Mitt Romney Was Kind of Right

Recently, "news" has leaked where Mitt Romney claims he lost because the evil Obama guy won the elections with gifts to certain demographics.

Much like Mitt Romney's 47% comment, he is absolutely correct on this claim. 

Of course, in both instances news agencies are kind of taking isolated comments out of context. Both comments were made at events/under circumstances catering to campaign donors (who tend to be a little further to the right side). i find both comments to be factually correct.

The 47% claim was mostly about how a large group of the country is becoming more dependent on a federal government that refuses to make them pay their fair share.  Dependence on the government and preferential taxation are very bad things.  If the people are dependent on government programs, they will likely vote in perpetuity for the free spending party that implements them.  Once the populace (or a bunch of people are addicted) it is very hard to discontinue the programs.  The direction the country (and many states) seem to be going is to force fewer people to pay much higher taxes.      

The "auto bailout" likely would have never happened if the unions weren't heavily involved.  How much did the taxpayers of the US lose on that deal again?  (probably just to prop up bad management who will likely fail again in the future).  i would like to congratulate Ford for not accepting the money.  There are more examples of the "president" (of the US, not mine) offering incentives (or if you want to call them "bribes") to minority groups. 

Let's put it this way... politics is essentially reverse prostitution.  The candidates are promising people to do certain things (usually their promises aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on) if they vote for them.  So, people are doing things to get money from the government (usually someone else's). 

There is a definite conflict of interest in DC, the politicians are buying votes at the expense of the health of the country (not to mention how short-sighted it is). 

It would be far more honest if the government allowed direct payments from the candidate to the voter.  Make no mistake, the current system is just an abstraction on that premise.  When voters try to elect people to directly get them more money (voting for personal funds from the government coffers), that is a sign of democratic failure.