Romney loves the 47% more than Obama does, but Mainstream Media doesn’t care

I’ve complained before that Romney shouldn’t think that any economic class is beyond his reach. I think he knows that and always knew it. The way a man speaks to a bunch of millionaire donors is not necessarily reflective of his heart. He feels pressure to perform and to say the things that they want to hear. We all do that in front of a group.

Romney has been given a chance to re-articulate is remarks. He has appropriately stuck to the conservative point that we are manufacturing a class of government dependents. The media has acted like this is some grave sin on the part of Romney. What is especially insane is that the media heard remarks from Obama that same week and gave him no scrutiny about them.

For all its problems, the British press seems able to sometimes give more equal treatment to the candidates. As story in the Telegraph, “Barack Obama shrugs, but the debt keeps mounting” summed up the American media’s double standard:

The difference was that, whereas Mitt Romney impugned the integrity of millions of fellow citizens, dismissing 47 per cent of them as scroungers, the president merely insulted the nation’s collective intelligence – and almost no one seemed to care… aside from the opprobrium of professional budget-watchers and diehard opponents, the man in charge of the world’s biggest economy emerged virtually unscathed from his casual confession on CBS that he did not know how much the US owes. It was a triumph of style over substance.

The story is referring to the appearance of President Obama on the David Letterman show where Letterman asked him about the meaning of the “debt clock” featured at the RNC convention. Obama couldn’t remember the amount of the debt and then confused the debt with the deficit.

Obama actively campaigned on the debt issue during the 2008 election. We regularly saw leads in the mainstream news like this: “Barack Obama accused John McCain today of offering a tax cut plan which would bring corporations $2 trillion in tax breaks, including $1.2 billion for ExxonMobil, and will add $5.7 trillion to the national debt.” Now, Obama has managed to add a lot more than that. At the end of 2008, the debt was 9.9 trillion dollars. Four years later it is 16.3 trillion dollars.

How does Obama get taken seriously when he is so inconsistent? He obviously cares nothing for the debt. The coming economic difficulties are probably going to hurt the poor and middle class the most. By acting like it is no big deal, and giving false assurances, he is showing he doesn’t take the debt seriously and is not concerned about the economic well-being of millions of Americans. Romney loves them more.

On Letterman, Obama insisted that the debt wasn’t even a problem in the short term. Has any pundit asked why Obama campaigned on the issue in 2008 if it didn’t matter?