Time for a pop quiz. I'll give you a quote, and you guess who said it.
"Romney types, of course, are the ones who sign the front of the paycheck, and the Obama types are the one who have spent their entire lives signing the back of them."
Guessing the person who said this might be tough, so instead, consider the speaker's motivations. Was this quote intended to be complimentary towards President Obama or Mitt Romney? Was the quote uttered by a liberal or a conservative?
In this case, the line came from Michelle Malkin, a far-right media figure who appeared on Fox News over the weekend and shared these words of wisdom (via Steve M.).
To be sure, there are plenty of political provocateurs, who tend to say strange things in public in order to get attention, and who are generally better left ignored.
But I nevertheless found this quote remarkable. Since when do conservatives go on national television to mock the working class? I suppose the point of the argument is that wealthy captains of industry are writing large checks in support of the Republican candidate, so the rest of us should necessarily be impressed, but like Romney's comments last week on "free stuff," it's the kind of tone-deaf, hyper-elitist pitch that may not resonate given the larger economic circumstances.
Leave a Comment:
Michelle Malkin. A fountain of crazy.
Let's hope Republicans continue to think that attacking the working class is a good idea. There are many more of them than there are of the uber-wealthy. And, despite the goal of many conservatives, each of their votes counts the same.
She is a truly vile creature.
who, Maddow? I agree, she is vile. And wrong.
At least Malkin has some chops, Maddow is a loser HACK cheerleader with nothing more than her "I wanna marry my girlfriend" and "homicide of convenience" agenda!!!!
What difference does it make about signing checks? If Barry wins you'll all be getting food stamps....
At least people would be fed not starving. Cold hearted you.
LOL at the new re-reg, new name same old smelly sock.
this one sock seems to be deeply planted in its 4th point of contact.
Michelle probably has direct deposit so forgets she would be signing the back of her check as well.
Wingnut welfare recipients don't need to sign checks. They are all paid under the table from the Koch slush fund.
Uh, no wonder Microsoft is separating from this site and MSNBC... YOU ALL are a bunch of freak nut cases!
As the descendent of a long line of people who signed the backs of checks, and as a person who signs the backs of check herself, I am proud to be an Obama supporter!
You know, if I didn't know that Ms. Malkin was the speaker, I'd say that the quote is about how oblivious Romney is about being an excutive, CEO, etc in that most checks "signed" by the wealthy aren't signed by them at all but by a employee using a stamp or a computer printer. Poor Malkin, left to clean up the mess left by this idiot.
The tealiban has been getting sloppy lately and telling the truth about the nasty stuff they are up to, but too many Americans are so ignorant from listening to Rush and watching Faux they miss it. The tealiban has done a fantastic job on projection for over 30 years and it still works. They probably don't even realize they've been insulted. They think it's only Obama that's been insulted.
I saw the plans for this president's library already in the works, but they resembled a two story outhouse. It is sad The One is on his way out the back door of the mansion. Afterall, someone as elegant and polished as he is could give us something besides a crummy two-thousand page slavecare bill which he gave to Pelosi to craft, five trillion in new deficits, the endless war in Afghanistan, the failed "shovel ready job stimuli" con. I wish he had something to run on-besides "i'm not as bad as Romney." Rise up Comrades!!
Moderator!
Ohh moderator...
When Romney was governor, fewer of his constituents were signing the fronts or backs of checks -- he brought Massachusetts in at 47th out of 50th in job creation. But I'm sure Romney himself was signing the fronts and backs of his own checks for the $100,000 Bain salary he received, for doing absolutely nothing - according to him.
What? Michelle "In Defense of Internment" Malkin saying something tone deaf and offensive? I refuse to believe it...
And with possible overtones of racism? Say it ain't so!
Overtone this.
Moderator!
As a retired, union carpenter of more than 37 years, I'm proud to have been one of those that signed the back of the check. I earned every dollar (and then some).
I have often said of my career/industry, "There are boat rowers and there are boat steerers. Both have to be onthe boat, doing their job, for the boat to get where it is going. Boat steerers without rowers just sit there adrift and boat rowers with out steerers tend to go in circles."
I think MM is one of those people who can neither row nor steer. She can only complain that we aren't going the way SHE thinks we should go and we aren't getting there fast enough. The temptation of both rowers and steerers is to toss her overboard!
What a great analogy.
Don't hate Ms. Malkin, it makes you appear petty.
I think this is a GREAT campaign slogan...
if you sign the front of a paycheck, by all means, vote for Romney...
if you sign the back, vote for President Obama.
Pretty simple.
One of my simplistic definitions of Democrat and Republican is - if the government tells you how much you will pay in taxes (withholdings from payroll) you are a Democrat. If you tell the government how much you will pay in taxes (tax shelters, deductions, off-shore accts) you are a Republican.
That's funny Pauly seeing that two of the richest men in america (Buffett and Gates) use those tax shelter, deductions and off shore accounts that you talk of and they are among the biggest contributors to Obama's campaign. Kind of ironic..huh? Oh and my the way...I sign the back of a paycheck ;)
Oh, don't confuse libtards with facts... Makes them shiver and hide in corners.
Michelle, I said it was simplistic. And, of course, it is possible to be rich and liberal/Democrat. Our past is full of examples, starting at the very beginning of our nation.
I have used this description much more effectively to my co-workers (if you have been following along, you know I was in construction all my life) - the ones who thought they were conservative/Republican. It was a way to start a conversation in which I could show them how they were voting against their own best interests.
And Larry, as you can see, I don't run from the "facts".
Oh Pauly....you just made every conservatives point. Don't be so selfish that you approach an election hoping to GET something. Americans should be voting for what's good, right, true, and best for the country. What's best for this country is for government to get out of the way and let the citizens take care of ourselves!
I will mow my neighbors lawn every week while his lawnmower is broken and he can't afford a new one. I will, however, never mow it if someone tells me that I HAVE to do it.
Fine. In the next war, the military will just let you fend for yourself. When the next pandemic occurs, you have to develop your own jabs. When you drive from state to state, you can build your own damned highway to do it. When you get into trouble while traveling, the US consulate will just let you rot. When your home catches fire, you have to put it out yourself. If you're mugged, you have to track down the culprit yourself and incarcerate him in your closet.
I could continue to mock the insanity of your bollocks ideology, but that's really like signing dirty words to the blind. Rest assured, though, we are all highly entertained and you'll never ever understand why.
But that is truly the point isn't it...Mr. Meddling? You see...our government and those services are run by the citizens...not the other way around. And you can be highly entertained all you'd like but when you stop smoking whatever it is that is making you high then you will realize that it is your duty to do YOUR part and it is not MY duty to do your part.
I really don't think that is what TommyGun was getting at...but then again, trying to get through your thick skull is absolutely useless. All I want, and I think TommyGun feels the same way, is for the government not to tell me I have to buy something, or not to buy something or what to eat or what to drink..the list is endless. But while we are at it, it's all the Democrats that have cut our spending on our military down to nothing. So don't yell at us conservatives...look in the flippin' mirror when we get attacked and the Military isn't there to help protect you.
US military spending is greater than the rest of the world combined, just about. If you think that's "down to nothing," then you are insane. Besides which, nothing has been cut from military spending at all. There's a trigger of mandatory reductions that are supposed to kick in, but it was demanded by Republicans.
Reality. Accept no substitutes.
MeddlingMonk,
Only an idiot thinks anyone means getting rid of ALL Govt. when they talk about Govt. getting "out of the way".
You sound like one of those fools who hangs on every word MSNBC feeds you.
Let me guess....You are one of those who takes the hand-out all us working folks (we sign both sides of checks) gave thinking it was going to someone who really needed it and not a suck-off who chose not to bother working for a living.
You are right, you could "continue to mock the insanity of your bollocks ideology", but the attempt would only confirm what the rest of us see in you.
"Us"? You seem to forget that you're the n00b to the MaddowBlog, not me, so you have no grounds to talk like you're on the home team. As for the "rest of us," I'm the one with the starred comment.
You're just mailing it in. Actually, that's a lie. It's being mailed in for you. By your elderly great aunt. The one who's been dead for 23 years.
Michelle Malkin's career demonstrates that there is indeed a post-career career for over-the-hill Olongapo boom-boom girls. This bimbo was fired from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in 2002 for incompetence, and that is how she ended up a wingnut "spokesperson." Too bad she didn't trip and fall and knock herself out when the Colorado Springs fire swept through her neighborhood and took out her house. The world would be a better place.
It is known as "Wingnut Welfare" Wherein obviously incompetent people are given positions in which they can recite their foul rhetoric for paychecks. The back of the check this blot on western civilization signs comes from Ailes, Murdoch and the Koch Bros.
Prostitution dare not speak they name .
I encountered bar girls in the Philippines who were much better people than Malkin.
Wasn't her house saved from going up in flames recently? I'm pretty sure those firefighters signed the backs of their checks.
Except, of course, the ones who've lost their lives in the line of duty.
Those were Government checks. The kind that go to lazy worthless parasites.
Sounds pretty elitist to me...
She seems to be hearkening back to Ye Good Olde Dayf, when only landowners could vote...
White, male landowners.
Good times, Michelle?
Yeah, can't wait until white people get to vote again... Libtards have given everyone except Americans a say in this country.
Remember the Hampton's fundraiser for the ultra-rich last week? Those comments about "the nails ladies" and such? It's more of that sort of thing.
Michelle Malkin should be writing bad checks.. This thread has some very good posts!
>> I suppose the point of the argument is that wealthy captains of industry are writing large checks in support of the Republican candidate, so the rest of us should necessarily be impressed
Really? I'm pretty sure the point is supposed to be "Romney supporters pay the taxes that support the welfare system, Obama's supporters cash the checks the welfare system gives them". In other words, like almost everything else out of the GOP lately, it has ultrasonic dog-whistle codes of classism and racism.
I think your interpretation speaks well of your good nature but is entirely too benign.
I don't think it's a winning line for the Republicans, though. I'm proud to be one who (metaphorically; I've got direct deposit) signs the back of my paycheck. I work for a living, I don't just inherit capital interest. Mitt Romney, on the other hand -- if you take the most charitable task and accept his arguments about when he left Bain -- received over 100 k$ a year for doing -- by his own insistent terminology -- absolutely nothing.
Yeah, that'll really help undercut the out-of-touch fat-cat vibe that's been going on. Way to go, Michelle Malkin.
I wish I'd read your comment before I posted mine. This is exactly what I was trying to say and you said it five times better!
You may well be right but in this case it is best not to come off whiny.
Remember those comments from the ultra-rich fund-raiser in the Hamptons last week? The "nails ladies" comment? It's more of that sort of thing.
Well if she works for Fox News than she is signing the back of checks. Michelle Malkin comment just proves what Democrats have been saying, Romney is for the 1% and Obama is for the 99%. Thank you for your support Ms. Malkin.
This isn't elitism so much as just evidence of epistemic closure. Malkin can go on Fox and spout this nonsense to a mostly working- and middle-class audience, 90% of whom get a biweekly paycheck themselves, and they don't catch the ridiculousness of the statement, because all they hear is the dog whistle translation: "Lazy welfare recipients make up a significant portion of Obama's supporters." Equally absurd, but that's something they've actually come to believe.
It's not that they believe it, it's a lie they enjoy hearing and repeating.
I didn't interpret it that way at all, Steve. I think Malkin was trying to make the point that Obama is the type of guy who signs the backs of other people's checks, written to him (or to the government, presumably, meaning taxes) and then spends those funds on his vast array of entitlement programs. Romney, on the other hand, is presumably the type of guy who is always paying for things by writing out a check. She is probably referring to the amount of taxes the rich pay for folks like Obama can turn around and give it all away to society's undeserving parasites, but on that point she completely fails if she's referring to Romney's 15% tax rate.
However, it's a very stupid comment regardless of which interpretation you use.
“In 2011, the US Department of Labor reported at least 10 million people worked and were still below the unrealistic official US poverty line, an increase of 1.5 million more than the last time they checked. The US poverty line is $18,530 for a mom and two kids. Since 2007 the numbers of working poor have been increasing. About 7 percent of all workers and 4 percent of all full-time workers earn wages that leave them below the poverty line.
One third of the working poor, over 3 million people, work in the service industry. Workers in other occupations are also poor: 16 percent of those in farming; 11 percent in construction; and 11 percent in sales. “
Bureau of Labor and Statistics 2010: 1.8 million earn Federal Minimum Wage 2.5 million earn wages below Federal Minimum Wage
Why do Republicans presume that people who get assistance are people who sit at home and watch game shows all day? People who are working do not earn enough to support themselves and their families and need Federal Assistance.
Want people to get off of Welfare, Food Stamps, Housing, and Educational Grants:
1. Raise minimum wage to a living wage - make all employers pay at least minimum wage.
2. Get Republicans and Democrats to work together to pass bi-partisan jobs bills,
where the only ones who benefit are the American People.
3. If you do not like Obama care find another bi-partisan solution NOW.
4. Instead of threatening to privatize everything including Education, invest in Education and perhaps people can get higher paying jobs. Make higher
education more affordable so again people can choose a profession rather than
settle for one.
Stop putting down people who get assistance. I agree there are those who take advantage and need to be weeded out, but there are far more that work hard but do not earn enough to meet the cost of living in this country.
Because that plays to two key attributes of their base:
I hope you understand I used the phrase "undeserving parasites" as a way of talking about how the GOP views people, not how I personally view them. Your rant suggests otherwise. You're preaching to the choir.
Freddie my apologies nice to be in the same choir.
Wow....amazing. Simply amazing. You people actually don't even grasp the simplest truths about how life actually works.
Lorr...bullet point 1. Ridiculus....what do you think will happen to the cost of EVERYTHING when you raise the minimum wage?
bullet point 2 and 3. These have been presented, and ignored by the Senate....AND your silly left wing media outlets.
bullet point 4. If everyone has a college degree...none of them will be worth the paper they are printed on.
This is a simple concept folks, one that conservatives all over the place agree on, one that liberals pull their hair out over but deep down know is true...LIFE ISN'T FAIR!!!
Tommy - you really need to stop smoking what Limbaugh and the PR Firm for the Republican party Fox News are smoking. The damage to your living brain cells can be irreversible.
Your responses are just plain ridiculous.
Lorr-2611132,
Your Choir is tone deaf.
Talking like you know anything about the GOP or how they view people and saying what you say shows you are only watching too much MSNBC.
Anyone talking with the generalizations you are about any one group shows a level of not having a real clue about the real world.
Ms Malkin should know that her last name is an old word for cat. It was also a slang term for a nasty, catty woman. Is that a perfect description of Ms Malkin or what?!
The GOP has disenfranchised everyone but fat-cat, uber-elitist, rich people. Damn them. Better yet, don't vote for them.
Romney signs the front of paychecks as the evil profiteering boss while Obama signs the back of checks as the sweating denigrated laborer. With the explosion of modes and devices for communication leading to the implosion of content and understanding, and the manipulation of the masses through this implosion by reinforced miscommunication through simplification which comes from an image-dominated social contract, the Romney-Obama paycheck simulacra serves as a fine example of simplification leading to the vacuum of understanding. Given two images, the person chooses a meaning specific to him or herself and accepts that meaning as the intention of the message sent. Liberals will see the cruel elitist Romney looking down prejudicially on the over-worked, underpaid, one-bad-word-from-fired Obama and allow that to reinforce their held beliefs. Conservatives will see the powerful, successful Romney rightfully entitled to process salaries of those whose skill sets prevent them from ever deserving to be boss. But the undecided voter, those who have no predisposition to reinforcement are left to create any mind-phrase to match the media image. In that space between image reinforcement of belief and the Rorschach-test ambiguity of the undecided voter lays the flux over which these two powerful campaigns battle. Consider that Mr. Obama is President of the United States, making him the most powerful boss of the most powerful military and consumer force on earth. Doesn’t that dwarf Romney’s wealth and bluster? Consider that Mr. Romney is worth at least half a billion dollars that the American voter knows of and probably many millions more than that in undisclosed accounts offshore. The American public clamors for transparency in the historical record of a Presidential candidate (for example, the birth certificate dust up which Mr. Obama addressed to no avail for those whose pre-existing beliefs were only reinforced somehow by the image of the long-form). Mr. Romney is powerful or arrogant enough to simply declare that he deserves trust and the swing vote without having to reveal any of the truths within the penumbra clouding his financial record. Two powerful men indeed, both of whom are front-of-the-check signatories. But the images do not define the men so much as their perceived approach to the middle class. The disdain of the Romney boss man might represent the Thanatos, or death instinct, for the middle class, while the hourly wage could be the Eros, or life instinct, of the middle class. The profiteering Capitalist, strangling the life blood and sweat for maximum productivity and minimum remuneration, is the death of the middle class and theoretically a return to serfdom wherein peasants plow fields they will never own for overlords who offer only threat and protection in return for labor. For the paid worker, signing the back of the check is the planting of a seed toward the basic needs of Maslow’s lower orders and perhaps with overtime toward the higher aspirations Maslow identifies in all of us (if not for the worker’s generation, then hopefully for that of their children). Buried in this image choice, then, is a life and death struggle. The flux voter, the undecided not easily swayed by image reinforcement perceives what they will as individuals bombarded by not only the check signing imagery but all the peripherals swirling consciously and subconsciously around them. The global chatter, so loud it must be filtered or reduced to sound bites, photos and tweets to avoid overload, presses down on us all. In this country, 99% sign the back of the check. We relate to the Obama archetype because we have performed the action. But that check is worthless without the signature on the front of the 1%, and so we understand the need, or at least fear that we are pinned down under the system of front-and-back-of-the-check signatures in an essentially moneyless, data-based value system. We live in fear of remaining, becoming or returning to the unemployed masses that sign nothing or are forced to sign over their dreams for lack of paying the mortgage. We live a false binary communication that appears to offer only two choices, two definitions, two paths to the future, our future. Do good fences make good neighbors? Will our choice of paths have made all the difference when we look back in years to come? Is it simply the front of the check or the back? With the explosion of chatter and the implosion of meaning, it remains life or death and the struggle over the flux and swing for an evanescent, illusory control inside the voting booth.
Your post, fb, is a lot to agree with, but I do. All salient and germane in our lives. I picked out one I think says the most in terms of impact on the middle class in this economy:
“The profiteering Capitalist, strangling the life blood and sweat for maximum productivity and minimum remuneration, is the death of the middle class and theoretically a return to serfdom wherein peasants plow fields they will never own for overlords who offer only threat and protection in return for labor.”
Since about 1973, wages flat-lined while productivity increased whereas preceding history had wages matching the climb in productivity. The net result is a doubling of productivity with zero corresponding wage increase. Where did all that money go? There is a the ideal of self-responsibility to get more you work for it, the basic human economic equation to determine reward for fulfillment of work responsibility. American labor has not been getting what they worked for. That money went to others. Our direction is to the serfdom of "the company store", a privatized kleptocracy. We're all hooked-up the matrix illusion.
Good grief Charlie Fb, you need to get a life.
Lets talk "Political Correctness." They are all about free speech and tolerance and diversity and sensitivity and multiculturalism until one dares to openly admit to being pro-life, or a born-again Christian, or a believer in traditional morality, or that marriage should be between a man and a woman, or that Israel has the right to exist, or supporting gun ownership, or that maybe we should not allow in millions of illegal aliens every year. Once such an admission is made, all that great liberal love and tenderness is thrown out the window and all that is left is the naked viciousness and unmerciful intolerance of Political Correctness.
Freedom of speech to enforcers of the PC doctrine means hand-wringing over polar bear populations, condemning the detention of terrorists at Guantanamo, sounding the cry of climate change, tossing and turning at night over Abu Ghraib photos and bemoaning the oppression of all others by white males in modern society. Its logical conclusion is the broad brushing of nearly all of Western Civilization with the smears of patriarchy, misogyny and unforgivable perpetual oppression. Any other thoughts or speech that might challenge the official line is simply unacceptable in their eyes.
Perhaps novelist Dorris Lessing stated it best:
""Political Correctness is the natural continuum from the party line. What we are seeing once again is a self-appointed group of vigilantes imposing their views on others. It is a heritage of communism, but they don''t seem to see this.""
I sign the fronts of a fair number of checks. I don't remember the last time I signed the back of one.
Does this make me a "job creator" or a bill payer?
What I find galling is Michelle Malkin dividing American voters and who they choose to support based on their economic status. I guess the only thing that matters in Michelle's world is money. Abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, all these social issues must only matter to the wealthy Americans, average Americans don't think or care about important issues according to Michelle Malkin. Talk about an elitist self-centered snob!
lovessummer,
Are you serious? I find it "galling" that Obama divided the country the same way you are claiming Malkin does....
It's clear you have no idea what Malkin is saying.
Lovesummer, you sound like a robot spitting out buzzwords that have no content, no authority, and certainly no authenticity. What ever happened to TRUTH, integrity in what we say, and the authenticity it brings to address real issues, and not these political stereotypes you belt out with such rancor...
You really are out of touch with people, and listen to rhetoric fostered by those you want to hear from.
If you want to be enlightened and grow as a person - do what brings you no comfort, gets you in touch with reality where the 99 percent of us live, and learn from those who do not share your precise values or ideals. THAT is what is divisive, along with the political labels that you put on others.
Start over, and be a caring, feeling human being, and treat others the way YOU want to be treated!