Mitt Romney Video Caught On Camera Telling the Truth!! Hidden Camera Catches Off the Cuff Remarks at Fundraiser. Gallup: 67% of Dems Want More!

GOP Presidential Candidate, Mitt Romney was taped while speaking at a private fundraiser back in May of 2011. His remarks were in a Q&A style, addressing concerns of potential diners as to Romney’s potential as a contender for the White House. The tape was released yesterday by the left-leaning, Mother Jones magazine. In this “hidden camera” tape, Romney speaks to the audience about his campaign strategy and which voters he will win over, and those he will not - it is evident that this is what is taking place in the video (even though it was cut to a smart 30 second clip). The New York Times offers a take on this as “Romney Faults Those Dependent on Government” leading with:

”During a private reception with wealthy donors this year, Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “people who pay no income tax” and are “dependent upon government.” Those voters, he said, would probably support President Obama because they believe they are “victims” who are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”

Nowhere in the taped remarks does Mitt Romney "fault" anyone.

Of course, the opening paragraph is close to what Romney said, and Romney is correct in his video remarks, the media and Mother Jones think it’s shocking that Romney’s campaign believes that he will appeal to Republicans! It is shocking that the campaign would focus their attention on independents! It is shocking that the campaign would not go overboard trying to attract those individuals who would automatically vote Democrat. In speaking of automatic Obama voters, Romney points out that 47% of the nation pays no taxes and is dependent upon the government – citing these individuals as the Obama base. Of course, it’s a bit broader than that, but not by much.

According to a new Gallup Poll 67% of Democrats do not believe the government is doing enough! When one thinks of those who are most likely the partisan Obama voters, one thinks of those who rely on the government in some way, shape or form, specifically public employee union members and organizers, those individuals who are generational welfare recipients, and those who are going to vote for a Democrat, no matter what, due to blind partisanship.

On the flip side, one has the generic Republican voter who will vote for a Republican no matter what, those that are in the military, those that are the middle income taxpayers, those that are concerned about the economy, and those that are big on individual liberty rather than government intervention.

Then you have those moderates, who are concerned with helping others, but not to the point where one is given and EBT card that offers free tattoos (Massachusetts EBT, no kidding), those who feel that the economy is in tatters and that JFK and Reagan using tax cuts as a means to jump start the economy, were right, those that are concerned about Middle East policy and will vote for a Democrat or Republican, depending upon who that individual feels is most like to “fix” the situation. Those are the moderate and independent voters who swing elections. That’s this opinion of course, based on polls, and statistics available through a simple Google search.
So, Romney is caught on camera, telling the truth about who is going to vote for whom. Shocking!

See the full video on You Tube here at Mother Jones You Tube Channel which has received 338 views – so help them out!

Meanwhile, what you will see is a smart and savvy campaigner who understands his base, the middle, the way the economy will react, and get this: Romney’s remarks will not appeal to the Obama base, it will automatically appeal to the Romney base, and the moderate or independent? One has to guess these are the smart voters who are not taken in by the constant hype of any campaign, but reality – and Romney is speaking directly to the moderate who might vote either way, who might just find his remarks to be not only “off-the-cuff” but, grounded in reality. This was not a slam at Obama’s base, but a strategy of which voter Romney felt he would appeal.

Go figure. Every campaign has their supporters:

Classic 2008 campaign clip: “Now I don’t have to worry about paying for…”


The flip side: Welfare Fraud (Short Documentary) “It’s free money!” (Talking to the Middle)

A sensible response to the entitlement program by an average American! – Talking about limits!! And Tax Credit Limits!!!



Consider that President Obama’s Administration has waived the work requirement for welfare recipients (the claim is they tweaked the current law, not gutted the law), especially during an election year cycle, it does, intentionally or not, appear that the Campaign is attempting to solidify its base – i.e. those who feel that the government should do more.

In short, both President Obama and Mitt Romney need to appeal to their base, both need to appeal to the independent voter – both will most likely loose voters to the other candidate, or alienate voters who will stay home rather than vote at all. That said, although many may claim that the polls are extremely close, and that likeability is a factor, will vote with their pocketbooks, and whether or not they “like” a guy (or a woman for that matter), it is the one who is perceived as most competent that will rule the day.

This non-story will be a huge story for the next three days – while the Middle East is burning, while the Libyan President specifically stated that the the murder of our U.S. Ambassador was premeditated, and that it had nothing to do with a stupid movie - the strategy form the White House and its campaign supporter will be to ignore, deflect, and hope that the American Public finds Mitt Romney, telling the truth news! Those 50% of American’s working extra hours; extra jobs to make ends meet, might just miss it entirely, or agree with Romney if they do manage to catch the clip. This is not a “gotcha” moment, no matter how one slices it – the left will eat it up, and the middle? It’s: Nothing to see here, move along.

The Establishment GOP and Main Stream Press – Fear of Santorum – The Battle Between Conservatism and Moderates within the GOP – Analysis

Santorum - Feared by the GOP Establishment and the left - photo time magazine

First an article from the Daily Beastheadlines: “The GOP’s Panic over Rick Santorum”- which speaks to the GOP’s first choice Romney and their failed “strategy” for him to win the GOP nomination. The article notes that that polls show Santorum leading Romney, either one on one or with Paul and Gingrich, however, if it looks like Romney is out, the GOP has Chris Christie, new to the political stage as the Governor of New Jersey waiting in the wings to take on the Party’s Minimization. The article describes the reasoning that Santorum’s “controversies” will turn away young voters – rather than say a Mitt Romney or Chris Christie might get them to the polls in droves (Note later remark is bloggers sarcasm).

Following that logic, the man who has professed to not the office (so many times that it has become legendary) – and article from CBS alludes to the same theme – titled “Michigan may be Romney's last stand”, the CBS piece illustrates the rise of Santorum and the polling in Michigan, and should Romney lose Michigan, the GOP powers that be promise a “Brokered Convention” – this according to non-other than Chris Christie.
Needless to say, this same type of rhetoric from both the Press and the Establishment GOP was heard once before in 1980- the candidate was Ronald Reagan – and the panic was the same – how the tune changed once Reagan became the most popular of Presidents, and is now seen as the “bar” for all GOP Presidential hopefuls.

This is the problem with the national GOP – they believe that unless they run a “moderate” candidate, they cannot win (having short memories – see Reagan) – therefore they run, the Bob Dole’s, the John McCain’s, the appeasers to the left, and the result – they lose. Whiel losing the GOP might or might not pick up a majority –but a lot depends on the strength of the GOP in general and specifically the Speaker of the House – and right at the moment, John Boehner is more Romney than say Gingrich – who was successful is accomplishing just that – with Dole as the nominee. From a strategic standpoint, the only candidate that would worry all sides and achieve a rally to the base and independents who are fed up with the Obama administration policies (specifically economic), is Rick Santorum. Ron Paul, the perennial candidate, has a good percentage of the youth vote locked up – and as far as the youth vote goes – they generally do not account for a large enough percentage to affect an election. However, the “religious right” does. The Evangelicals and the Catholics are two of the largest voting blocs in the nation – If they come out in droves for a candidate (2000 and 2004 for George W. Bush (Evangelicals) and 2008 for Barack Obama (Catholics), then there is an effect, a real effect on who becomes the nominee.

Therefore, although the press and the national GOP and the DNC are terrified of the fact that those two factors, who they both court and dismiss at the same time – (being somewhat elitists) – when a candidate is surging who may be more credentialed than the rest of the PAC, but is not moderate enough for the taste of the national GOP, or the press, he is labeled “controversial”. Santorum has made statements that are just that, controversial to those who have no idea of what Catholicism entails, or the “Sexual Revolution – not the Progressive viewpoint, but the religious and also statistical viewpoint – and the latest charge that Universities might be teaching students liberal, progressive and anti-religious ideology. The problem with Santorum is that although one might not want to take a good looking the mirror, he does – he doesn’t mince words, and he makes no apologies for his statements.

The fact that colleges and universities are catered left (including Catholic institutions) is no secret. One is challenged and derided if one is not “secular” - it is a fact, but one must ask the college students, not the media and those elitist who were in agreement with the general think.

The Chicago Tribune in a piece that might be considered somewhat misleading given the headline “Rick Santorum rejects absolute separation of church and state” – speaks to the differences between Romney and Santorum, however, emphasized Santorum’s note on the “class system” developed by progressives.

The former Pennsylvania senator also doubled down on comments he made the previous day that believing everyone ought to go to college is snobbish and devalues the hard work done by Americans who don't hold college degrees. (Chicago Tribune)

It has become part and parcel of the American think that without a college degree on can do nowhere, however, those graduating from college today are faced with a choice between which fast food chain they are going to work for, assuming there are jobs available.
The Progressive ideology suggests that there is a class system (this is a taught at most universities in Senior Seminars): The First Estate, (those coming over on the Mayflower), the Second Estate (the Kennedy’s, Roosevelt’s, etc. who are very wealthy), and the Middle Class (or Elites), those who have a four year degree, then the Blue Collar workers (those who hold a high school degree and work in public service (police, firefighters, etc.) and then the “masses” – those who hold no degree.

It is the most ridiculous and misleading piece of useless information that is given to students that are about to receive a 4 year degree – that somehow the Kennedy’s are American Royalty, that they are now elite, and that the rest of the groups are “beneath them”. (This blogger had to sit through that course and not without a bit of argument). It is the most anti-American thought process, a class system in a nation that was designed to give opportunity for all, regardless of education, regardless of social standing, and yet, the courses and dogma give the student the impression that they are part of a social class – one last ditty from this course – certain things are not to be told to the “masses” because they cannot handle the information – no kidding. Also one is not supposed to "share" this "entitled" piece of information (indoctrination?)

When Santorum spoke of Kennedy’s speech on Separation of Church and State, he spoke to the fact that Kennedy was distancing himself from his Catholicism as he was facing a fierce battle for the nomination and his Catholicism was being used against him quite effectively – he needed to come up with an assurance – and he took the progressive stance – which appeased those on the left who feared the Pope would be running the United States (no kidding those were the anti-Kennedy ads from within his own party). It is an oxymoron to say the least, when the Constitution directly states that the State should make no religion primary, and protects the practice of religion – that’s it in a nutshell. The Separation of Church and State means simply that the United States cannot set up a Theocracy – and as far as anyone who studies the Constitution or has read the Bill of Rights – it is difficult to misinterpret. Yet if it is in the political interest of the Press, or a party – it is done so on a daily if not hourly basis.

The message one will hear is that Santorum is out of touch, right wing, when the reality is, he is a Catholic, with Catholic viewpoints (not shared by all Catholics, just as there are differences in all Christian and Jewish faiths (Orthodox, Conservative and Reform, for example) and one must suspect others not mentioned. His points are not within he mainstream think regardless of whether they are right, and that is all one hears. One does not hear about his economic policies nor his foreign and domestic policies, nor his energy policy. Rick Santorum is not Mitt Romney or the establishment GOP candidate – Good! Good for the Country – especially if they learn about his non-controversial statements (press and GOP speak) but rather his sound policy statements. The fact that Chris Christie, and the balance of the GOP standard bearers are threatening a “brokered convention” (just like they did in 1980 – except they wanted to run George H Bush instead of Reagan) – is just that, a warning to those who might see chaos and vote for Romney against their better judgment or their own preference.

The likelihood of this happening is nil, but the GOP and Press shoving this down the voters throats “literally’ is ridiculous. From this perspective and without a Chrystal ball – no one knows at this point who will win Michigan and or Arizona (as polls are too close to call), and on Super Tuesday, ten states go to the polls: Alaska - which may go to Romney, Georgia where Newt Gingrich and Santorum are doing well, Idaho, Santorum, Massachusetts, Santorum or Romney, North Dakota, Santorum, Ohio Santorum, Oklahoma Santorum, Tennessee, Santorum, Vermont – Romney, Virginia Ron Paul or Romney.

The fact is that Romney on Super Tuesday, based on current polling, may take 3 states, and with proportional delegates awarded in some, pick up a few. It is where he suffers, in the middle of the country and the south, which makes it impossible for a candidate, a GOP candidate to win the nomination and then win the presidency.

A closing though, Rick Santorum is not Ronald Reagan, but their current situations are so similar, one must make the comparison – one might suggest that Santorum would be the candidate to best Obama, given the national polls as well – therefore, the media fights against another Conservative taking the role of President, and so does the National GOP. It is a question of power, having power over those “masses” that is at stake. Santorum is, for all intents and purposes, a working man’s advocate, and that just breaks all the rules of both the Progressives and the national GOP – to encourage a working man (or woman) to believe they are of equal worth to the Elite – it’s simply heresy.