Takers > Makers

If there was any doubt in any fiscal conservative’s mind, it’s now squelched. Mitt Romney was a great candidate, and he ran a great campaign. Better than Ronald Reagan.

Mitt is ethical, principled, accomplished, an experienced leader in managing projects and budgets, a very hard worker, and had the US’ best interest at heart. I thank Mitt for serving his country with such a campaign. I’m glad I financially contributed.

But…

Even Ronald Reagan could not have won in 2012.

“The country has changed.”

We are past the 51% tipping point.There are now more Takers than Makers. The Takers don’t see themselves as takers. They see themselves in circumstances out of their control in which they just need a “little help” and use the voting booth to get it. No inconvenience of personal responsibility involved here.

Hispanics tipped the election. Many must not realize they are causing the US to become like the bad governments they fled. Nothing good comes from the corruption of trading your vote in exchange for left wing politicians granting citizenship to your illegal friends. I’m sorry this is harsh, but if you did this, you are corrupt. Go back home.

Ann Coulter on Takers vs. Makers

Paul Ryan on Takers vs. Makers

Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Takers > Makers

  1. Greg B says:

    There is no doubt this election was purely about “gimme more free stuff”
    Not about reproductive rights
    nor the economy
    nor anything of substance.
    Just “gimme more free stuff”

  2. Matt says:

    It takes a pretty extraordinary man to live 65 years pretty much beyond reproach, as far as I am aware, all the while working hard and learning the lessons that will allow him to be an effective leader, and then be willing to enter into a national race, knowing that he and his family will have all sorts of baseless crap thrown at them from all corners of the country, for no other reason than that he had the courage to step up to serve his country. We can’t ask for much more than that in a candidate.

  3. BaconNeggs says:

    James I have to agree, Mitt was a better candidate than Reagan and even Reagan himself, would not have been elected in 2012 because of the 51 percent tipping point so evident that you mentioned.

    The fact is, Mitt ran a damn good campaign and handled his business perfectly and yet he still lost.
    Listening to Republicans and the MSM slamming Mitt and Christie moreso, is so stupid. If one month, one week or one day out from this election, a person still needed convincing who to vote for after these past four years, then I am sorry, but they are so ignorant and stupid, that no amount of well reasoned arguments to put country before self could ever
    convince them.

    I have a lot of doubts about Mitts foreign policy but he would have made of hell of a good President and America missed a great opportunity. Mitt can hold his head high and sleep a little easier at nights knowing Obama has inherited his own stinking mess that he will either have to try and clean up, or drown in it.

    Obama wants a legacy and thinks four more years will crown him, but unless there is some super-hero ready to step-up and peel off the Obama guise and save America, Obama’s legacy will be as the man who finally crashed America into the ground, something even Bin Laden never managed to do.

  4. James says:

    My realization has been that few special interest groups love this country. It’s evident by how they treat it. Worst have been politicians.

    The banks dumping bad debt on it and devaluing its currency. The Ag and ethanol industry extracting subdidies and privileges, individuals extracting free medical care, Hispanics trading votes for the promise of getting their friends legalized.

    You don’t heap garbage on something you love, or steal from it. The behavior we’ve seen is what one would do if one wanted to destroy then trample. The only group treating this country with respect has been the military.

  5. pateriot says:

    Reagan was no Mit… but than again, Mit was no Reagan! A decent and good person, but not a principled Conservative. The biggest difference was in Ronald Reagans ability to communicate with the average person.

  6. notamobster says:

    James – your observation on special interests is spot-on. Consider it stolen, sir.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>