The Media’s Intentional Destruction of Mitt Romney

I’ll make you a ten thousand dollar bet that if you search for Mitt Romney on Google, you’ll find nothing but the salacious debate of bloggers and news anchors, both left and right, about Mitt Romney being out of touch with American voters. Why? Because he bet Rick Perry that he knew what he’d written in his own book. Really? Does that make him out of touch with Americans? Or does that make him confident in his side of the argument, and passionate enough to actually risk his personal wealth? How many times have you been in the middle of a heated debate and turned to the person you were arguing with and said, “I’ll bet you a million dollars…” to prove a point- you’re so invested in what you believe that you’re willing to risk money that you probably don’t have. Well congratulations, you must be out of touch as well.

Anyone who watched the GOP debate on Saturday night can tell you that Mitt Romney had a huge smile on his face during the whole exchange with Perry. This tends to lean towards the assumption that Mitt Romney was not making a serious ten thousand dollar bet, but using the bet as a ploy to elaborate his confidence in his statement. And has anyone stopped to consider that Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and that Mormons don’t believe in gambling?

Of course not, but this is the point. Judging by the Google hits that come up when you search Mitt Romney, you would think his entire political career consisted of that one statement. This is the clip from the ABC debate being bandied about the cable news circuit (click image to play video or use link below):

https://youtube.com/watch?v=0CPQMDS_XO0

However, this is not where Mitt Romney’s response leaves off. Here is the ABC news transcript of what Romney said after the clip cuts off:

MITT ROMNEY: And I– and I– and I wrote the book. And I haven’t– and chapter seven is a section called The Massachusetts Model. And I say as close as I can quote, I say, “In my view, each state should be able to– to fashion their own program for the specific needs of their distinct citizens.” And then I go on to talk about the states being the laboratories of democracy. And we could learn from one another. I have not said, in that book, first edition or the latest edition, anything about our plan being a national mo– model imposed on the nation.
The right course for America, and I said this durin’ the debates the last time around, I’ll say it now and time again, is to let individual states– this is a remarkable nation. This idea of federalism is so extraordinary. Let states craft their own solutions. Don’t have ObamaCare put on us by the federal government.

How come a search about Mitt Romney at the debates does not reveal this response about Romney’s understanding of Federalism? Romney described his understanding of the Federalist system with such passion during the debate- it was absolutely mesmerizing. It was the kind of fiery moment that makes you stop and want to know more about this candidate who shows such passion towards the genius of the American political system. And it is nowhere to be found online.

Why? Because the media is trying to marginalize Mitt Romney- and succeeding. Think about it. How many stories have you read about the solidity of Mitt Romney’s hair? The past few weeks have had his hair stylist come out, as well as his wife, and speak in defense of his hair, and the amount and type of hair product he puts into it. And while this might be an interesting little tidbit of pop culture, whether Romney uses hair gel or not is not the sum total of his validity to be the next president of the United States.

So, why the lack of debate about any of his political stances or serious responses in recent debates? How come the only thing news organizations are discussing in regards to Mitt Romney is hair and his distance from constituents being related to his wealth? And can I just say, I thought the Republican party was the party of evil rich people. So shouldn’t we be defending his right to dispose of his private income as he pleases? And what presidential candidate doesn’t have some wealth to speak of? Aren’t schoolchildren taught that in order to run for office, one has to have wealth?

This smoke and mirrors sidetracking of the electorate is because Romney is a serious threat to Obama’s re-election. Polls show that, among independents, Romney is much more appealing than Newt Gingrich is. Therefore, he must be marginalized. And in order to do this, the media has to focus on such inane drivel as Romney’s hair and wealth (which everyone was aware of anyway) because Romney’s character is pretty much impeccable. Sure, his voting record is a little disconcerting to most conservatives, but that’s because it’s considered to be progressive and leaning towards big government, and since the Democrats love using their power to insert themselves into the minutia of everyone’s daily lives, they can’t exactly attack him on his record. And unlike Newt, Romney doesn’t have even a whiff or immorality when it comes to his personal life. He’s known his wife for over forty years and has five children and sixteen grandchildren, as he’ll proudly tell you. He is very devoted to his faith- a faith that prohibits alcohol, gambling, drugs- pretty much anything that even remotely resembles something the media could hook its talons into and create a scandal. Therefore, in order to discredit him in the eyes of voters, the media must resort to such measures as ridiculing his hair and wealth.

And whether or not you like Mitt Romney or not, doesn’t he at least deserve the same honest scrutiny in regards to his policy as others as judged by. Let’s be honest, if we as Americans elected our president based on hairstyle, Romney would win without contest. But fortunately, we have not descended to that level yet, so let’s put aside the schoolyard antics and focus on something actually relevant to Mitt Romney the presidential candidate, and judge him, as the great Dr. Martin Luther King so wisely said, on the content of his character (and his policies), and not on the contents of his vanity cabinet or the depth of his pockets.