Mitt Romney--a man of whom it might be said "He lacks the vision thing"-- had an interesting week. He decisively won the Florida primary by carefully articulating no vision, while instead single mindedly focusing on the expensive evisceration of Mr. Gingrich.
Heretofore nothing interesting about which to type.
Fortunately, the world was spared the boredom of perfectly predictable politics when Mr. Romney rose on Wednesday morning. Whether he'd enjoyed one too many celebratory appletinis, as has been suggested, or he simply felt a little squirrely remains unknown. What we do know is that he came close to saying something relevant. Close.
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." - W. Mitt Romney
This is the type of statement Democrat strategists dream about hearing their Republican opponents utter. I don't mean a fragmented dream that isn't remembered in the morning. I mean the heart racing, sweaty sheets type of dream. Proof, in their view, that Republicans hate poor people. Vindication of their view that they form the thin veil of tears between Americans and extermination camps. Which is why Mr. Romney should have stood by the comment.
It is perfectly legitimate for a candidate for president of the United States in 2012 to be unconcerned with the very poor. First, the very poor are in their situation for some anachronistic reason. It isn't the normal condition of life in America now, or ever for that matter. Russians at the turn of the 20th century--maybe. Second, America provides an excellent safety net for those who wish to avail themselves of it. Both the government and the private sector offer services, shelter, training and treatment for those willing to seek it. Again, there are always reasons someone is very poor. Third, the very poor, the poor, the working poor, any of the poor groups bleeding hearts like to lament, all lead better lives when the American economy is functioning at full tilt.
And this is our present problem. It isn't that we have too many unexplained very poor; it is that we have too many easily explained poorly used. Our economy is chock full of skilled labor and hard workers sitting on the sidelines of productivity. The economy isn't working against the poor, it is simply working poorly. Getting Americans back to work won't eliminate the rare phenomenon of very poor people, but it will guarantee that shelters stay open and food pantries are stocked. It even helps assure that there are ample consumers shuffling through expensive shopping districts to fill the rattling cups of the persistently and stubbornly very poor.
For many if not most "poor" Americans, poor is a transitory rather than permanent state. People are for a time in their lives poor. Then they do what Americans do: they work hard, study something, and improve their lot. This happens best when those who have gone before do well and manage to create a demand for ever more labor. It isn't a process organized or facilitated by government. Quite the contrary.
This Mitt Romney might have said. He might have stood his ground, spoken the truth, outlined a vision and thereby educated the voters about the real economy he claims to understand so well. Instead, he rushed to clarify. He rushed to dissemble about how he'd been taken out of context. Alas, he is a blind nut who just got squirrely.
No comments:
Post a Comment