Recently, Vanity Fair set out to reveal the real Mitt Romney, to expose his dark side. From the article we learn that Mitt Romney has been a devoted father, an extremely loving husband (always an "Anything for you, Ann" attitude), a faithful member of his church, has given up trivial social activities for the more important things in life, and has been frugal in insignificant things to save for important things ("Kids, don't waste water!"). His tax records reveal he has paid millions in taxes (at a rate higher than 60% of Americans), has paid a full tithe to his church, has his own charitable foundation, and in 2010 he gave away 14% of his income to charity (the typical American pays 2 to 3 percent, including Newt Gingrich who gave away 2.6% on his over $3 million income). We learn that he actually walks the talk.
A politician who is a good guy? One whose actions generally match up with what he says?
What a turn off, right?
Apparently. It seems that good is being called evil, and evil good.
I won't say Romney doesn't have flaws, but they're certainly not worse than the other candidates'. What's sad is that people seem so desperate to find something wrong with him that's big enough to rule him out that they're holding his outstanding qualities against him.
Today I read the kicker: Mitt Romney has been claiming to be more like the people (more normal, you could say) because he hasn't been a politician his whole life. But Newt Gingrich says he's "more normal" because he's had multiple affairs in his life. Bahahahaha! This is what Gingrich said about his affairs:
"So, I think in that sense, it may make me more normal than somebody who wanders around seeming perfect and maybe not understanding the human condition and the challenges of life for normal people."
For Gingrich to think Mitt Romney is a weirdo for not cheating on his wife says a lot about his values, does it not? And if the American people agree with him....wow, we've come far.
(How can a party concerned about traditional family values beat up Mitt Romney and ignore that Gingrich doesn't understand that a marriage vow is a non-adultery pledge?!)
Anyway, why have we decided that virtue is now suspicious? That fidelity is a handicap? That making money in such an efficient way must mean conspiracy? Why should we give the advantage to the guy with more vices in his life? When electing someone, I don't think, "I want someone just like me!" Am I a politically-savvy, economic genious who is brilliant with foreign affairs and a pro at fixing the economy and finding sustainable solutions to national crises (aka important qualities to have as president)? NO! I want someone who is much better than me. If someone is able to achieve a higher level of character and success, shouldn't we latch on to him since it sounds like he knows what he's doing?
|Weirdo Mitt Romney and his wife he doesn't cheat on because he's abnormal.|
Is it that Romney stands a little too straight for most average people to be comfortable with him? Something is wrong with a society that says, "I want a president to be good, but not that good." Why set the bar so low? Why vote for Joe Average if we're offered something better?
Is Mitt Romney too good to be elected President? I mean, he does have perfect hair and his first name isn't also the name of the cousin to a gecko. With hair like that, how can he possibly relate to us and uphold the values of us "normal people?"
Maybe he should have cheated on his taxes a little.