James Fallows highlights this clip of Matt Lauer committing some journalism on the most glass-jawed hothouse flower in the race, Mitt Romney. Romney says that “envy” at the success of others (the top 1% are the “most successful”) is driving the discussion about wealth disparities, not considerations of fairness. When Lauer gently but firmly presses him, Mitt allows that it might be OK to talk about fairness in “quiet rooms”, but it isn’t appropriate to do so in a Presidential campaign.
Stupid remarks like this are similar to plane crashes and train wrecks: they have more than one cause. Part of the cause is Romney’s wooden touch and rich-kid sensibilities, which make him say really offensive and stupid things. But what really drives the train off the tracks is his need to put any discussion of his personal wealth out-of-bounds. In particular, he has to work the refs hard enough to have them look the other way on his unprecedented decision to avoid releasing his income tax returns. A smart politician would release them now and work through the pain well before election day. Mitt is a shit politician, so he’s going to let the pressure build from the usual suspects, and from some less likely sources such as even the conservative Washington Post editorial page, who hit him hard on that topic yesterday.
schrodinger's cat
Romney does not represent the 1%, more like the 0.1%
geg6
Saw that at Fallows’ place yesterday and, gotta say, I’m gobsmacked that Lauer actually committed an act of journalism there. He’s usually the softest of soft interviewers.
Pretty bad when Matt “I’m in the 1% and a germophobe to boot” Lauer realizes that what you’ve said is the most tone deaf possible soundbite.
schrodinger's cat
Romney does not represent the 1%, more like the 0.1%. It is not surprising that he doesn’t want to talk about income inequality.
Baud
Good.
dmsilev
Someone was asking yesterday about how far back the release of tax return tradition dates, so I did some googling. At least as far back as Nixon/McGovern, every major-party nominee for President has released at least a couple of years worth of tax returns. I didn’t bother going back further than that, though my Googling did turn up FDR’s returns from 1913 to 1937 (the man employed the world’s most anal-retentive accountant; he listed charitable deductions ranging down to 2 or 3 dollars each in 1937 on an income of near $100K).
Schlemizel
Too bad Matt was not so impolite as to ask Willard where & when this ‘quiet room’ discussion should happen. “Would a President Willard make time to have these discussions and create proposals for dealing with income inequity”?
flukebucket
This reminds me of when Obama publicly said that he would go into Pakistan to kill Osama if the situation called for it and McCain almost shit in his Depends. “You don’t say that outloud!” What is it with these people and quiet rooms?This morning I heard a clip of Mitt pushing the meme that Obama is not a bad guy, just in over his head. Nothing makes me sicker than a trust fund baby talking about competence and merit.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
The WaPo will consider their editorial statement an application of “due diligence” and will now promptly move onto other things. That’s their problem: no follow up.
When called out on it (“why haven’t you continued reporting or commenting on Romney’s refusal to release his tax returns?”), they’ll reply “oh, our editorial board drafted a sternly worded editorial on just that subject” as if that gets them off the hook for laziness. Lauer’s tepid attempt at hazing some journalism is an example: “Well, I tried to pin him down on this but he refused to answer the question.” Yeah Matt, no “gotcha journalism” gold stars for you.
The only way this type of issue gains traction is by repeated reporting and commentary. But the Villagers will undoubtedly find a new flavor of the moment while casting about for a return to “Dems in Disarray” stories and forget all about this.
MattF
Romney’s ineptitude as a politician is yet another case of an egotist striving for success in areas where he is weakest. Evidently, it’s ‘way too late for anyone to just sit him down and say “You know, you’re not very good at this politics thing.”
Cargo
The Reagan coalition was built on three groups – evangelicals, corporate raiders, and leave-me-alone gun-nut libertarians, all of whom had major axes to grind with the ruling Keynesian New Dealers that dominated America for the 40-odd years prior and gave us what we recognize as the modern federal government for good (moon landings, WW2) and bad (to them, everything else)
And now, 30-odd years later, we’re seeing this coalition fracture. Santorum, Paul, and Romney represent the three legs of this formerly stable platform and their mutual rancor is just getting worse. And we have front row seats.
I’m starting to doubt my original theory that authoritarianism would just kick in and Romney would smoothly sail to the nomination as the wingnuts fell into line. They don’t like him. He’s no Bush. They’ll certainly vote for him, and he’s got 250-odd EVs no matter who he is, but this is starting to look like Clinton V. Dole at best for the election. But the bigger picture, the fracturing of the Republican Party, is the more interesting story.
Cat Lady
@Cargo:
This. Romney’s got no base, he’s supremely unlikeable, and that’s even before his family’s polygamist/Mexican roots gets fully explored and his bishop status in his secretive church with exceedingly strange beliefs. As much as they hate Obama, that’s going to be a bridge too far for a lot of the gooper base. They’re godbotherers first and Republicans second.
John O
He’s not going to release his tax returns without pressure because everyone will then know he’s paying a lower rate than most of us, which plays into the fairness issue. And is a loser for him.
It IS stupid of him not to deal with it now.
hildebrand
It would be good if some of the hometown news types started asking Mitt these kinds of questions. Have a few local TV reporters gently ask this same question about envy v. fairness and watch Mitt disappear from interviews for the rest of the campaign.
On a slightly different tangent – will Mitt as presumptive nominee finally get the hand-wringing types to see that there is rather a significant difference between Obama and Mitt and therefore they need to turn out and vote this November? Good god, if people cannot see what a disaster it would be to have Thurston Howell III as president…Sigh…Probably not – the usual suspects will soon be here to tell us all that Obama is just as much a creature of the 1% and that all of his pretty words to the contrary (including his Kansas speech from a few weeks back) is just so much smoke-screen, blah, blah, blah.
Pococurante
@dmsilev:
At that time the average worker earned a dollar a day.
http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/money_23.html
satby
As I said on FB when I shared this post: “Yeah, that’s right Mitt. We’re all jealous. Not frustrated that after a lifetime of work and playing by the rules we’ve been ripped off on our 401Ks, our houses are underwater, and now you want to reduce Medicare and SS and leave us eating cat food in our old ages. And our kids can barely pay off the student loans on degrees that will allow them to slave like we have for less”
I hate these people with the heat of a thousand supernovas.
Cargo
So are gonna see signs saying WHERES THE 1040, MITT!? I hope so!
I don’t know how many more buckets of popcorn I can eat.
Legalize
You know who else is starting to be a pain in Willard’s magic undies? St. Sarah: http://biggovernment.com/publius/2012/01/11/breaking-palin-urges-romney-to-release-tax-returns-provide-proof-of-100000-jobs-created-at-bain-capital/
That’s a full green light for the wingers. The Kenyan isn’t going to have to get his hair mussed for months.
Sly
@Cargo:
It has been happening slowly for decades. Political coalitions simply don’t die out overnight; though the New Deal Coalition seemed to be at its zenith in the early to mid-60s and then rapidly crumbled, in truth there were structural weaknesses in the alliance since the very beginning. You can’t expect a movement that includes racial/ethnic minorities and white supremacists, and political reformers and city machines, to last forever.
The same holds true for the Conservative Coalition. It was never really stable, it just seemed stable because there were circumstances beyond the alliance that kept it functioning. Clear white electoral majorities, the existence of an external communist threat, a cultural nexus that had developed between Northern financial interests and Southern low-wage industrialism, etc. All of these circumstances have been slowly changing over the past half century, and the coalition has decided that it was more productive to shout at the wind than to adapt.
BudP
There is something in Romney’s taxes that would disqualify him with Republican base voters. My guess is he/his wife gave generously to Planned Parenthood.
GMF
The scariest thing about Romney isn’t his cravenness or his blatant lying, but his general stupidity.
The guy’s an idiot & if it wasn’t for the fact that he was born into wealth he’d be a sniveling mid-level manager at BOA or running a car dealership.
MattF
@BudP: Good point. He’s almost certainly given a huge amount of money to the Mormon church.
RSA
Mitt is showing a blind spot in this area. Has he looked at what seems to motivate a lot of people in his economic class? What the fuck are you going to do with a quarter of a billion dollars, more money than a single family could spend over several generations? I’ll assume that I’m a representative worker: I work to bring in enough money to cover basic necessities, some security for what will happen in the future, and whatever enjoyment I can find. A lot of banksters and stockbrokers, though, seem to me to be mostly thinking about how to move up to the next rung of the ladder–what’s that if not envy? They don’t seem to be doing anything useful with their money, so maybe greed is just as appropriate.
Maude
Did Mitt miss OWS?
Income disparity is front and center. He is an ostrich.
pk
Mitt has a weird definition of success. So if a top notch neurosurgeon or a nobel prize winner were to talk about income disparity, according to Romney it would be due to “envy” because they are jealous of “success”. I would question why Mitt thinks being successful means you have hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s amazing how every time this guy opens his mouth he says something stupid. He has no ability to even say BS commonplace stuff which most politicians can say in their sleep. I predict that this will be his downfall more than anything else. And he has been campaigning for a bazillion yrs.
John O
@pk:
Right. A simple follow up question that would’ve been interesting would have been, “So, Governor Romney, you define ‘success’ as wealth?”
Obama may just be able to squeak this one out, economy be damned.
Barry
mistermix: “In particular, he has to work the refs hard enough to have them look the other way on his unprecedented decision to avoid releasing his income tax returns. A smart politician would release them now and work through the pain well before election day. ”
If he’s smart, he’ll release them once the nomination is effectively in the bag – that way the base will already have been given its orders. I’d picck a Friday afternoon before a three-day weekend, when something else bright and shiny is happening.
Hal
And yet millions of working class people will line up and vote for Mitt because Obama’s a socialist who’s taking their money and giving it to welfare queens driving Cadillacs.
flukebucket
Keep fuckin’ that rooster Ann.
Legalize
@Barry:
Memorial Day weekend.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
I would suggest waiting to ramp up calls for his tax returns until after he gets the nomination sown up. The fact that he is earning money for not working and paying a lower tax rate than most Americans is the kind of thing he won’t be able to effectively handle.
Betsy
Not “jealousy” made a monster out of me. Envy.
Jealousy is what Mitt and the 1% feel toward their own wealth.
Envy is what they imagine the 99% feel.
One jealously guards what one has; one envies that which another has.
B W Smith
@flukebucket: Ann Coulter is a hypocrite (I know, not a news flash). I remember her saying clearly at CPAC this year, “If Chris Christie doesn’t get in, Romney will be the nominee and we will lose.”
According to Ann, government doesn’t fire people. Tell that to the thousands of public employees let go in the last few years. As usual, Ann is full of shit.
rlrr
@John O:
And it may turn out he’s been short changing the Mormons…
Schlemizel
@flukebucket:
Expect to hear a lot of the ‘nice guy in over his head’ meme this year. The GOP knows Obama is likable so they are going to have to tread carefully when they try to stomp him. That is directly targeted at the low-information independents they need to win who have nothing particular against Obama but need someone to blame for our current situation.
Roger Moore
@flukebucket:
They’re oligarchs who don’t really believe that the lesser orders have any role to play in decision making. Decisions should be made by the right people and presented to the rest of us, rather than being the result of open debate. They just aren’t usually so open about admitting it.
catclub
MANCHESTER, NH – Jan 11 (The Borowitz Report) – In a rousing victory speech in New Hampshire last night, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney vowed to undo everything Barack Obama has done as President, promising his supporters, “I will make Osama bin Laden alive again.”
I saw it at Andrew Tobias.
rlrr
@GMF:
The guy’s an idiot & if it wasn’t for the fact that he was born into wealth he’d be a sniveling mid-level manager at BOA or running a car dealership.
In other words, the ideal Republican candidate.
Steve
Obviously, Warren Buffet is just dripping with envy when he makes all those arguments about tax fairness.
geg6
@Cargo:
OMG, yes. I have to admit to some academic interest in this (my undergrad degree was in political science) as I was too young to really understand the fraying of the Democrats during my youth in the late 60s, 70s, and 80s. But it’s just fascinating to me to watch it happening. And that’s without even taking into account my liberal leanings and the joy this situation brings me.
@pk:
You gotta wonder how he looks at someone like Warren Buffett and his support for OWS. I don’t think even Mittens could make the case that Buffett is envious or jealous of anyone’s success.
geg6
@Steve:
Heh. Great minds and all that.
Paul in KY
@RSA: They are in a race to see who dies with the most. This race is worldwide (to them), which is why they want the lowest taxes & no regulation of their thieving stock market tricks.
They are in competition with despots, heriditary rulers of religious groups, monarchs, sheiks floating on a sea of oil, etc. Those people have ‘advantages’ that the poor U.S. plutocrat just can’t match. It needs to be a level playing field (thus their desire for no taxes/no regulation).
Life as a big monopoly game.
WereBear
@rlrr: I have observed that being born into wealth seems to create two conflicting drives; they feel compelled to “top the old man” and at the same time they have been infused with caution lest they blow the whole thing. I saw this in the long article on Romney that made the rounds a week or so ago; he was repeatedly courted by his then-boss to start Bain Capital, and would not do so unless he had a written contract that, in essence, guaranteed that he would risk NOTHING.
Not exactly the “Captain of Industry” so beloved of the Randians.
catclub
Some journalist needs to bring up Warren Buffett when Mitt says this is just all about envy. Warren Buffett says there is too much wealth inequality. It ain’t envy when he says it.
ETA: I also envy those with faster fingers.
Hillary Rettig
The issue of fairness is really interesting, and runs very deep. Many of us have been told, from a very young age, to accept the fact that “life isn’t fair.” It’s a way to keep demanding (read: assertive) kids in line. I remember a second-grade teacher telling us she never wanted to hear any of us say, “It’s not fair!” when one of us was unhappy.
I get life isn’t fair, and that one needs to internalize that growing up. But life *should be* fair, and even tiny children and nonhuman animals “get” that. (Google “animals and fairness.”) But just as parents and teachers denigrate the entire topic rather work to make things fairer for the kids, the right wing strenuously tries to vilify fairness as a trivial, immature goal. And when one of the oppressor class starts saying denigrating it, you know he’s actively scamming you.
some other guy
In other, obvious news that will surprise no one, 1-percenter wall street assholes will defend each others’ greed, regardless of party affiliation.
Jim Pharo
Mitt keeps saying Kerry didn’t release his tax returns — true? If so, then why is his failure to do so ‘unprecedented’? It may still be disgraceful, but not ‘unprecedented.’
Any one? Bueller? Bueller?
Valdivia
@Jim Pharo:
that’s a lie. he did release them though they were late in releasing his wife’s tax returns they still did. So Romney is, as usual, lying.
WereBear
@Jim Pharo: Kerry did, but his wife only did under pressure; like McCain, who behaved the same way. In both cases, the bulk of the dough was on the distaff side.
Chyron HR
@Jim Pharo:
No, that would be false. Does the Book of Mormon permit believers to lie to infidels? Inquiring minds want to know.
B W Smith
@geg6: I think one of the many problems that Romney and other Wall Street types have is that they are 100% motivated by acquiring more money. Therefore, they envy those who have accumulated more money. Romney cannot conceive of anyone not being motivated money. So any accusation thrown at him about how he earned his money is a result of envy. His narrow focus does not allow for the concept that some may be motivated by service, like a military officer, teacher, or social worker and work in fields where they know they will never be wealthy. He doesn’t want to be president as a public servant, he wants the power and the notch on his belt and the opportunity to make more money through changes in policy.
Steve
@Jim Pharo: Kerry released his tax returns, but he didn’t release the returns of his wife, who filed separately. Eventually I think he may have released part of her return or something. So there’s some truthiness to Mitt’s claim.
MattF
Note Matt Bai’s article in upcoming Sunday NYT Magazine:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/magazine/tea-party-south-carolina.html?_r=1&hp
Haven’t yet read the whole thing, but here’s a quote:
“Then our conversation turned to Mitt Romney, and Martin’s sunny countenance darkened. “I don’t know a single Tea Party person,” she said, slowly drawing out her words, “who does not despise Mitt Romney to the very core of their being.” I searched her face for levity or compassion, but found neither.”
PurpleGirl
@MattF: I believe that Mormans are encouraged to tith at least 10% to the Church. Perhaps he gives less and claims to make less or be worth less and he doesn’t want the Church leaders/treasurers to know just what he makes.
Villago Delenda Est
@WereBear:
Just this.
Romney has NEVER actually taken a risk in his entire life.
He always wants a golden parachute for everything.
He’s far too cowardly to ever be President. But then again, so was George W. Bush.
handsmile
@Roger Moore: (#35)
They’re oligarchs who don’t really believe that the lesser orders have any role to play in decision making. Decisions should be made by the right people and presented to the rest of us
I didn’t see your “nym” on last night’s thread on Corey Robin’s The Reactionary Mind (perhaps you were lurking), but this comment is a precise distillation of one of Robin’s principal definitions of conservatism:
“It provides the most consistent and profound argument as to why the lower orders should not be allowed to exercise their independent will, why they should not be allowed to govern themselves or the polity. Submission is their first duty; agency, the prerogative of the elite.”
Maybe you don’t need to read it after all, but the book and the “BJ Book Club” discussion organized by Angry Doug J may be of interest to you.
ETA: The first paragraph should have been block-quoted. It’s an excerpt from Roger Moore’s #35 comment above.
Roger Moore
@Hillary Rettig:
This is the most fundamental difference between progressives and conservatives. Conservatives say “life isn’t fair” as a way of ending arguments; you’re just supposed to accept the unfairness as a given. Progressives say “life isn’t fair” as a starting point; the role of society is to minimize the unfairness so we don’t have to accept it as a given.
Special Patrol Group
Mittens Logic:
Paris Hilton is part of the 1%.
Ergo, Paris Hilton is successful. QED, bitchez!
And anyone who says otherwise is a big jealous doody-head who simply hates Capitalism and America and One Nation Under God. QED.
Schlemizel
@Steve:
THATS IS A KEEPER!
“If even Warren Buffet says this is a problem” is a great come back on the envy line.
Roger Moore
@handsmile:
I was in on the discussion, but I got in a bit late because I’m on the Left Coast and was busy for the early part. I don’t think the idea that conservatives think decisions should be made by the elite and accepted by the rest of us is at all novel. It should be blindingly obvious to anyone who observes them.
ira_NY
In Newt’s info/filmercial, “When Mitt Romney Came to Town”, the photo at the 9:47 mark of Romney having his shoes shined on the tarmac is damn powerful.
Ella in New Mexico
Shit-for-stuffing scarecrow that he is, I want nothing more than to be a fly on the wall at the party coming when Romney is the latest pinata and the press starts whacking his limbs off, piece-by-piece until a whole lotta special treats fall out of his butt to the floor and the David Gregory’s of the world dive to their knees, scrambling like animals to stuff it into their mouths.
My biggest fear? It will happen too early to be useful to the Obama team.
Lynn Dee
Fucking idiot.
evap
A Kirsty MacColl reference, I am impressed! The song is now running through my brain, and will be all day. Thanks for making my day, mistermix. :)
handsmile
From today’s Guardian website:
More tales of Romney’s notions of jealousy, envy and class warfare:
“Poverty in America likely to get worse, report finds/Indiana University study says 46 million Americans are living below the poverty line, up 27% since the start of the “Great Recession”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jan/11/poverty-america-likely-worse-report
As well as Mormon paranoia and resentment:
“About half of Mormons believe they are more discriminated against than African Americans” [Pew Forum Survey]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/12/third-mormons-mitt-romney-religion
pseudonymous in nc
@John O:
And that he sends more each year to the LDS coffers (tax-deductible, natch) than he does to the IRS. That’s my guess, anyway.
ira-NY
Has Romney been asked in a major interview or debate whether he has money in offshore banks?
Comrade Javamanphil
@Betsy: Lyrically, I believe it is treachery. RIP Kirsty.
ETA: @evap: Also, too.
eemom
Obama’s going to win, and it’s going to be a STOMP.
I’m just going to keep saying it until people believe me.
WereBear
I think the issue with Romney and his tax returns is that it is simply not the proles’ business. It’s not done, don’t ya know.
Yes, he’s clueless that it is considered a standard expectation. He doesn’t care.
Linda Featheringill
@handsmile:
I was thinking about that statement this morning. Interesting word, agency. New to me with this meaning, although I’m very well acquainted with the principle.
FWIW, Godwin and all, during the Shoah the Jews who did what they were told had a survival rate of about 3%. Those who made their own decisions, often contrary to orders, had a survival rate of about 50%.
Redshift
@Belafon (formerly anonevent): I think he’s had people furiously massaging his return for this year to make it look the least bad they can, and he’ll release sometime after April 15. I’m guessing he tries to get away with releasing one return, because I don’t think he’s smart enough to have figured out that he needed to make his return for last year look as good as possible; it wouldn’t have been until he had campaign staff thinking about it.
gogol's wife
@Roger Moore:
That’s what Christianity is supposed to be about too.
gogol's wife
@eemom:
I want to believe, I want to believe! I believe, eemom, help thou my unbelief! (Not snark)
Redshift
@Schlemizel:
A ‘nice guy in over his head’ who got Osama bin Laden when their last guy (and his sociopathically ‘tough’ VP) spent seven years failing to get him. Good luck with that.
captnkurt
@evap: I too was tickled to catch that and am also singing the Kirsty MacColl referent song (though the lyric actually is “Treachery made a monster out of me” and not jealousy).
edit: @Comrade Javamanphil – shoot, you beat me to it. Now to go dig out the Tropical Brainstorms CD…
handsmile
@eemom: (#67)
At the very least, I hope you’re not driving. :)
On the issue of Senate presumption of presidential nominees that we were batting about yesterday, this linked article underscores why I think I’m not “overestimating” concerns about a GOP majority there. (Yes, it’s to GOS, but that alone doesn’t invalidate it for me and the bulk of it is an excerpt from a 1/7/12 NYT article.)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/09/1053180/-Senate-confirmations-nearly-20-percent-lower-under-Obama-than-Bush?via=blog_1
James Gary
@Linda Featheringill:
FWIW, Godwin and all, during the Shoah the Jews who did what they were told had a survival rate of about 3%. Those who made their own decisions, often contrary to orders, had a survival rate of about 50%.
Huh? Two questions:
1. Do you have a source for that?
2. What exactly constitutes “made their own decisions?” Please provide some kind of quantitative metric.
Comrade Javamanphil
@captnkurt: Snowing here. Perfect day for it.
Jay in Oregon
@PurpleGirl:
I’m under the impression that the Mormon church does more than just “encourage” tithing; it’s considered an obligation of being a faithful member of the church.
http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/24907/Tithing-settlement.html
Yes, you too can be audited by your church so that a bunch of unaccountable church elders can determine whether or not you’re going to heaven! Sign me up!
Jay in Oregon
@flukebucket:
They should call them what they are; “smoke-filled back rooms.”
handsmile
@Linda Featheringill: (#69)
I was unaware of those survival figures on Jewish acquiescence/resistance, and appreciate your bringing it to my attention. Nothing more to add; just letting it grimly sink in.
One frequently comes across that usage of “agency” in works of political or moral philosophy. (part of my backstory)
4tehlulz
@Linda Featheringill: [citation needed]
Roger Moore
@Jay in Oregon:
And remember, Mitt Romney is a bishop, so he’s one of those elders who’s going through your finances to figure out how much you owe. I do wonder, though, if they’re a bit easier on the hierarchs than they are on the peons when it comes time to do the auditing. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to discover that Mitt’s unearned income somehow doesn’t count when it comes to figuring out how much to tithe.
McJulie
@Sly: it just seemed stable because there were circumstances beyond the alliance that kept it functioning. Clear white electoral majorities, the existence of an external communist threat
I feel like the external communist threat is a huge part of this — which is why you see the continual attempt both to invoke the 60s (ie. remind older people that Democrats are “soft on communism”) and to reconstruct the “terrorist threat” as something much more similar to the communist threat than it really is.
gaz
@Schlemizel:
I’m not convinced of that. First of all, the *only* thing Romney’s got going for him with the GOP base is that he’s not Obama. Secondly, he’s going to have to throw red meat to the crazies. And even if he finds a way to do so “nicely”, he still can’t control what *they’ll* spew.
It’s gonna be a long election cycle.
Kane
Many continue to ask the question of why the GOP also-rans are remaining in the race when they have no chance of winning.
Clearly, Romney answers that question with all of the unanswered questions that surround him. He may be the strongest GOP candidate, but that certainly doesn’t translate into his being a strong candidate. He is one Bain revelation or tax return story or YouTube gaffe away from complete collapse.
gaz
If there’s an argument to be made that DougJ is not Veritas, it’s threads like this.
Veritas has been conspicuously absent on every thread I’ve seen that is about Romney doing something stupid and indefensible.
If DougJ *were* Veritas, one would think that he would want his parody to play out in threads like this, for maximum lulz.
On the other hand, if Veritas is just another cheeto munching moron, posting from an undisclosed basement, somewhere in his mother’s house, he’d probably tuck tail and hide from threads like this.
This is of course, not actually solid proof. But dougJ, if Veritas is your sock-puppet, then what is with all the missed opportunities over the past week or so?
McJulie
@Paul in KY: Life as a big monopoly game. I just finished reading The Sociopath Next Door, which provides some insight — in the absence of a conscience or a sense of emotional connection to other human beings, many sociopaths define their interactions with others purely in in terms of “winning.”
And of course, the current Republican base is really a collection of people acting like sociopaths. Some of them (Romney, perhaps, and GW Bush, I suspect) are genuine sociopaths who have simply found the political philosophy that gives cover to their pathology, but others have chosen to embrace sociopathic behavior for some other reason — tribalism, authoritarianism, ignorance, or even just localized social norms.
Satanicpanic
Serious question for everyone saying the Republican coalition is fracturing- where will the various parts of the coalition go?
Emma
@Special Patrol Group: Actually, she probably is as successful than he is, by his own definition. She’s parlayed being born into a wealthy family into an empire of her own. And to her credit, all the tv reality shows and shoe and perfume collections do create jobs.
feebog
Comrade Scott @ 8:
I made the point in a thread yesterday that in this day of social media, we can keep this issue alive. How powerful would it be to have several million people posting on facebook at the same time; “Where are the tax returns Mitt?” This could be are birther moment, except we would have a real issue to exploit.
BDeevDad
On a related note, the New York Times is actually asking if their reporters should actually report if a news maker is lying or distorting the truth. Isn’t that what a reporter’s job used to be?
Interestingly, they use Mitt Romney as a prime example.
Hoodie
@Roger Moore: I read that Corey Robin thread and, while I agree that Robin makes some great insights, some of the discussion seemed overly reductionist, i.e., Robin’s theory is incomplete and the way some apply it leads to demonizing conservatives and validating liberals, rather than understanding both. I get the impression that Robin is aware of that, and tries to advise limits on how his theories are applied.
Based on my own experience, I think part of the appeal of conservatism is that all people, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the individual, understand hierarchy better than other, more complex, organizational structures. For an analogy from compsci, it’s much easier to understand the concepts underlying a hierarchical database than those for a relational database,even though the latter is potentially much more powerful. Thus, it may be that part of the pull of conservatism lies in the limits of human cognition. Hierarchy is the organizational model that most people learn first, and it’s deep coded into our culture and psyche.
I’ve noticed this in connection with an observation that a lot of people have a hard time viewing things in other than a “win-lose”, zero-sum frame, which correlates with hierarchy. As Robin notes, some people are keenly aware of a loss of status arising from perceived inability to assert some sort of dominion over others. One obstacle to overcoming this bias toward hierarchy is that hierarchy is often an effective organization form, or at least may be perceived that way. Back to the compsci analogy, hierarchical databases do work,and do they have the virtue of being relatively simple. Hierachical social arrangements also can work pretty well in things like the military. They’re not so great in other contexts, e.g., in a national economy or politics, where their limitations can become perverse or malicious.
Special Patrol Group
@Emma:
I dig what you’re saying. But I’m talking about the infant Paris Hilton in this instance. Or perhaps her brother, Chucky Hilton. You do catch my drift, no?
chopper
let us now read from Mittens 6:5-6.
And when thou brayest about inequality, thou shalt not be as the hippies are: for they love to bray standing in the public parks and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
But you, when you bray, enter into your quiet room, and when you have shut your door, bray to your Father who is in secret about how just awful it is that everyone is soooo jealous of your money; and your Father who sees in secret shall reward you openly. With profits. Lots o’ money. Dolla dolla bill, y’all.
Comrade Javamanphil
@BDeevDad: Journalism. How does it work?
dogwood
@Jay in Oregon:
It’s more than that. It’s not all about heaven. It’s about social pressure and humiliation. The real threat to Mormons during the audit is that the Bishop can deny them a Temple recommend, and Temple recommends are the social capital of Mormonism. There is nothing more humiliating than losing one and not being able to attend your child’s wedding for instance.
Emma
@Special Patrol Group: Yep. My answer was about 2/3 snark anyway.
Valdivia
@BDeevDad:
shoot me now. so their job is just to repeat talking points?
Catsy
@Satanicpanic: My WAG?
Some of them will go to the Constitution Party. Some, the Libertarians or some equivalent. Depends on what’s more important to them: hating on darkies and foreigners, or keeping guv’mint out of their Medicare.
Some few will vote Democratic, at least in red areas where they can be assured of voting for a Blue Dog or similar lower life form.
Many will stay home out of disillusionment or spite.
But the vast majority, I think–especially the theocrats like Santorum, who have nowhere else to go–will wage war for the right to remake the Republican Party in their ideological image. There’s just too much in the way of invested resources, history and brand recognition for the GOP to simply disband or disintegrate into nothing. Think of it like Hostess going into bankruptcy: someone is going to want to claim that brand for themselves, because regardless of where they come from, there’s already a built-in market for Twinkies.
Roger Moore
@Emma:
It’s also worth pointing out that the Paris Hilton persona who showed up on TV isn’t necessarily the same as Paris Hilton the person. I think she pretty clearly understands the value of image and has crafted a profitable public image; it may draw heavily on her own personality but it is still an image and not the person underneath. I don’t think she could have been as successful as she is were she as dumb as she appears to be on TV.
Frankensteinbeck
@McJulie:
I agree that it’s a big part of this, and I think it’s a deep and emotional element rather than an obvious surface element. The Cold War was DIFFERENT. We have an entire generation now that worries about getting a job, but not about whether they’ll die in their sleep because a nuclear war has suddenly wiped out the entire human race.
There is a whole lot of fear and anger that the Tea Party generation spent their entire lives reacting to that disappeared in the 90s. They can’t stop trying to recreate it.
Consider that congress, the punditocracy, and the presidential campaign field are composed almost entirely of people who grew up in the height of the Cold War.
Emma
@Roger Moore: Yeah. Witness my favorite “dumb blonde”, Dolly Parton.
Jay in Oregon
@Roger Moore:
It wouldn’t surprise me at all that there are two standards—one for the wealthy/influential/connected, and one for everyone else.
Mitt doesn’t want his tax rate to become a campaign issue. And he if he is skimping on the tithes, he doesn’t want the proles in the Mormon church to know it; they may start getting ideas…
smintheus
It’s not just Romney’s tax returns that are kept under wraps. There’s also his decision to delete electronic files from his governorship, and the near total blackout on info about the work done at Bain Capital. Politico calls the Bain lockdown Romney’s “black box”, but I think a better expression to describe the situation facing voters is “buying a pig in a poke”.
Paul in KY
@McJulie: Interesting point, McJulie. I don’t think all of them are sociopaths. It’s just that most of the ones I’m railing against are very competitive people who think they are in a wealth competition with rich people all over the world. Some of those rich in other countries have ‘legs up’ that our millionaires don’t have and for those who take the ‘game’ seriously, it grates in their craw & they want to ‘level the field’.
I don’t think they think these changes would make the U.S. into a 3rd world nation. That is wishful thinking, IMO. They have all their lickspittles telling them it’s the right thing to do & they probably delude themselves about how their wishes would play out.
MattF
@Emma: Dolly Parton does not appear dumb. She has a center-of-gravity issue.
ruemara
@eemom: I tell you what, saying this over and over is way better than the constant, “Romneys going to win, how awful” and “Maybe Obama can pull this out, even with unemployment”. I don’t get why anyone who isn’t a republican seems to revel in being demoralizing.
Chris
@Cargo:
Cargo,
It’s true they don’t like him, but the same was true of McCain: all he had to do was pick Palin and energize the shit out of the base. It’s not insurmountable.
Trouble is, what Palin brought in from the right, she lost in the middle. Romney’s going to have to choose between having a really dull, uninspired candidacy where the wingnuts really, really have to hold their noses to vote for him, or trying to beef up his wingnut cred in a way that’ll cost him in the middle.
He could try to find a solution that makes both groups happy, but I doubt he’ll succeed. He could also go ahead and pick a Palin and hope that the shitty economy is enough to make independents hold their noses and vote for her anyway, like they didn’t do in 2008.
Emma
@MattF: Ah. Maybe since I’m female I see it a little differently? :D
I was just remembering her riposte to someone who asked her about all the dumb blonde jokes people made. “I’m not offended by all the dumb blonde jokes because I know I’m not dumb – and I’m not blonde either.”
Jay C
Seems like Mr. Romney’s been following the Karl Rove playbook a little too closely:
1. Attack on strengths
2. Stay on message
3. Control the narrative (and the media coverage)
4. Ignore any counterattacks
The big problem for Mitt isn’t so much, IMO, the triteness and bogosity of his attacks – all Obama-bashing, all-the-time -, but that he looks like he’s losing control of #3. Leaving aside, even, the utter (and apparently genuinely clueless) hypocrisy of a wealthy character like Mitt Romney mouthing off about economic issues to (actual) “ordinary” Americans, the “debate” has been shifted to be mainly about him, not the Party, platform or even ideology. And it’s a debate he probably (even given the fecklessness of our national media) come off well in.
It’s the slow, steady trickle of stuff like this that’s changed my opinion of Mitt Romney and his candidacy from a sort of amused disregard to an active dislike.
BTW, it’s really unlikely that the Mittster has been shorting the Mormons on his tithes: if everything I have ever read about the LDS (about money matters, anyway) is accurate, nobody – but nobody, however wealthy they are, gets anywhere in the hierarchy without their tithe account being properly up-to-date. Whatever goodies migh be revealed in the Romneys’ 1040s, I would imagine that stiffing the poorbox isn’t one of them…
handsmile
@Hoodie: (#94)
I believe that Robin addresses and refutes the notion that the “pull of conservatism lies in the limits of human cognition.” He argues that conservatism, rather than a cognitive imperative, is, like any other political philosophy, an ideological formation that may be embraced, ignored or rejected by independent actors. The experience and understanding of hierarchy, moreover, is determined by an actor’s position within a polity.
Here a long quote from the first chapter of The Reactionary Mind:
“In every social movement or revolutionary moment, reformers and radicals have to invent-or rediscover-the idea that inequality and social hierarchy are not natural phenomena but human creations. If hierarchy can be created by men and women, it can be uncreated by men and women, and that is what a social movement sets out to do. From these efforts, conservatives learn a version of the same lesson. Where their predecessors in the old regime thought of inequality as a naturally occurring phenomenon, an inheritance passed on from generation to generation, the conservatives’ encounter with revolution teaches them that the revolutionaries were right after all: inequality is a human creation. And if it can be uncreated by men and women, it can be recreated by men and women.”
I surely hope this addresses the substance of your thoughtful comment.
dogwood
@Jay C:
Absolutely, he’s an insincere politician, but a sincere Mormon.
chopper
@Catsy:
mitt’s a real wild card here, because while conservatives love to come back into line, it only really works when a heavy-handed authority figure tells them to. mitt just aint got the chops to glue a fractured coalition back together.
that’s what has to scare the money boys in the GOP the most. mitt would make an absolutely terrible republican party leader.
MattW
Ah, but would Romney be willing to stick his face in a hat and read his tax returns aloud?
Joel
If Romney were half as clever as Bush, he would have taken losses last year or paid a high tax rate somehow, so that he could use this as his “Dan Rather” moment. But he isn’t even that.
Joel
@gaz: Maybe he’s just trying to fake us out.
Tractarian
@gaz:
Aah, that’s what he wants you to think! :)
geg6
@eemom:
It’s all starting to have a Bob Dole feeling to it for me.
But I try not to say that out loud for fear of jinxing.
gogol's wife
@geg6:
Yes, and I freaked out about Bob Dole right up until November.
AA+ Bonds
I think it’s just fine that envy contributes to attacks on wealth disparity, blah blah blah utility blah blah blah consequentialism read all my other posts on the topic
Long story short, if our system treats envy (or greed) as Catholic sins, our system will collapse and probably in violence
SiubhanDuinne
@eemom:
eemom, it’s ten hours after your post, the thread is dead, and you’re probably not seeing this, but FWIW I think Obama is going to run away with the election come November. Doesn’t mean circumstances couldn’t change, doesn’t mean I’m not going to work for him, doesn’t mean I’m going to stop giving him money — but I do think he’s going to win handsomely. I could wish it were more because people love him and less because they hate Mittens, but a win’s a win, and I”ll take it.
mclaren
The problem here of course is that Americans are a nation of bully-worshiping sadistic cowards, so your average Americano instinctively leaps to the defense of any wealthy thug inconvenienced by evidence of his crimes.
Americans are known the world over as born serfs, and nothing brings a smile to your Americano’s heart like the sight of a strapping 250-pound burly he-man beating up a crippled child. When an Americano sees a preteen girl getting held down by ten grown men and gang-raped, why, he jumps to his feet in a swoon of delight and spontaneously recites the pledge of allegiance.
So seeing proof that Willard Romney is a wealthy thug and a bully who breaks the rules…wowie zowie! That makes your Americano voter positively dizzy with delight. As a nation of cowards, Americans yearn for nothing more than to help hold down that preteen girl for the Big Man to gang-rape. “I’ve got her, boss! Go to it!” is the American motto. So I’ll bet a supermajority of the American electorate is now faint with excitement at the prospect of voting for Romney, just as John Cole was back in the year 2000 when the Drunk-Driving C Student was on the Republican ballot.
Glen Tomkins
“A smart politician would release them now and work through the pain well before election day.”
That’s not a safe assumption until and unless you know how much and exactly what sort of pain the returns will bring if made public. A smart politican who did know what’s in the returns might indeed want their release delayed, or even denied, whatever the cost of non-disclosure.
If the returns would show that he’s done things that the R base would disapprove of, then it’s a good bet right now to stonewall until the nomination struggle is won. He could have it all wrapped up with FL, or even SC this Saturday. The next few weeks are exactly the wrong time to accept any pain.
If the calculation is that he will eventually have to release the returns, the best time now available would be a few weeks after the nomination fight is won. Media attention will no longer be focused on him, there won’t be a pack of rivals for the nomination out trying to amplify the pain, and there will still be plenty of time for the issue to be over and done with well ahead of e-day, well ahead of when swing voters make their decision.
But I’m not sure that smart political calculus dictates that he will ever have to release the returns. Whatever malefaction of great wealth the man has done that would come out in the returns would probably, in most swing voters’ minds, do more damage as a concrete, known malefaction, than there would be damage from even the worst suspicions of potential malefaction.
Great wealth has a halo effect these days. People would tend to imagine better than the often sordid reality about how a rich person comes by his or her wealth. Romney leans heavily on his proven ability to make big pots of cash as a proof that he has what it takes to be an effective and competent president. He does that because the climate of opinion we have tody equates ability to make big pots of cash with ability in general, and inability or lack of desire to make a lot of money with generalized incompetence and lack of drive and energy.
People who are paying attention to our culture will assume that the tax returns are being witheld from public scrutiny because they would reveal a pattern of crony capitalism at least, and perhaps show where particular legalized bribery bodies are buried. But we assume that because we have observed that these days the surest path to making money is to get the rules rewritten, not to build a better mousetrap. Romney’s not getting our vote anyway. He can only hurt his chances of getting votes from peoiple who aren’t paying attention by producing a concrete example of crony capitalism at work.