The Seeming of Mitt Romney

A long piece in today’s Globe tells how Romney is leading the pack of tiny-minded Republicans seeking a primary win in New Hampshire. The article doesn’t really break any new ground, but a telling comment from a voter occurs three-quarters of the way through:

“I was really impressed with him; he seemed very relaxed, very confident, and very knowledgeable,” said … an undeclared voter in her late 60s…”

Romney seemed knowledgeable.

That pretty much tells me she didn’t have a clue about the issues, or about whether the Mitten actually knew what he was talking about. But she’s willing to put together her ignorance and his confident manner and decide that he’s the guy to run the United States.

I’m sure part of the Mitten’s undoubtedly entertaining shtick involves boasting how well he did as Massachusetts’ governor.

Of course he won’t mention that he wasn’t in Massachusetts much of the time, but was out whoring in other states for primary votes by criticizing the state.

Perhaps that voter who places such great faith in seeming would be interested in a report in the Globe today by Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, both of the Center for Market Studies at Northeastern University, about Romney’s tenure as Governor of the state he loved to bash. 

Our analysis reveals a weak comparative economic performance of the state over the Romney years, one of the worst in the country.

Some highlights:

• Formal payroll employment: third lowest in the country
• Manufacturing payroll declined by 14%, compared to 7% nationally
• Two states experienced no growth in resident labor force, Massachusetts and Louisiana. Louisiana had Katrina.
• 220,000 more people left the state than came to live here

Between 2002 and 2006, the median real (inflation  adjusted) weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers in Massachusetts is estimated to have fallen by $10 or nearly 2 percent.

Heckuva job, Mitten!

The authors also mention that Massachusetts was a national leader in home price increases between 2002 and 2005 – 95%, compared to 40% nationally.

Sum and McLaughlin generously add:

Real world experience has shown that a governor is limited in his power to influence the course of economic development in a state. A full-time governor who is deeply committed to the economic well-being of a state’s workers can, however, make some difference. The state unfortunately did not receive such leadership over most of the past four years.

No kidding. It’s the Republican way. Make your money off the backs of the working class and then kick the crap out them every chance you get.

As I recall, the Mitten, when sucking around for the governorship, flaunted his business success and promised he would boost Massachusetts’ stature and finances.

Seems like he blew that. But then what could you expect from a guy whose first act as governor of Massachusetts was to start running for President?

Makes me wonder what he’s going to run for if he wins the trophy of the Presidency? He’s already shown that he’s too ignorant and too psychologically challenged to be competent in the White House. Hell, he’ll probably make Michael Vick the Secretary of Defense on the grounds Vick understands how to fight subhumans. I’m sure the two of them will have a great time playing with their dogs in the basement pit of the White House. Or in Romney’s case perhaps on the roof.