Skip to main content

Romney's 47% is Ryan's 30%

As most every person knows by now, including babies whom have yet to be born as well as chimpanzees, Mitt Romney was quoted in a Boca Raton May fundraiser as saying, "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right - there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."

Now it's his running mate - Paul Ryan's turn, who said the following at a keynote address at The American Spectator's 2011 Robert L Bartley Gala Dinner:

"Seventy percent of Americans want the American dream. They believe in the American idea. Only 30 percent want the welfare state. Before too long, we could become a society where the net majority of Americans are takers, not makers."

Perhaps the two of them can join forces, come to a compromise and declare that approximately 38.5% of people in this country are worthless. That or as Ryan's number was 17% lower than Romney's (63.8% of it), maybe the campaign team will try to run with this and continually decrease the number of purported worthless Americans. A Romney campaign adviser can come forward and say that 19.14% of Americans are worthless. Mitt's wife - Ann - can then adamantly declare that 12.21132% of Americans are pathetic. Paul Ryan's boyfriend can then say that only 7.79082216% of Americans suck (but not as well as Mr. Ryan). By the time election day rolls around, voters will have forgotten all about Romney's 47% remarks and instead think, "Eh, I can't be one of the stupid 7.79082216%. I'm voting for Romney and Ryan!" You're welcome, Mitt!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/paul-ryan-30-percent-welfare-state_n_1933730.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"