $60 for only one vote.

    But then again, having your aide brag about blatant violations of elections law doesn’t show too many smarts either.

    Guess you don’t have to be particularly bright to be rich, just lucky:  “Laissez les bon tiemps roulez!  Thirty-two Red!”

  11. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    Well, CNN didn’t publish the receipt this woman would have given Romney, but I’m assuming there’s at least one other voter in her family.  Romney’s too shrewd a bargainer to pay $60 for only one vote.

    But then again, having your aide brag about blatant violations of elections law doesn’t show too many smarts either.

    Guess you don’t have to be particularly bright to be rich, just lucky:  “Laissez les bon tiemps roulez!  Thirty-two Red!”

  12. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    Well, CNN didn’t publish the receipt this woman would have given Romney, but I’m assuming there’s at least one other voter in her family.  Romney’s too shrewd a bargainer to pay $60 for only one vote.

    But then again, having your aide brag about blatant violations of elections law doesn’t show too many smarts either.

    Guess you don’t have to be particularly bright to be rich, just lucky:  “Laissez les bon tiemps roulez!  Thirty-two Red!”

  13. Land of the slaves January 16, 2012 at 4:33 pm #

    I think your “extensive research” has failed you. But seeing this: ”
    For

    the first time sense I have been old enough to vote, I don’t think I will vote
    at all in the Presidential election this year.” explains why. 
    “A lot of Ron’s ideas work great if you’re wealthy, but for the average
    working class or elderly person, we would be homeless and starving.”
    That’s what’s going to happen if you don’t vote for him or if someone else gets elected. So your screwed either way I guess. Good luck! 

  14. Jason33 January 16, 2012 at 4:35 pm #

    +1

    Couldn’t have said it better myself. 

  15. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

    RP knows many people are dependent on social programs right now and says he will not cut funding for them. But he will cut other places to ensure there is money for those programs.

    Ron Paul is the only candidate who has submitted a serious plan to cut the budget, and thereby save the social safety nets that are in place like social security. He also knows that many of us have contributed to social security, and it wouldn’t make sense to cut benefits to people who have paid for them, whether they wanted SS or not.
    He wants young people to be able to opt out if they wish, so they can invest their money as they see fit.

  16. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 5:10 pm #

    Ron Paul is the only one running who has a workable plan to SAVE SS and Medicare for those who have paid into it.  There is no money left in the coffers to pay benefits, so we have to cut spending elsewhere in order to have the needed funds.  And who is the ONLY candidate talking about cutting federal spending?  Ron Paul!!  And while he’s making sure that those who deserve benefits are receiving them, he’ll also change the current system to one of personal investment so that the government will never again have the chance to steal retirement funds from future generations.

    As for things that Dr. Paul claims he’ll do that the President of the United States doesn’t have the power to do, can you name a few?

  17. DeepCough January 16, 2012 at 5:16 pm #

    I can’t believe a Republican would even deign to give someone welfare in the first place, even out of his own pocket.

  18. DeepCough January 16, 2012 at 5:16 pm #

    I can’t believe a Republican would even deign to give someone welfare in the first place, even out of his own pocket.

  19. DeepCough January 16, 2012 at 5:16 pm #

    I can’t believe a Republican would even deign to give someone welfare in the first place, even out of his own pocket.

  20. DeepCough January 16, 2012 at 5:16 pm #

    I can’t believe a Republican would even deign to give someone welfare in the first place, even out of his own pocket.

  21. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 5:21 pm #

    Paul’s intentions may be good, but the man needs a little help.

    For instance, as immoral and disgusting as the bank bailouts are, they did not come out of the pool of payroll tax receipts, which funds SS. 

    The genius idea to undermine that is all Obama’s.  I’m sure he’s very proud of that.

    But the solution would be to adjust the 1960′s era withholding levels to something representing post-Neolithic levels inflation.  Not to con gullible voters into pissing away their nest eggs on the Wall Street shell game.

    I would have thought that if Americans had learned nothing else since the Crash of ’08, it’s that “investment choice” is just a sham for the same old ‘churn and burn’ bullsh*t that brought the whole house down to begin with.

  22. Cgenosky January 16, 2012 at 5:45 pm #

    You know what , stop and quit being scared. First of all, we would all take care of each other. I would actually give 10% of my check to church, which I do and another 10% to charity. Without ever batting a eye or feeling like it is going in the wrong place. If you need help from the American people just ask. Hell if you were my neighbor I would shovel your walk for free, grocery shop for you and the list goes on. Ron Paul as President could easily do all the things you think he can’t. FDR created welfare, social security and ended prohibition. All Ron Paul supporters are saying is there has to be a better way. It doesn’t mean tomorrow you will wake up homeless and broke.

  23. Ehhhhh January 16, 2012 at 1:49 pm #

    Any article that states “because you are this, you must me this”, or “because you believe this, you MUST be part of this group” is instantly propaganda in my eyes. I understand that many of you may not agree with me, but if your labeling people as something based on them supporting something else, you are a finger pointer. It’s like believing democrats and republicans are any different from each other. There are bad and good people in almost ANY group or party. Sorry, this doesn’t really pertain to this article, but all I see anymore are similar sounding articles about various things that are written in the same way… Damn… 

    • Jin The Ninja January 16, 2012 at 3:01 pm #

      sorry to inform you, most dems and all repubs are morally corrupt, lacking ethics, and/or souls.

      or it could be repubs just are less pretentious about it, and actively try to look like scum bags public.

  24. Ehhhhh January 16, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    Any article that states “because you are this, you must me this”, or “because you believe this, you MUST be part of this group” is instantly propaganda in my eyes. I understand that many of you may not agree with me, but if your labeling people as something based on them supporting something else, you are a finger pointer. It’s like believing democrats and republicans are any different from each other. There are bad and good people in almost ANY group or party. Sorry, this doesn’t really pertain to this article, but all I see anymore are similar sounding articles about various things that are written in the same way… Damn… 

  25. Jin (仁) January 16, 2012 at 5:56 pm #

    “Invest their money as they fit” in a corrupt (even more) de-regulated marketplace. Look at 401ks- didn’t turn out so well, that is exactly what SS will look like in the future under a marketeer model.

  26. Jin (仁) January 16, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

    normally they wouldn’t, but the angel moroni appeared to mitt in a dream, telling him what a great photo-op it would be…

  27. ThinkSkeptic January 16, 2012 at 2:18 pm #

    I don’t like Romney, but this incident doesn’t matter. What matters is that his money comes from the institutions that, in conjunction with government favors, resulted in the poor woman being poor in the first place.

  28. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 6:18 pm #

    I don’t like Romney, but this incident doesn’t matter. What matters is that his money comes from the institutions that, in conjunction with government favors, resulted in the poor woman being poor in the first place.

  29. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 6:55 pm #

    The money for SS is gone regardless of where it was diverted, and it’s the federal government that stole it.  Yet your solution is to force taxpayers to give that same government a far greater portion of their money?  And your reasoning is that people aren’t smart enough to make wise investments, but that their money is safe with the government that stole everything they’ve been entrusted with so far?

    I think that the government should keep SS in place so people who feel as you do can ‘invest’ their money in it, and let the rest of us decide how to invest ours.

  30. Jin (仁) January 16, 2012 at 7:01 pm #

    sorry to inform you, most dems and all repubs are morally corrupt, lacking ethics, and/or souls.

    or it could be repubs just are less pretentious about it, and actively try to look like scum bags public.

  31. Jin (仁) January 16, 2012 at 7:02 pm #

    401ks. please explain how that worked.

  32. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

    My 401K is doing pretty well.  I take responsibility for it and I’m pretty proactive about where it’s invested.  I’ll definitely be getting money back from it, which I really can’t see happening with my SS.

  33. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 7:11 pm #

    Well said.

  34. Jin (仁) January 16, 2012 at 7:21 pm #

    so those millions of other people who lost their corporate backed 401ks, were not in your opinion “personally responsible”? and thus you feel everyone should move to a privatised system?

  35. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 8:52 pm #

    There are many good reasons for voting for Ron Paul–his stances on civil liberties, ending imperialist wars, etc.  But Paul’s “profound understanding” of finance and economics isn’t one of them.

    The SS money is not part of the General Fund.  It is completely separate from other fiscal considerations.  That is a simple fact.  There is no diversion of SS funds.  I’m not going to gloss over that one.  That’s just a ground reality you’ll have to grasp before you can develop an effective strategy.

    In the near term SS is solvent.  The crisis begins to set in 10 to 20 years from now, when lop-sided demographic trends and failure to adjust withholding cutoffs on a timely basis begin to creep up on us.

    That’s because SS isn’t structured as an investment fund.  Current accumulated receipts fund curent benefits.  It’s not like your 401k or pension, where you gradually sell off the accumulated assets you’ve saved away and earned.  Benefits are paid directly from current cumulative withholdings.

    Something else you should probably understand about 401k’s–they’re huge beneficiaries of the bailouts.

    Anyone who thinks the number reported to them on their quarterly 401k statement is anything other than a shared illusion is kidding themselves.  Those balances are based on market quotes, in turn driven by certain accounting conventions.  It’s an estimate of the current perceived value of the assets within the most active markets–plus or minus some accounting and actuarial bullsh*t, as I HOPE Americans learned in 2008.

    Ironically, that 401k’s value would still be in th sh*tter today if not for QE2 and the other Fed bailout programs that provided liquidity to the investment markets.  That’s why Wall Street bonuses are still riding high while real employment (i.e., + ”discouraged”) is essentially the same as it was in January 2009.

    The problem is that this policy of bailout and tax cut is knocking the legs from under the single asset propping up this moribund economy–the tax base.

    The bailouts could have bought us time–but only if we had the brains to rebalance the tax codes closer to historical norms.  Especially capital gains.

    In 1965 the top marginal rate was 70%, unemployment was at 5%.  Today it’s 35% and 10%+ (in real terms).  The problem is that market “gains” aren’t making it to the real economy.  The wealthy are starving the real, productive economy of the capital it needs.

    To run a business you need customers, not tax breaks for already bloated plutocrats who don’t know how to spend it.

    I’ve got nothing against Paul, really.  Honest to God, I flirt with the idea of voting for him, from time to time.  But that’s a hard sell when the guy’s basic understanding of tax, economics and markets is so shakey.

  36. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 8:52 pm #

    There are many good reasons for voting for Ron Paul–his stances on civil liberties, ending imperialist wars, etc.  But Paul’s “profound understanding” of finance and economics isn’t one of them.

    The SS money is not part of the General Fund.  It is completely separate from other fiscal considerations.  That is a simple fact.  There is no diversion of SS funds.  I’m not going to gloss over that one.  That’s just a ground reality you’ll have to grasp before you can develop an effective strategy.

    In the near term SS is solvent.  The crisis begins to set in 10 to 20 years from now, when lop-sided demographic trends and failure to adjust withholding cutoffs on a timely basis begin to creep up on us.

    That’s because SS isn’t structured as an investment fund.  Current accumulated receipts fund curent benefits.  It’s not like your 401k or pension, where you gradually sell off the accumulated assets you’ve saved away and earned.  Benefits are paid directly from current cumulative withholdings.

    Something else you should probably understand about 401k’s–they’re huge beneficiaries of the bailouts.

    Anyone who thinks the number reported to them on their quarterly 401k statement is anything other than a shared illusion is kidding themselves.  Those balances are based on market quotes, in turn driven by certain accounting conventions.  It’s an estimate of the current perceived value of the assets within the most active markets–plus or minus some accounting and actuarial bullsh*t, as I HOPE Americans learned in 2008.

    Ironically, that 401k’s value would still be in th sh*tter today if not for QE2 and the other Fed bailout programs that provided liquidity to the investment markets.  That’s why Wall Street bonuses are still riding high while real employment (i.e., + ”discouraged”) is essentially the same as it was in January 2009.

    The problem is that this policy of bailout and tax cut is knocking the legs from under the single asset propping up this moribund economy–the tax base.

    The bailouts could have bought us time–but only if we had the brains to rebalance the tax codes closer to historical norms.  Especially capital gains.

    In 1965 the top marginal rate was 70%, unemployment was at 5%.  Today it’s 35% and 10%+ (in real terms).  The problem is that market “gains” aren’t making it to the real economy.  The wealthy are starving the real, productive economy of the capital it needs.

    To run a business you need customers, not tax breaks for already bloated plutocrats who don’t know how to spend it.

    I’ve got nothing against Paul, really.  Honest to God, I flirt with the idea of voting for him, from time to time.  But that’s a hard sell when the guy’s basic understanding of tax, economics and markets is so shakey.

  37. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 9:32 pm #

    Why did those people lose their 401ks, and lose on their investments?
    Because of the artificial boom and bust cycle and inflation created by the fed, that ron paul is trying to stop.

    With a stable currency the markets are much more predictable and fair to those who are investing and saving.

    If people want to keep their SS they can, if people want to start opting out of these programs they can. Where is the problem?

  38. Anonymous January 16, 2012 at 9:41 pm #

    As I said above, I think it would be ok for people to have the choice of putting their money into a government-run “investment plan”, but nobody should be forced to do so.  Neither should we be required to support the other if either of our choices fail us.  I personally would choose against a system which has accrued many, many trillions of dollars in current unfunded liabilities.  You should be allowed to choose for yourself as well.  Do you have a problem with that?

  39. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:33 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  40. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:33 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  41. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  42. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  43. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:35 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  44. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:35 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  45. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  46. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  47. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 11110 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  48. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:37 am #

    President Obama claimed the power to use the military to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American without trial or charge.  He goes to war as congress screams “NO”.  He funds trillions in bailouts as the people scream “no”.  He created a “Super Congress” that can fast track legislation and 13 members are much easier to influence!!!  

    But you’re trying to tell me that Ron Paul’s can’t reinstitute idea of sound money, and give the printing power (and control of interest/inflation rates) back to the congress rather than a private run for profit bank that has been bleeding America dry since 1913?    sure he can…somebody else already did… his name was JFK and it was executive order 1 1 1 1 0 (and it would have accomplished the transition slowly without as much harm as you think) and he got shot in the throat for it. (an INTERVENTION as John Mcain put it.)

    Not to mention Ron Paul’s plan of a BALANCED budget his first year (rather than Trillion dollar deficits every single year)

    As for Social Security… Ron Paul does not want to scrap it.  He wants to reform it.  All those wellfare dollars won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on if you keep electing candidates like Obama, and Romney who will print endless “stimulus” and devalue the dollar into oblivion…. You should do some MORE research.

    Once again… Ron Paul 2012.

  49. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:45 am #

    “Invest their money as they see fit”  could mean start a RRSP/GIC with a guarantee on their principal investment and modest interest return with their own bank or credit union. Or even buy precious metal bullion!  It doesn’t mean rather than invest their money into the Social Security system, they are just going to blindly invest into the stock market, like most 401k exposures….  It just gives people the CHOICE.  Hell, they can hide their money under their mattress if they want… and guess what?  It would have been better off there  than 80% of “investments” including social security! :)

  50. Chris Saccoccia January 17, 2012 at 12:55 am #

    Liam’s basic assertion is that 401k’s got helped by the trillion dollar bailouts because those recipients of those trillions (the banks) re-invested some of the money in the market (A LOT of that “stimulus” was stolen)… however the money that was re-invested did inflate the stock market bubble (albeit momentarily) and this is the reason that a lot of the people saw their 401k “bounce back” and also why Liam calls it an “illusion.”

    So he’s right… the bailouts did help the 401k.  but only temporarily and at the cost of the theft of hundreds of billions now piled on as debt to the people.

    not a good trade off, if you ask me.

    Sound money is the only solution.  Not a debt based monetary system, with continuous “bail outs”  That is nothing but a transfer of wealth from poor to rich, and my proof is the wealth gap in the country now as compared to even 10, or 25 years ago…

  51. Rwright05 January 17, 2012 at 3:26 am #

    Way to post 6 times asshole.

  52. YaBooSucksToYouFascists January 17, 2012 at 2:41 pm #

    Headline doesn’t match article.  Another pro-Romney article on DisInfo.  WTF

  53. YaBooSucksToYouFascists January 17, 2012 at 10:41 am #

    Headline doesn’t match article.  Another pro-Romney article on DisInfo.  WTF

  54. Anonymous January 17, 2012 at 5:23 pm #

    Are you sure it wasn’t the 7ft tall quaker moon people?

  55. tiggles January 18, 2012 at 12:13 pm #

    little did Mitt Romney know, it was the Loch-Ness Monster in disguise.

  56. Jin The Ninja January 23, 2012 at 12:47 pm #

    ;)

  57. Residing February 5, 2012 at 6:53 am #

    Mitt Romney giving money to a woman on campaign trail is a clear violation of The United States Code. 

    Title 18 U.S.C. § 210 : US Code – Section 210: Offer to procure appointive public office
    Whoever pays or offers or promises any money or thing of value,
    to any person, firm, or corporation in consideration of the use or
    promise to use any influence to procure any appointive office or
    place under the United States for any person, shall be fined under
    this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

    http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/11/210
    http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/210.html
    http://corpuslegalis.com/us/code/title18/offer-to-procure-appointive-public-office

  58. Oficiious February 25, 2012 at 2:47 pm #

    I have a feeling you will see a lot of this in the Michigan primary

Leave a Reply