53 votes

Mitt Romney DESTROYED by Jon Stewart on the Daily Show - link to video



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Income Tax is the Tyrannts tool

to control the population. Every April 15 you fill out and submit your confessions, and hope you haven't made a mistake the rest of the year.

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

So it's funny these days when

So it's funny these days when a comedian derides a man who would not like his money stolen?

Sure, I doubt Romney made all his money in the private sector, but really, guys? Is THIS what we laud Stewart for?

Check out LibertyHQ, where I aggregate the all best articles on libertarianism by topic! For now, the "Issues in Libertopia" section is the most developed. Find a link to it below:

LibertyHQ

Careful here folks... TAX IS FORCE!

I like Jon Stewart. He is very funny. BUT, lots of class warfare, envy, economic inequality stuff here. The implication of this piece is that making money is somehow less than ethical and We should use FORCE on those who prosper while not using FORCE on the poor. You simply should not use FORCE on anyone, period. The progressives like to pull all down to the lowest common denominator. Mitt deserves leaches cause He is rich. NO NO NO...No one deserves leaches, period.

No one deserves taxes....Now you may debate the ethics of how he achieved his wealth. That is a very different topic.....did he violate others liberties doing so...that should be handled very differently than assuming We all should be forcefully taxed at the point of a gun once the wealth is earned. AND, PS...Taxing is certainly an unethical way to make a living.

Very dangerous....crowds lap up class warfare, envy. That likely fueled the Bolshevik revolution, which caused in the neighborhood of 143 million deaths over the 20th century and untold suffering. Bright side - Russia now has a freakin FLAT TAX!!!!!!!! , while the "beacon of liberty" practices Marxism.

Jon Stewart delivers the

OP here. Ok seriously, Jon Stewart delivers the punchline (censor beep and all!) to this sketch at about 6:54. You literally have to listen AND comprehend everything he says over the 6:57 to really get the punchline too. It is definitely intellectual humor, and this is one of the best skits i have ever seen by him. BRAVO sir.

I'm not surprised some people might take out of context any part of this clip and fly off the handle or have a kneejerk reaction. C'est la vie right? But I expect more from Ron Paul supporters, which is why I feel the haters here sort of reveal themselves, and should go back and fully get the joke no matter who you are voting for, and/or edit out your statements and reserve judgement until you have time to watch the whole thing in it's entirety.

I understood the punchline

I understood the punch line, plus the rest of the skit - Which you seem to be implying I should ignore.
I cannot simply allow a bit of humor at the end to cover up the fact that the majority of the clip highlights the large amount of money Mitt earns and the little (relatively) taxes he pays off it.

This is not the platform I want to discredit my opponents on. I applaud efforts of my allies to avoid and end taxation; I won’t attack my enemies for the same reason. If you want to get into the ethics of how he earned that money, that’s another subject that this video does not touch upon.

The joke essentially boils down to Mitt being rich, hypocritical enemy of poor. He being a hypocrite is a worthy label, but the last thing we need is to stoke the fires of class warfare, even when it appears to be in our favor to do so.

We seem to have just as many

We seem to have just as many commentors that automatically assume anyone liking this vid is jealous of Romney's money like so many Romney supporters throw at me.

The point is not how much, or any at all that he's paying, it's the hypocrisy. So long as we 'single out' people purely based on other associations, and not listen to anything they have to say(this is to all the 'Stewarts's OBVIOUSLY A BLATANT COMMIE' mentions), we're no better than the rest of the republican establishment. I say kudos to Stewart here, he may have left some things out, but Romney has constantly been changing his 'stance' on issues, and Stewart pulling out a clip of him saying something in response to an issue he's flipped and flopped on and putting a perspective on it(whether right or wrong), sheds more and more light on Romney.

Gold was $663/oz July 11, 2007!?

Wish I could have bought some then!

My labor is my private property!

We need to stop this pay as you go BS! Another area where the government used a war to extort money from the American people and guess what they never gave it back! It was called the Victory tax. As a manager I resent the fact that the government makes me the the tax collector and the immigration officer for the government.

Please cite the Constitutional authority for going to war without a declaration of war by congress.

Hypocrites, all of them...

I wouldn't be surprised if Jon Stewart's active tax rate is similar to Romney's...

Our goal should be to lower taxes for EVERYBODY, but the only way to do that is if the government stopped spending our money... Eventually, we should ALL have ZERO income taxes just like we had before 1913.

Do you realize how wealthy our country would be if there was no income tax? It would be incredible.

I +1 your post, but i'm

I +1 your post, but i'm asking Jon what his tax % is for the record.

ecorob's picture

jon's not running for potus...

focus on the issue about the candidates and quit diluting the discourse with meaningless drivel!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

+1 to you for focusing on the

+1 to you for focusing on the issue about the candidates,

-1 for calling this meaningless drivel when the discourse revolves around MITT ROMNEY'S .001% HYPOCRISY

-1 for participating in the very discourse you call drivel

so total of -1 for you.

+1 to me for focusing on the issue about the candidates and not sidetracking or attacking people.
:)

no offense.

Stewart missed the point...

..the real issue is that Romney is a 'Plunderer' as Bastiat would say. Since Mitt doesn't actually have a job, the tax rate on interest accrued is appropriate. If he was getting a 'real pay check' for really working, and paying tax on those wages, then there might be a story here.

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"- Homer Simpson

Of course the flaw here for Stewart is that anyone is

paying anything on their personal salaries or wages, or investments.

Just where does this notion come from that one has to pay anything because they make something?

Rather, taxes should be direct and apportioned. You pay because you are. You pay when you use a service. The idea of paying because you produce is anathema to liberty and prosperity.

The tax rate on "incomes" should be zero. Same for capital gains.

We should keep government as local as possible so taxes are voted on directly by the people.

Layers above local should be smaller and smaller with tax rates lower and lower, and in forms that do not lend themselves to creeping rates and loopholes that require lobbyists to finagle.

On the national level, we should be limited to import/export taxes if that at all, but primarily direct apportioned taxation. (the latter is a better scheme because it is "pay-as-you-go")

Stewart's rant is nothing but misguided musings tainted by the brainwashing of years of class warfare.

tasmlab's picture

I digress, but my beef with Romney's wealth

I digress, but my beef with Romney's wealth isn't that he restructured companies, or fired people, or made a lot. Operationally, those are all sound things to do.

The thing with roll-ups, restructures, divestitures, mergers, acquisitions etc., the type of stuff Bain Capital would be doing, is all stock market transaction driven. I.e., they don't make their money by creating a new profitable enterprise, they make their money in a new IPO or stock sale on the promise of the company being different.

And this stock market phenom is all part of the Goldman/Fed/Wall St. mess, not productive capitalism.

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

What is your beef, then?

Technically, Romney's wealth is completely tied up in stocks, is that correct? Can't completely blame bull or bear markets on Wall Street itself. They just drink the alcohol poured by the Fed.

I guess your last sentense seems to me like you are saying you don't support that which is not productive capitalism, which I believe Bain isn't (literally... i.e. they don't produce anything), and yet you support it in the paragraph prior.

I'm not familiar with these types of restructures and acquisitions, nor how one can become ludicrous rich from doing it. A little more explanation for a layman like myself would be useful. I'm curious about your position and would like to know more.

This isn't a snarky reply. I really do want to know what you think about Romney's wealth.

tasmlab's picture

In short, he's rich because of our govt/corp banking sys

Hi Matt,

In business restructuring there is an operational side (e.g., consolidating computer systems, hiring/firing people, selling factories) and then there is a financial side which usually amounts to packaging some part of the entity for a 'liquidity event', which is where they will sell the stock of the company which is then bought up by financial institutions. At this liquidity event, Bain takes a commission on this sale and makes a boatload of money without regard to whether the restructured entity will become profitable or create wealth for the people who work there. Bain skidoos long before the new business cards of the restructured company are printed.

So while the rhetoric is about creating new value in the economy by restructuring companies and making them more productive (the operational side), his money is coming from the financial act of packaging a transaction to sell to Wall St. banks, who are entangled with the Fed and our currency in nasty ways. Bain Capital VCs essentially earn their money in the same entanglements as the financial actors getting bailed out, insisting on QE2, benefiting from regulation, etc.

In short, his wealth is derived from our corrupt govt/corporate banking system.

I have a larger criticism of the banking sector in terms of consumers being bullied into the stock market, the seemingly exaggerate role of stocks in our economy, our inability to save with current inflation and interest rates, the Fed printing money by putting it through the banks, and more. Bain would just be one more feature of this mess.

I'm over-simplifying this for sure. And like most posters here are saying, there's plenty of other reasons not to like Romney and damning him for his wealth in general is the wrong argument.

Thanks for asking!

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

This is very interesting.

I enjoy learning about things outside of my element. Thanks for the explanation.

I'm inclined to agree w/ 1988vote

The issue, per se, isn't Romney's tax rate, IMO. A percentage of your income is a percentage of your income. Quality of life is different for Romney and myself. However, if we paid the same percentage in taxes, his total monetary contribution is much higher. $6M in taxes is a lot of money. His taxes are a percentage of GDP (albeit a small one). Can't say the same for me.

NOW... what Romney does for a living is where I draw the line. What he currently does for a living is nothing. He doesn't do anything. And Bain Capital didn't produce anything that a consumer wanted, nor that society needed. The theme was different is certain cases (Staples), but ultimately Bain would go in to a company, fire employees to lower costs, re-arrange how capital was employed, and ultimately sell the assets for a profit.

Is it capitalism? Maybe. Probably. Is it ethical? Nope. I couldn't sleep at night doing what he did. People were out on their home mortgages, etc. But Romney did it and got filthy rich standing on the throats of others. Not illegal, but certainly souless in a lot of cases.

Ron Paul for President's picture

Judge Andrew Napolitano should

be Dr. Paul's VP pick

Would be nice but...

I think I would rather have him as Supreme Court Justice.

as "Americans" who pay the same per cent . . .

of an income that is much less per year than Romney makes in a year--

it never occurred to me to resent that.

The idea that a person who makes THAT much less and still pays the same per cent would only be critical of someone like Romney because of envy?

No--

I don't envy Romney. I wouldn't have a heart like his for all his millions.

What *I* am criticizing in Romney is HOW he made his millions and what he does with them--

it may be 'legal'; whether or not it is ethical is in question, but it's certainly not . . .

the sort of attribute *I* want in someone who is supposed to 'represent' *me*.

I did not have any idea how much $ Romney made or what percentage he paid in taxes 'til this comical 'skit'. Now that I know I have little but disdain for the man, having seen youtubes about how he has bankrupted companies, etc., etc.--

When he dies, his money won't go with him. His soul will, whatever parts of it he hasn't sold.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

reedr3v's picture

We all know Romney, Gingrich, etc

are major sleazes after power and the same economic pork enjoyed by the current gang who rule us.

But when will Stewart go after Obama's profligate spending of taxpayer money for his lavish life style, his super paranoid personal protection excesses, his mania for surveillance and control of We the Serfs, his mega-arrogant belief he should control the entire world? Does it take any courage to knock Romney's personal billions while giving a blank pass to Obama and his gang while they totally irresponsibly rack up insane trillions of debt that falls squarely on the "little people?"

Romney should endorse Ron Paul

It's the spending that allows the income tax. The sooner Ron Paul's message transforms the system the sooner Romney will be just a successful guy paying the same federal income tax rate as everyone else: 0%

Bad clip

Jon Stewart is wrong in this video. Mitt's not doing anything wrong that I can see as far as his taxes and investments.

Yep

Jon's basically calling for wealth redistribution. Mittens isn't cheating on his taxes. But people who want to tax the hell out of the rich so that they're closer to the income of the "comman man" is ridiculous. You can't punish success.

Am I missing something here?

Am I missing something here? There's not really a whole lot where Jon talks about 'wealth redistribution'. It's that Romney helped set up the current system that he's saying "hey, it's legal, so get off my back", or did people quit watching the video a few minutes in?

I don't want any taxes either, but for those people out there who are 'not' with Paul on that issue, it's very powerful to point out that Romney was very close in the effort to make it so he had to pay no taxes. He's quite hypocritical in that regard, and I think that's what Stewart nails here. Whether or not Stewart is 'like us'(yeah, the posted is a little overboard with the 'he should be VP' line...), isn't an issue, it's that Mitt Romney is continuing to tell his voters "see I play by the rules", when he helped make the rules.

Edit:Another thing to point out is, interestingly enough, Bain capital is being made out to be a 'perfect' company. I know they did some good things(hence the format of Newt and Perry's attacks being wrong), but seeing as how they lobbied for, well, anything, really needs to be driven home.

It's in there

Jon Stewart's main angle is that Romney pays X in taxes while other people pay Y. He does mention that Bain Capital doesn't actually do anything, which I mentioned in a previous post.

Jon does go into Bain's lobbying to keep the tax code intact for the super rich. But the theme in the beginning was "Romney's tax rate is too low!" It's basically the first 2 or 3 minutes of the clip. You hear people boo when Stewart says how much he made total, how much he makes per day, and what his tax rate is. Class envy in the very beginning. Funny, but his heart is in the wrong place.

There's a lot not to like about Romney and Bain, but taxes are low on the list. I understand what you're saying about him being within a tax law he influenced. I just don't think that's the initial tone of the piece.

i dont think that Jon's main

i dont think that Jon's main angle is the unfairness in paying taxes as much as it is about the unfairness of how Bain lobbied and bought congress off while he talks about how everyone ELSE doesn't work, don't pay enough tax, and think they are entitled while MITT ROMNEY does the EXACT SAME THING while drawing million of dollars off Wall Street (while poor working class people don't have lobbyists buying off washington to their advantage) = HYPOCRISY

Shoul be Ron Paul's VP, really?

You're really suggestng that Jon Stewart should be Paul's VP pick because of video that features Stewart attacking Romney from the left? An attack that leaves out many key facts such as capital gains and charitable contributions?

I don't like Mitt, but I firmly believe attacking him for wealth or his efforts to avoid theft (taxation) is the wrong apporach. Sure, it's hyporictical that he speaks of others who don't pay taxes, but this video reeks of the "fair share" rhetoric from the Occupy group.