Plutocrat Dems Attack Romney as ‘Richie Rich’


Pages: 1 2

It’s never a good time to talk about Democrat plutocrats until it’s way too late to talk about them.

With Corzine, we’ll have a window of three seconds to talk about his financial shenanigans. He’s innocent until proved gui — Convicted! — What? You’re still burbling about that guy?

Liberals will be carrying on about Richard Nixon until we’re all long dead. Why has the time passed for them to really examine the man who was their vice presidential candidate only eight years ago and was desperately seeking the presidential slot just four years ago?

Until we hear ferocious denunciations of FDR, JFK, Kerry, Edwards and Corzine, liberals have no business criticizing Bain Capital.

Maybe some people are irrationally offended by the rich, but Democrats aren’t. This is the party of George Soros, Goldman Sachs and Nancy Pelosi!

The six wealthiest senators are all Democrats, half of whom married or inherited their money. Some of the multimillionaire Democrats are:

– Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the second-richest senator after Kerry, inherited his money.

– Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the sixth-richest senator, married her money.

– Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., was a bogus dot-com multimillionaire, cashing out before the stockcrashed.

– Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., the ninth-richest senator, who failed to pay taxes on her private plane until she was caught last year, married her money.

Meanwhile, with few exceptions, Republicans either made money on their own or they don’t have it.

It’s not an accident that Democrats oppose a tax on wealth, which they have boatloads of, but strongly support taxes on income, something they typically do not have.

Democrats don’t hate the rich; they are the rich, luxuriating in fortunes acquired by inheritance or marriage, fleecing the taxpayer, trial lawyer hucksterism or disreputable money manipulation. Their contempt is reserved for those who engage in honest work for a living, whom they accuse of “greed” for wanting to pay the government a little less.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • WildJew

    Who Castrated Ann Coulter? By DAVID CATRON

    ….In 2008, for example, she declared that she would not merely vote for, but actively campaign for Hillary Clinton if the Republican Party were foolish enough to nominate John McCain for President….

    But something has happened to Coulter. I don't have firsthand knowledge that she was kidnapped by RINO Team Six and taken to an offshore medical facility where she was forced to undergo a gruesome surgical procedure, but many of her recent columns suggest that something of the sort must have occurred. …..

    She relentlessly trashes Republican "moderates" like McCain, yet now supports a candidate who makes the Arizona Senator look like Barry Goldwater by comparison…….

    Unlike Coulter, the media and the Obama reelection team know that Romney can be easily portrayed as a Wall Street parasite whose only memorable "accomplishment" as the Governor of Massachusetts was the enactment of a health "reform" law that renders him unable to credibly denounce ObamaCare.
    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/06/who-cast

    • mrbean

      That Hillary Clinton comment of hers was one of her more stupid moments, because when a conservative marginilize a weak candidate like John "Dead Man Walking" McCain they have caused a lot of independent voters to vote for Obama and that is exactly what happened with both Coulter and Limbaugh busting on McCain. I think McCain is a gutless arrogant media A$$ kisser. By the way, why is the photo of the dishonorable discharged traitor John Kerry who arranged for secret meetings with the NVA and VC Communists in Paris while still a reserve naval officer shown saluting up there?

  • StephenD

    I still like Coulter. I support Gingrich (the only one that has a true grip on the M.E. and how to deal with it). I can't reconcile her to him and…I don't need to. She has her opinion which, in the one instance, I disagree with. Otherwise, I think she's great.

    • WildJew

      I'm sure she is a bright and a talented woman. She lost me when she said Jews need to be perfected. To me is smacks of a kind of moral or spiritual superiority; or supremacism.

      • StephenD

        I never knew she said such a thing. Of course, none of us are perfect; including her. What could she have been thinking?

        • WildJew

          Also, why does she support apologists for Islam like Governor Chris Christie who has a huge Muslim / Sharia problem? How can any true conservative support Christie?

          • Asher

            I do believe that she wants one of Romney or Christie's sons, (that was such a funny comment by Steve Chavez.) Coulter is totally not a Conservative!

          • WilliamJamesWard

            Chris Christie sets off many warning bells and I see red flags
            hanging all over him. He reminds me of someone who will serve
            to the highest payer………………………………………William

      • 1mrsdash

        " Jews need to be perfected" –Ann Coulter by way of WildJew.

        Can we have a link, context, planet spoken from, etc.?

        Todah Rabbah.

  • tagalog

    I think it's over the top to criticize Maria Cantwell, who made her money from smart investment. That may not be exactly EARNING it, but it's OK in my book; that's one of the things capitalism is all about, isn't it, the creation of wealth from investing? And Cantwell had to have SOME significant amount of money in order to invest and make a fortune, didn't she?

    Isn't investment funds where most of Mitt Romney's money comes from? Isn't that why he had a 15% tax rate instead of one that is higher, because he only had to pay capital gains taxes?

  • tagalog

    Come to think of it, I also don't have much of a problem with someone marrying money, or winning it in some lottery, either. Marrying money, in my estimation, involves at least SOME form of earning it ("Yes, dear"), and the lottery, well, that's just Aristotle's wheel of fortune turning and good luck striking. Better to have money that's come by without dishonesty than to be poor, eh?

  • Steve Chavez

    I FINALLY FIGURED OUT why Ann is so obsessed by, and REALLY sucking up to, Mitt: SHE WANTS ONE OF HIS SONS!

    Here she is writing on who MARRIED INTO MONEY or INHERITED IT. She knows the sons are rich too, and cuter than her current "gigolo," but now that she knows that there is a $100,000,000 TRUST FUND, SHE'S a pussycat turned TIGER out for blood money. BUT, she'll have to give up drunken dinners with Bill Maher and cussing but for the smackeroos, she'll gladly oblige. "ANNIE RICH?"

    As for these anti-Capitalist DEMOCRAT 1%er OCCUPY SUPPORTERS, I would hope someday that someone, anyone, would ask them: "Thanks for supporting us but would you give up 99% of your wealth to prove your sincerity? Will you be true to your ideals and live in a tent? Some of you would still be millionaires so would you give up another 99% of that? Just asking." "Well ah, I ah… ah, ah, my… OH S**T! When I said 'Spread the wealth,' I meant yours not mine!"

    BUT, I would also hope someday that someone, anyone, would ask an OCCUPIER: "Do you, or anyone in your group, BUY LOTTERY TICKETS and if so, WHY?" To be "Filthy Stink'n Rich?"

  • Guest

    Before I say this let it be known I have been a Coulter fan somewhat.

    These past few years she has seemed to latch unto one person after another then simply become a mouth piece for that individual going so far as to ignore their faults and blow out of proportion thir accomplishments. This was the case with Chris Christy and seems to be the same now.

    Romney will be the guy to get the nomination. The upper east coast establishment has already decided. They cannot stomach anyone who will personally attack Obama. Romney is not someone who will attack anyone other than his fellow candidates.

    The republican field is very weak.

    • Maxie

      "The republican field is very weak."

      The Republican Party is very weak because it's split philosophically between rich, liberal Eastern seaboard RINO's and Midwest conservatives and always has been. Until and unless that changes the Party will remain weak and feckless. http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/gop_what_g

  • maria

    Ann Coulter again focused how much cynicals and hypocrietes democrates/progressives are. You people can not imagine how much those one alike Communists by tactics, maners, moral standard ( more precise, lack of that standard). I am originaly from refugee from USSR and what surprise it was as I found the same Communists but under appealing name "democrats". Their weapon is lie, facts distortion. They used controlled by them Media (90%) and they seized Educational Institutions (schools, univercities, etc). Unions which is by V.Lenin "schools of communism" their proxy. Educational system all ( almost, at least) are unionized.
    Idea of class war was creation or main idea for Bolshevicks. Our socialists WH use that one. Riches are bad and poors are good. So much familiar with it. Socializm is dictatorship and oppresion and no freedom in reality.

    • Maxie

      Yes maria, very true. America has been Sovietized over a period of about forty years following Antonio Gramsci's strategy of "capture-the-culture": The Media; schools, entertainment industries, our Legal/Court system and gradually elected offices. You can read it here: http://www.americanthinker.com/archived-articles/

  • maria

    When criminal attacks common citizen who is weak? Of course common citizen as he held some rules and decent and peaceful person. The same with Dem's and Rep's. They play on different rules. Rep's adhear to Fathers founders of this country ideas but Dem's use close to criminals methods. It is nor surprise that Leftists/Dem's like Islamists. They use almost the same methods to win. Among them are intimidation, use of libels, blackmail, etc. And…LIE, LIE… They are sure that we are fools.

    • Jim_C

      From the lack of knowledge demonstrated by your posts, I'm absolutely certain you're a fool. Words have MEANINGS–you don't get to make up what they mean. You show me a "method" the democrats have used that republicans haven't. News flash: you can't.

      And the struggle between democrats and republicans currently is essentially the same struggle the Founders had with each other. When you invoke the founding fathers, it helps to know history.

  • Stephen_Brady

    The DEMs know that Republicans tend to circle the wagons when one of our own comes under attack. I've held … since the beginning of this campaign season … that Romney is the DEM's choice to run against, in November. They can also see that GOP turnout is lower, when Romney is winning. There isn't a lot of enthusiasm for him.

    Attacks like Kerry's merely reinforce my conclusion that the DEMs want Romney as Obama's November opponent. That, in turn, reinforces my intention to vote against him, in the primary.

    I do like Anne's description of John Kerry's "sheer luck" in marrying two heiresses in a row!

    • Jim_C

      Romney is a little bit like Hillary was last time. Republicans wanted so badly for her to be the nominee–they game-planned for it, and got gobsmacked when it turned out to be Obama. In fact, they still can't believe he's president.

      And that won't change when he's re-elected in 2012. Romney is easy to game plan for; there's a wealth of gaffes, flip flops, and yes "out of touch rich guy" that haven't even begun to surface.

      I'd rather it wasn't Romney, because the margin of victory for Obama will be smaller. But Newt or Santorum? People loathe Newt, for all sorts of reasons, most of them proper. He's the typical sleazy pol. And while Santorum is stronger on the stump, and more respectable than Newt or Romney, he simply doesn't have what it takes, and would alienate almost as many people as Newt would.

      Most importantly the GOP money settled on Romney long ago, and it'll be very hard for these also-rans to turn the tide.

      • Maxie

        The GOP candidate is incidental. The election will be stolen in the tried-and-true manner the MarxiCrats have used since Tammany Hall (NY); the Daley Machine (Cook County, Ill) and the Pendergast Machine (Kansas City). It won't take much. A few key districts in a few "swing states". Watch for districts that get a 110% turnout of registered voters. A couple of "recounts" in such districts a la Al Fraken in Mn will finish the job.

        • Jim_C

          Nah, Obama won't need help. He'll have a majority.

  • WilliamJamesWard

    The Democrats have Obama and his record of depredations against America,
    the election is there for the Republicans to lose. I could stay up nights thinking
    of a list of candidates I might have serious problems with, it will fall out the way
    it will and nothing could cause me to vote for Obama or not vote against him,
    even if Amused was his challenger or Flippie but in that case the Rapture would
    spare us, I hope………………………………………………………….William