Redefining Romney

Governor Romney hasn't really defined himself. Instead, he has pretty much left that to the experts—namely his opponents.

In his race against a very vulnerable Senator Ted Kennedy in 1994, in their debate in October, Senator Kennedy, who looked like he had all but lost the race came out punching:

"I have supported the Roe v. Wade [decision]. I am pro-choice," Kennedy said. "My opponent is multiple choice."

Romney's reply has dogged him ever since:

"My mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that, or be a multiple choice, thank you very much."

In other words, he did then just what he's doing now: Not defining himself. Now I do understand that Mitt Romney is a believer in a minority religion, but heck, so was Kennedy. His brother was our first Catholic President. You can see Romney's first debate, on the C-SPAN website and marvel at how he completely failed to directly answer questions as well as define himself as a person.

As Governor of the Massachusetts Commonwealth, Romney was preceded by three Republican governors. He made a lot of promises when running and then became "Governor No," when he was in office, vetoing vetoed 844 pieces of legislation, with over 700 of those vetoes overridden. One might think it would be a good idea to work with a legislature than to stand against it. He came into office with a 66% approval rating on November 18, 2003 in Massachusetts and, by November 27th, that plummeted to 45% after the Massachusetts Supreme Court ordered the Commonwealth to allow gay marriage and Romney took a hard stand against it.

Remember the statement above, that he will not force his beliefs on others? I guess he decided to allow the Massachusetts Supreme Court to define him. By November, 2006, his approval rating sunk to 34% with a 65% disapproval rating. He did not run for re-election and his successor was a Democrat.

Then it was time to run for office again and I think he's running for President because he knows that is the only way he can match his father's record as a three-term governor. He doesn't really seem to like debating, running, talking to the press or anything about campaigning and he has refused to offer any specific plans for what he plans to do if he becomes President.

Oh, he sais memorable stuff, like "We're going to take this country back," and "Put America back to work," and "Free us from this big government," and "Repeal Obamacare."

I would ask, take the country back from whom, or what? We do have a ballot box and people do go to the polls. It's not as if we invited Russians or Australians in to run this country in our stead. (Please note, I have nothing against either Russians or Australians. These are two countries pretty much on the opposite side of the world from America.) And Republicans ran on "Jobs, jobs, jobs" in 2010 and I have yet to see a single jobs bill come out of the House of Representatives, which they took over then—save the reauthorization of a highway bill.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

And our government under Obama has actually shrunk from the size it grew to under Bush. In fact, one thing that Romney won't say is that Bush grew the government faster than any President in history since the 1960s. Actually Romney won't mention the Bush name. The only reference I have heard him make to him is "Obama's predecessor."

What worries me is that all of the people around Romney in his campaign are all former Bush (II) staffers. Those goons should stay out of the West Wing. They have all ready proven their lack of competence.

And, repealing the Affordable Care Act will bloat the US budget deficit, which is something Romney says he won't do. Those who have teased actual numbers out of Romney's really incomplete proposals suggest that middle income people will pay around $2,000 more annually in federal taxes, while people like Romney who park their money overseas will pay less.

And that last item is something that Democrats have been using to define him—that and his tax return issue, which simply will not go away.

You cannot choose to run for President of the United States and keep your privacy these days. Romney thinks that's possible and I don't think that anyone in the press agrees.

So, in this upcoming Republican National Convention, they're going to try to redefine Romney for the voters. In that Romney's opponents have been doing that since 1994, I wonder if they'll be able to do that.