That is the number that political pundits, reporters, and blogs are discussing today. It is the number or, more accurately, the percentage of voters that Mitt Romney declared are on the government payroll and, therefore, are voting for President Obama in November.
Mother Jones has secured…
I agree with everything my friend, Kirt Wilson says here, and I would also like to amplify what I consider to be the real problem with Romney’s statement. Although 47% is a striking figure, what is more disturbing, and what will give Romney the most difficulty, is the way he condemned the character of that 47%. To him they are people
who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.
He then went on to say:
My job is not to worry about those people … I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.
These are not accidental words; they articulate a strict dichotomy between the “makers” and the “takers” that cuts to the very heart of the right-wing ideology Romney is trying to draw upon in order to get elected. He characterizes all who depend in any way on the government to help them create a better life as irresponsible (and lazy?) moochers.
This expresses perfectly the distain the Republican ideology has for any sense of responsibility we might have to one another as members of a common political community.
Romney’s rejection of this common sense of responsibility - that is, his own irresponsibility - is ultimately what will lose him the election.
The Washinton Post makes some of these points, I now see, here: