Mitt Romney graciously gave the world a new bumper sticker line yesterday when he blatantly uttered those now classic, and yet, not retractable words “I am not concerned with the poor” (insert sigh here). Yes, he said it and we say… finally an honest politician.
One has to wonder if somewhere in the White House there was the roar of laughter coming from the private level where President Barack Obama was sitting in front of the television watching what he thought was a comedy sketch staring a Mitt Romney look-a-like.
Legend has it there were cries of “oh no’s” heard through out the Mitt Romney offices as the computers slowed down from all of the people trying to download their resumes onto their computer’s desktop. There is just nothing better than to hear a speech (during one of the worst recessions since the 1930s) that speaks to… uhhh well, to…who was his audience again?
None-the-less for those of you who think the worst of poor old Mitt, give him a break (because more than likely right about now you’re contemplating not giving him a vote), consider your sympathy a possible parting gift. In the end, I am sure poor old Mitt Romney already learned one valuable lesson… there is more than one way to be considered poor (defined by Webster’s Dictionary, as “Lacking in a specified resource or quality”), one could be poor in votes!
We end this article with a question posed by communication strategist Doug Poretz:
He [Mitt Romney] quickly moved to assert that those words were taken out of context, and that immediately after those words (which we will hear from his opponents repeatedly over the course of the presidential campaign) he said: ‘We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I’ll fix it.’ Does it matter what he said in-context and what he said out-of-context?
You be the judge.