Mitt Romney, Crap Job Creator: “No Excuses,” Mitt

Mr. Romney,

In your recent interview with Soledad O’Brien, you indicated that you didn’t care about the poor, because they have a “safety net.”  You also indicated, when pressed, that you would “fix” it if elected President.

Click here to watch a clip of Mitt Romney telling Soledad O'Brien he's "not concerned" about the poor 

Sir, when you’re poor, there is no social safety net.  The social safety net is an antiquated idea that has been put to rest for many years now.  The so-called “safety net” that you think is in place with just a few “holes” is like the Costa Concordia…in case you haven’t heard, a few measly dollars from food stamps when you’re 6+ months behind on rent due to lack of adequate income is about as useful as patching the holes in the Costa Concordia…truth is, by then you’re already taking on water and sinking fast.

The only way to patch up that social safety net is to offer jobs.  And Mr. Romney, I’m not talking about the kinds of “jobs” you “created” at Bain.  I know you’re so full of yourself and proud about having been a “job creator,” but frankly, all you did was contribute the water to sink quite a few of those sinking ships.  Because I have to ask you, Mr. Romney–how many of those “jobs” you “created” (you know, like the ones at Staples and Sports Authority) pay 6 figure salaries or even high 5 figure salaries?  How many of those “jobs” you “created” were paid at substantially more than minimum wage, at least three times as much, particularly after you and your partners at Bain took your huge chunk for making the taxpayers pay the pensions and other expenses for what you and your cronies decided not to pay, to take those numbers off of the company balance sheets and say the company was now healthily swimming in cash?

Hey, it’s only a few bucks, right?  We’ll just call that “taxpayer responsibility.”  Which means that when you get around to doing like the rest of your party, you know, that “cut, crap and balance” bunk, you’ll cut out the pensions, because why should we be rewarding people for doing a good job for years and years?!  You’ve gotta figure that if they’re not working anymore, why should we pay them (who cares if they’re 70 or 80 years old and unhealthy?), and all of the money they’ve paid for those pensions over the years is perfectly fine for “wealth redistribution” to your rich friends.  Because your rich friends are “successful,” right?  Sitting around on their asses, picking apart companies for sport and profit, having money in Swiss bank accounts and the Cayman Islands, but hey, work is work to you rich guys, particularly when it’s not.  But not if you’re poor, because then you have a “safety net” to save your sorry ass, that magnanimous government check that lets you have all of the luxuries like a few dollars toward a dilapidated apartment in a dangerous section of town, and if that’s the case, then you’re just too damn lazy to make good money at your minimum wage crap job, courtesy of good old Mitt Romney and Bain.

And let me ask you another question, Mr. Romney.  Since you’re so good with figures of all of those wonderful jobs you created in your years at Bain, I wonder if you’ve ever really looked into how many of those you’ve “employed” over the years have lived at or are living at or below the federal poverty level?  I would think that since you’re so quick to talk about how many “jobs” you’ve “created,” you would want to convey the pride you feel in not just “creating” jobs that keep people dependent upon the government for those silly little “extras” like food, but also that you’re taking so much pride because you’ve created the types of jobs that are contributing to the economy by keeping people independent?  The types of jobs that pay well enough so people can afford the very basics…food, rent or mortgage, utilities, car payments, gas for said car, maintenance for said car so it doesn’t become a falling-apart craphole, carfare if said employee can’t afford a car (though we know your salaries are so generous, people are at least able to obtain decent used working cars, right?), plus health insurance?  Maybe a little extra, so if junior has a health problem and the health insurance company decides not to cover it, the family doesn’t have to think about pimping out their oldest daughter just to cover the extra expenses?

I’ve seen your ads, looking for money to “hold Obama accountable.”  Well, before you go spending that money on holding Obama accountable for seeing to it that corporations are encouraged to hire people right here in the US, rather than supporting overseas nations and saving themselves boatloads of money with cheap labor, I’d like to make a suggestion.  Instead of holding Obama “accountable” for some meaningless drivel, Mitt, please hold yourself accountable.  You should be sure you’re holding yourself accountable for good business practices.  The quick, easy solution of just sending jobs overseas, dismantling companies and pocketing the lion’s share (which is what makes your collection of donations onerously laughable indeed, as you could at least fund it yourself—why, Mitt, don’t you have enough money already that you don’t need to take more from the American people?) is creating an onus for the already overtaxed taxpayer (who would be lucky to pay the measly 13.9% in federal taxes that you yourself pay, less than half of what most people pay) and furthermore, creating crap jobs isn’t taking people off of the food stamps and other assistance they so desperately need.  I would think that instead of raising money, money, money for smear campaigns and boring old rhetoric about the big, imaginary and extremely harmful things you will do if you become President, surely you would want to instead spend that money wisely.  Not on stupid crap like smear campaigns, which help no one but yourself and already-rich television stations, but on things that really help the economy, like providing good, decent-paying jobs to hardworking people, who really don’t want to go on food stamps, but would actually, gasp, prefer to pay their own way, only there’s always some rich person who just wants them to earn minimum wage, so that every corporation bigwig can make ever more money.

So Mitt, which side are you on?  The side of the American people, who deserve a little bit of that money in salary for doing a good job, which you’re instead throwing around to other rich people, or are you on the side of the rich people, because screw the poor, since (somehow, while working at their minimum wage crap jobs created by the likes of Mitt and Bain) they’re just sitting around on their asses waiting for those hedge funds—I mean, hefty government food stamp checks.  After all, a little goes a long way, right?  It might be illegal, but if you’re receiving food stamps while behind on rent, you can just find a way to cash in those food stamps, pay your rent and then starve.  If you get caught, hey, they have to feed you in jail.  Simple solution, huh?  “No excuses,” right, Mitt?  So then why are you making excuses for doing an extremely lousy job—when, despite your aspirations, you’re not even President and haven’t done a damn thing for the American people?  I say you should definitely apply your own motto to yourself: No excuses.  Because there's no excuse for collecting money from and then irresponsibly blowing tons of money on everything and everyone but the majority of your own fellow citizens, the ones whose lives you don't even try to understand.

It's completely shameful.  "No excuses," Mitt.