added plenty to that pool of resources. It's along the lines of his "pay your fair share" nonsense to those that were already paying more than their fair share. What he should've been saying was "thank you for you hefty contributions, not just directly, but also thanks to the employees and stockholders that prospered from your taking that risk and having that vision. We couldn't have done this without you."

Now a true conservative (not the GOP based on past and current actions) would argue that the amount and scope of stuff Govco tries to include in that shared pool of resources is far too broad, and should be the vehicle of last resort when no other option is available. Not the first option. Because it's the least efficient vehicle. So of course they'll take issue with a message that it should be a greater role as Obama did, and that even more of that burden should be placed on those already paying the most, while 47% or so pay nothing (via income taxes used for that infrastructure and environment you mention). That was the core of Mitt's message.

And just to be clear, I've posted many times that Cap Gains should be taxed like any other income, despite that not being in my best interest. (It can be phased in over many years so as not to shock the markets) Not because I think it will lead to some substantial increase in revenue, but because it's the right and fair way to tax income.