The Mittster

When Mitt Romney announced his candidacy, I figured, “Well, at least he’s a pragmatist.”  He appeared not to believe in anything other than what was necessary to win elections, and if winning the nomination meant disavowing his accomplishments as Governor of Massacnhusetts, he was perfectly okay with doing that.  He ran to the right of Rick Perry in 2012, he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in 1994.  Both stances were viewed as necessary at the time, I’m sure.

While I prefer candidates to share at least a few of my ideals, I usually have few problems with pragmatists, because they can generally be counted on to do a reasonable if not inspiring job.  George H.W. Bush was a pragmatist: he did a fine job of negotiating the end of the Cold War; he flattened Saddam in a way that didn’t produce a quagmire; and he raised taxes when he needed to (and thereby lost his re-election bid).

Pragmatists usually lack the ability to inspire.  Ronald Reagan, an inspirational president, was able to raise taxes dozens of times without losing popularity, but Bush couldn’t do it even once.  Pragmatist presidents are often one-term presidents: Van Buren, Taft, Truman, Ford, Bush I.

But Romney seems to be taking an inability to inspire to vast new levels.  His trip to Europe was a bust.  He said that corporations were people.  His trip to the Middle East pandered to an extreme wing of Israeli opinion while demonstrating his ignorance of the fact that Jews have their sabbath on Saturday.  He told the world that he thought that median American family income was eight times larger than it actually is, and proudly proclaimed his belief that we need fewer firefighters and policemen.  His attempt to spin the deaths of American diplomats in Libya was not only in bad taste, but factually incorrect.

And he won’t let us look at his tax returns (except for one year, partly).  This despite his father George having given a full dozen years of tax returns when he ran for President in 1968 (and showing, incidentally, that he paid tax at a rate of 37%).

What is Mitt afraid of, exactly?  We already know he has Swiss bank accounts.  We already know he pays taxes at a lower rate than most of us.  Is he afraid that we might find out that the Chinese and/or Saudis and/or Goldman Sachs have been dumping large sums into his accounts?

(See, my imagination is already coming up with explanations that are likely far worse than the real thing.)

The tax issue may or may not matter, but along with all the other gaffes it drives the whole campaign off-message.

Even if the whole message is “I’m not Obama,” that matters.  Because now Obama can say, “Guess what?  I’m not Romney!”

Look, every candidate is going to make gaffes.  Obama’s made his share.  But Romney’s are so frequent that they’re dominating the news.

And now, oboy, we’ve got the Secret Romney Tapes, showing Romney talking at ease to a group of fellow rich people. And now we know how rich people talk, and what rich people think, when they believe no one’s watching.

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That, that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what … These are people who pay no income tax.”

Now my first reaction was to think: “Wow, the government’s going to pay me if I vote for Obama?  Where do I sign!”

And my second thought was that Romney was just pissed off because Obama had gone and bribed the poor with welfare before he, Romney, could bribe the rich with tax cuts.

And then I thought, Well, naw, he doesn’t mean it.  He’s just pandering to his audience, the way politicians do.

And then I thought: You know what?  That doesn’t matter.

Romney may or may not believe the nonsense that falls out of his mouth, but the fact is he’s willing to say it, and say it right in front of a bunch of his peers.

Romney insulted a whole lot of people in that simple paragraph, me included.  There have been years when I’ve paid no income tax, because I had little or no income in those years.

But y’know what?  In the years when I had only a few bucks, I didn’t go to the government and demand housing, food, and health care.  I paid for those out of my own pocket.  I’ve paid off maybe a dozen mortgages over the years.  I know dozens of people who have been in my situation, and none of them have been complacent, and all of them have worked hard,and some of them may have gone on relief, but they all got off it as soon as they could, and you know why?  Being on relief sucks!

And you know what else sucks?  Being disabled!  Being old and completely dependent on social security!  Working a full-time job but not being able to feed your children!  Going to Iraq to serve your country, being blown up, living in a wheelchair and having to crap into a colostomy bag, and then hearing a wannabe President of the United States call you a deadbeat!

Here’s a breakdown of the 47%  who pay no federal income tax.  Most of them pay taxes in the form of payroll taxes or sales taxes Medicare taxes or gas levies or whatever.  A lot of them are elderly and retired.  (And you know what?  0.6% earn more than 100,000 a year— I’m guessin’ tax breaks for the wealthy may be involved?)  And just about all of them have paid income taxes in years in which they had a decent income.

Might Romnay have considered that maybe a lot of these folks aren’t paying taxes because we’re in the worst recession since the Thirties?  No, it’s because they’re layabouts and Welfare Queens.

And who’s the real welfare queen?  The poor single mom trying to raise her kids, or the rich venture capitalist who gets so many tax breaks he pays nothing at all?

(And by the way, just as a personal note—  I pay Social Security taxes at a much higher rate than most of you— at a much higher rate than Mitt Romney, who pays none at all— because I’m self-employed!  So take that, you smug, complacent rich fucks!)

But when you get right down to it, how can Romney run as a regular guy?  He can’t.  He talks about how he’s a self-made man, but it doesn’t occur to him that his success may have had to do with his father’s paying for his prep school, his two Harvard degrees, his first house . . .

Romney should just run as a patrician.  It worked for both Roosevelts, after all.  Just have him say, “I’m smarter than you, I’m richer than you, I’m better-looking than you, I have better genes than you, I’m more deserving than you, my wife is prettier than yours, and I don’t live in a trailer.  I live in an exclusive world inhabited only by privileged people, and that’s because it’s a better world than the pathetic excuse for reality that you live in.  Vote for me, and you may benefit from the gloss and glamor that I will bring to this tawdry republic.”

At this point, what does he have to lose?