LAUER: When you said that we already have a leader who divides us with the bitter politics of envy, I’m curious about the word ‘envy.’ Did you suggest that anyone who questions the policies and practices of Wall Street and financial institutions, anyone who has questions about the distribution of wealth and power in this country, is envious? Is it about jealousy, or fairness?
ROMNEY: You know, I think it’s about envy. I think it’s about class warfare. When you have a president encouraging the idea of dividing America based on the 99 percent versus one percent — and those people who have been most successful will be in the one percent — you have opened up a whole new wave of approach in this country which is entirely inconsistent with the concept of one nation under God. The American people, I believe in the final analysis, will reject it.
LAUER: Yeah but envy? Are there no fair questions about the distribution of wealth without it being seen as ‘envy,’ though?
ROMNEY: I think it’s fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like. But the president has made it part of his campaign rally. Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires and billionaires and executives and Wall Street. It’s a very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach and I think it will fail.
Glad you made this personal, Willard. Sorry, but not everyone can blow $54,000,000 losing the Presidential nomination and then come back 4 years later and do it again, using only the money they’ve made by not working at any discernible job during those four years, and do so while claiming their own taxes are too high (and whining about the debt in the next sentence).
“Sanctimonious prick” is about the best definition for this waste of space I can find. I mean…how much money does it take to be this tone deaf?
Mitt? How much?
You know what’s ridiculous about this? A guy with many times as much money as Mitt is saying the opposite thing he is. Mitt Romney thinks you (my fellow Americans) are stupid enough to believe that Warren Buffet is only “envious” of Mitt’s vastly smaller fortune, which is why Buffet keeps bringing up the subject of income inequality.
Makes total sense…if one is a sanctimonious prick