Mitt Romney Lacks a Compelling Case for Presidential Bid

addictiveinfo.com 

Somehow, Ham and Wry has missed the evidence that would suggest Mitt Romney will lead the country out of the doldrums and return it to its former state of prosperity. 

In fact, I don't think most voters know who Mitt Romney really is.  I certainly don't, and I have read extensively in various types of publications. Perhaps a just-released biography can offer some insight about him.

The Real Romney by Michael Kranish and Scott Helman, two Boston Globe reporters, concluded that the Republican presidential front-runner "is one of the least colorful Romneys." The authors examine the backgrounds of Romney's more interesting Mormon ancestors and analyze his relationship with his father, George Romney, who served three terms as the governor of Michigan. I can certainly buy the idea that Mitt is not one of the most colorful of the clan. Frankly, he lacks charisma and warmth in his public persona and doesn't relate well to people one-on-one. He behaves like a caricature of himself.

Romney tries to make the case that he knows how to create jobs while glossing over the fact that he sent many jobs overseas when he led Bain Capital, and some of the companies he "helped" went bankrupt.  Oddly enough, Bain always made beaucoup bucks, regardless of the outcome for the troubled organizations. Frankly, that doesn't earn him the moniker of "jobs creator." In fact, it provides no measure for how he would lead a government when Congress doesn't have to do what he tells them to do most of the time.  His power to hire and fire exists only in his administration and that has some restrictions as well.

Of one thing, I am sure. Mitt Romney has never had to make some of the hard choices that most of us have had to do in this time of economic uncertainty. He most likely hasn't seen the inside of a grocery store and has no need to worry about whether his bank account is overdrawn or choose between paying the mortgage or making needed home repairs. He does not understand the middle class and the poor viscerally because he hasn't experienced the gut-wrenching angst that accompanies financial strains. That makes him different from the vast majority of Americans.

With all of the global unrest and trouble spots, why should we switch leaders and vote for Mitt Romney?  He's not well-informed about all of the places our troops are deployed, and he would have a huge learning curve to catch up to President Obama's knowledge. Even if voters aren't crazy about President Obama, Osama bin Laden was eliminated, as were many of his top lieutenants, under Obama's leadership.

He also supported the health care law, although Congress voted to make it law. Ham on Wry finds it curious that people object to it because it's socialized medicine. One third of our country is covered by socialized medicine, over 100 million people, because they use either Medicare or the military health system. It has worked for years and could have simply been extended to cover the rest of the population with a similar sysem.  People complain that they shouldn't be forced to buy health care insurance, but taxpayers pay when people aren't covered. Preventive care is far less expensive than fixing something that has gone horribly wrong with the body, and people without insurance don't receive preventive check-ups.

So, why should I vote for Mitt Romney? I can think of no good reason. In my view, he will do more to protect the wealthy than he will for the rest of us.