mzmadmike (mzmadmike) wrote,
mzmadmike
mzmadmike

So This Begs The Question...

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDAzYjY5OWVkMmQxZTJmNTZlNDNjZTlhOGU3NjNlZDA

What the Democrats say:
Bonnie Frost works for a medical publishing firm; her husband, Halsey, is a woodworker. They are raising their four children on combined income of about $45,000 a year. Neither gets health insurance through work.

What reality is:
Mr Frost, the "woodworker", owns his own design company and the commercial property it operates from, part of which space he also rents out; they have a 3,000-sq-ft home on a street where a 2,000-sq-ft home recently sold for half a million dollars; he was able to afford to send two children simultaneously to a $20,000-a-year private school; his father and grandfather were successful New York designers and architects; etc. This is apparently the new definition of "working families":

~~~~~~

Clearly, they're going to claim they exaggerated for "dramatic effect" (assuming these shameless @!#$ers say anything at all, and don't just stonewall).

But my question is...could they not find a poor person who looked good enough for the part? Or could they not find a real "working family" that would shill for the Dems (about like a Jew shilling for the Nazis)? Or...and this is the one that disturbs me with its likeliness...do DC liberals just not KNOW or have any contact or care about actual working poor, regarding them merely as a tool to be used for votes and then crapped on?

Oh, wait. Why am I asking the obvious?
Tags: politics
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 9 comments