THE STUMP JANUARY 8, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
What better person than the French-speaking Mitt Romney to lay bare the pure beating heart of noblesse oblige.
Sunday morning's NBC debate in Concord, N.H. was a vast improvement over the ABC one the night before -- it occurred to the non-Romney candidates that they might want to train their fire on the man who's up 20 points in the New Hampshire polls. Their focus trailed off as the debate progressed, but Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich did manage to produce a revealing exchange at the outset regarding Romney's motivations to enter politics. They challenged Romney's oft-repeated claim that he, unlike they, was no career politician but rather a man who saw running for office as the duty of a good citizen who, when his work is complete, returns like Cincinnatus to his plow, or to his carried-interest loophole for private equity investment managers, as the case may be. In the best zinger of the debate, Gingrich chalked this up as a bunch of "pious baloney." But it is these lines of Romney that should get the attention. From Ben Smith's writeup:
Mitt Romney suggested in today's debate that only rich people should run for office, and then quickly celebrated the fact that he'd forced a rival to take out a loan against his house. Romney said his father, Michigan Governor George Romney, had told him, "Mitt, never get involved in politics if you have to win an election to pay a mortgage."
"If you find yourself in a position when you can serve, why you ought to have a responsibility to do so if you think you can make a difference," he recalled his father telling him. "Also, don't get in politics if your kids are still young because it might turn their heads."
A few seconds later, he bragged about his run against Teddy Kennedy. "I was happy he had to take a mortgage out on his house to ultimately defeat me," he said.
The exchange with Newt Gingrich brought out Romney at his most tone-deaf, and echoed his offer of a $10,000 bet to Rick Perry in an earlier debate. Romney's rivals are already looking for ways to turn his wealth -- and his tone-deaf treatment of it -- into a liability. The Obama campaign regularly blasts him as out-of-touch with the lives of American workers.
So: the person running on the vision of a "merit" and "opportunity" society opposed to Barack Obama's "entitlement" society believes that politicians should be independently wealthy, not peons who have to rely on the paltry earnings of a U.S. senator or governor. It's worth noting that this is hardly the first time that Romney has depicted his move into politics in 1994 in this light. In his 2007 piece about Romney's relationship with his father, who after running American Motors became governor of Michigan and ran for president in 1968, Jonathan Cohn wrote: "George Romney had always said the ideal time to run for public office was after you had achieved financial independence and your children were old enough to put up with the loss of privacy." So Mitt today was just echoing the advice of the father he revered. But of all the aspects of George Romney that are to be admired -- including many lacking in his son -- this brand of noblesse oblige wasn't one of them. Once again, I'm simply amazed that the Republican Party, at a time of heightened consciousness about the privileges of the very wealthy, is on the verge of nominating a quarter-billionaire who, when presented with the notion of running for president, says: thanks, much obliged.
10 comments
Of course, Jefferson had to mortgage his house, with ultimately tragic consequences. On the other hand, one could argue (some do) that if the founders/planters (Washington included) had not mortgaged their houses to British lenders, we may still be one of the colonies today. And speaking of the founders, Cincinnatus was Washington's model; indeed, he was president of the Society of Cincinnati, a position he held for longer than he was President of the US (from 1783 until his death in 1799). My point is that Romney may not be tone deaf and, instead, may be offering the base exactly what they want in their leader.
- rayward
January 8, 2012 at 12:54pm
I think that Mitt has a certain CEO-type mentality (not all CEOs possess it, just to be clear) in which the employees are always ungrateful bastards who don't realize all the things you do for them -- they should be grateful that you even deign to run their company, as you could be making so much more money elsewhere. Admittedly, he may not have been -- or have come across -- that way as governor. But in a recent TNR discussion there was some talk about how the evidence suggests that he is respectful and give-and-take in his approach to people he perceives as his equals, but can be a total jerk if he believes that someone from the lower orders is giving him a hard time.
- ironyroad
January 8, 2012 at 2:20pm
I hope that comment about Kennedy and the mortgage gets some play in the press. First it shows how Romney figures campaigns are won. Kennedy did not win because he had better ideas or because of his record--Ted Kennedy won because he was able to pony up the cash, even if it did require him to mortgage his house. Further, it shows a nasty streak. Romney is pleased he forced a man to mortgage his house. Why should that please anyone? Finally, Romney does not mind other peoples' financial difficulties particularly if it works to his advantage. Just what we need in a president!
- Vekert
January 8, 2012 at 3:57pm
Dang I can't stand this guy. PS he's laying bears now? That is even worse!
- Sophia
January 8, 2012 at 4:01pm
Odd the way Romney remains insubstantial to me. It's as if nobody's really there. I see and hear him yet he makes no impression at all. Is it just me, or do others feel similarly? Very strange indeed!
- Tgossard
January 8, 2012 at 6:28pm
It is possible for the next election to be "the protector of the privileged" vs. "the protector of the 99%" and if President Obama can do that without sounding like it's all about wealth transference from the rich to the poor, I expect him to have the stronger of the two positions.
- Nusholtz
January 8, 2012 at 8:01pm
Rayward writes: "My point is that Romney may not be tone deaf and, instead, may be offering the base exactly what they want in their leader." Correct. These people want only the independently wealthy to be able to run for, & hold, office. It would go a long way to keep the rabble from inconveniencing the monied class. It's an old tendency in American politics, traceable back to Hamilton, who was enamored of the idea that the well-born should run the show.
- Haole45
January 8, 2012 at 8:59pm
Tgossard, It's not just you. Romney reminds me of a guy speaking at a corporate staff meeting who's about to be fired and who's desperately trying to hang onto his job. His words praising the ruthlessness of the company are empty echoes in his head. He doesn't believe what he's saying, nor does anyone else. Is Romney virtual? It's something to ponder.
- magboy47.
January 8, 2012 at 11:44pm
Good call magboy! He is such an excruciatingly awkward, empty man with this thin veneer of civility towards the paupers. Creepy creepy creepy.
- WandreyCer
January 9, 2012 at 8:20am
I've said it before, but it's that line of Iago's in Othello: "I am not what I am"
- ironyroad
January 9, 2012 at 10:28am