Why is Mitt Romney, the Republican Presidential nominee, able to declare that his years as Massachusetts Governor from 2003-2007, and his Mormon religion, are off limits as topics for discussion and debate in the 2012 Presidential campaign? And why is he not required to explain the truth of the effect of Bain Capital on workers and communities which lost out because of the drive for profits over 25 years?
All that Romney seems to want to be discussed is his “success” at Bain Capital for 25 years, making lots of profit for himself and stockholders, but not willing to admit that hundreds of thousands of workers lost their jobs, and that his equity company undermined many towns and other communities with the shutdown of many companies that were taken over by Romney’s company.
And the fact that he promoted a health care plan similar to that passed under Barack Obama is something else he wishes to avoid. Plus the fact that his state was 47th in job creation during his years as Governor!
And forbid the idea of him discussing his religious beliefs, knowing full well that it might antagonize many evangelical Christians and others, who are suspicious of the religion they and many others consider to be a cult.
But since when does a candidate get to decide what can be discussed about his past?
Did Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton or others, each of which had so called “skeletons in their closet”, have that same freedom?
The answer is NO, and Mitt Romney MUST be forced to discuss the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about EVERYTHING in his background!
He is not, despite what he may think, a “privileged character” who must be treated with “kid gloves”, so as not to hurt his feelings or sensitivities!
Nothing is off limits, as it is not with Barack Obama, so the opposition must not be cautious or careful in their exposure of Mitt Romney, with all the warts included!
A politician running for a political office not willing to discuss his time in a previous political position?
That’s like going to a job interview and not being willing to discuss your previous areas of employment.
If one were to consider the various events and debates of the election campaign a job interview, then one would clearly see that Mitt Romney’s attitude towards these discussions makes him unqualified for the job!
We the voters are essentially the job interviewers, and there is nothing Romney has done that has convinced me he is worthy of consideration for the position, much less a second interview!
Hello Bella,
Loved the statement and spot on, “there is nothing Romney has done that has convinced me he is worthy of consideration for the position, much less a second interview!”
Very insightful.