My verbose thoughts on the thing called Willard Mittens Romney III

In a spasm of arrogance, deception and elitism this weekend, presumptive Republican nominee Willard Mittens Romney III declared indignantly that he will only release two years of his tax returns, for 2010 and 2011, and that is all the American people need or deserve. And to justify this, the Romney campaign lied to the American people that John Kerry also only released 2 years of tax returns when he ran for President in 2004, even though every one on the planet with a brain knows he released 20 years of tax returns.

It seems to me that Romney has decided that releasing his tax turns back to 2000, which would satisfy any reasonable person’s demand for transparency as it would coincide with his own father’s 12 year rule as well as be exactly what the Obamas have produced, is simply a non-starter. Being the cold calculating businessman that he is, he has obviously run a cost benefit analysis, the result of which has shown him that no matter the political price he pays for not releasing his returns, it would be much better than the political price he would suffer if he did release it.

Indeed, as others have speculated, it is likely that Romney’s returns during the last 12 years show extremely high levels of income, more offshore accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands, investments in things and companies that will hurt him on the right (i.e. abortion providers, etc), and probably proof that he paid a very low single digit or zero digit tax rate.

But this whole incident has me wondering two things: 1) has Romney accurately conducted that cost benefit analysis, and 2) what was Romney thinking over the past 12 years?

I ask the first question because, it seems to me, if things continue at their current pace, Romney’s private business experience will be so toxic to the American people that will never be able to refer to it again. So with respect to his experience, we are left with his one term governorship of Massachusetts and his Olympic experience. His days as Governor are verbotten because his record includes Romneycare and a failing job performance that undercuts his message against Obama. So that leaves us with the Olympics, during which he relied heavily on funding from the federal government to rescue a scandal-plagued Games in Utah. But that also undercuts his message against Obama regarding the stimulus since Romney relied on federal dollars to help him “save” the games.

So, basically, Romney is left with no resume to run on. He cannot run on his personality, because the personality he has sends people screaming away from him like he is Frankenstein. He cannot run on his specific policy proposals because they are toxic as well. The Romney policy proposals that we know about include massive tax cuts for the rich, and tax hikes for the poor and middle class, all the while ending Medicare, Obamacare and Social Security. So all Romney wants to do and can do now is stand there like a statue and hope Obama either implodes or is taken down by the economy and thus Romney wins by default.

The problem that Romney did not account for, mysteriously, is that President Obama is a good politician and his campaign team is very good, and right now they are running circles around that statue of Romney. The Obama team has been masterful, indeed almost Rovian, in making Romney’s supposed strength (private business experience at Bain makes him the best person to turn economy around) into his greatest weakness (his outsourning and tax loopholes make Romney the problem, not the solution).

I think sooner or later he will have to release those tax returns, no matter what his own cost benefit analysis told him. Conservatives (i.e. George Will, Governors Bentley and Barbour) are already calling on Romney to come clean. If he doesn’t release them and stonewall, then Romney will never be able to change the narrative of this campaign and he will lose big. Now, it may be true that if he does release the returns, it will be so damaging so as to cause him to lose as well, but at least then the issue can be behind him and he can talk about something else.

The thing Romney and his supporters have to come to terms with is this fact: barring an Euro collapse that sends the global economy into a meltdown, President Obama is going to win reelection, and nothing Romney can do will change that. All we have left is to argue about the margins and Congress.

Finally, answering the second question. Mitt Romney has been interested in politics since at least 1993. Because that was when he decided to run for the U.S. Senate against Ted Kennedy. Since then, his desire for a political career never left him. I can recall reading about his plans to run for Massachusetts Governor in 2001 and all the behind the scenes manuevering that needed to take place to convince the Republican Governor Jane Swift not to run for election in her own right (she had taken over from Governor Cellucci, who was appointed Ambassador to Canada). And I recall the machinations over Romney not running for a second term as Governor in 2006 because he knew he would lose and he did not want that to damage his reputation as he wanted to run for President in 2008. And indeed, he has been running for President nonstop since 2006. So it is amazing to me, during all this time, Mitt Romney was not more careful with what he did with his money.

Other politicians are wealthy. John Kerry, both Bushes, John Edwards, the Kennedys, and even Romney’s own father, George Romney, were all very wealthy while they harbored political ambitions. And they all managed their money in ways that were not politically damaging to them. They were also transparent about what they had. And the reason all of them were careful is because they were smart enough to know what did and did not look good to the American people.

That Romney did not manage his money in a way that is politically non-damaging (which is the only conclusion we can draw) shows that Romney either is not politically smart or doesn’t care what the American people think. And I actually think it is both.

God, what a horrible candidate you Republicans have nominated. I guess he was the best of a very very bad lot, but still.

And do you know what is going to happen next?

To energize his campaign, or at least breath an ounce of new life into it during the convention, Mitt Romney is going to have to turn the convention over to Sarah Palin and the teabaggers. Hahaha, that will be good entertainment, but it will also do as much damage to Romney among the undecideds and independents as George H.W. Bush’s 1992 convention starring Pat Buchanan did to the elder Bush’s reelection prospects.