patching...
Update: Share your opinions by becoming a Local Voices blogger. E-mail sarah.worthman@patch.com for details.
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!
Local Voices

Mitt Romney is Rich

Mitt Romney is right. He should not have to apologize for being successful. He should not be ashamed of being wealthy. However, that being true (and since he says he has nothing to hide), why not release more tax returns? If he wants to keep his finances secret, maybe he shouldn’t be running for president.

Outside of the battle over the tax returns (and offshore accounts), there is too much focus on the wealth and social standing of the two men who will face off in November. It is one thing to debate Romney’s track record at Bain or President Obama’s first term. Those are fair game. Those should be discussed. But all of the chatter about who is out of touch and who is an elitist is inane.

Mitt Romney is rich. He has mansions in New Hampshire and California. He takes lavish vacations and cruises around in enormously expensive boats. Estimates of his wealth typically range from $250 million to $500 million.

Barack Obama is also pretty rich. He is not as wealthy as Romney, but he is still a member of the 1%. He also enjoys extravagant vacations and his home in Chicago is not exactly small.

That these two men are extremely wealthy is not news. Romney is not a newcomer to politics. He was born into a wealthy family and has done well for himself. Obama has written bestselling books and was rich before he was elected president (something that doesn’t hurt the bank account).

The fact is, either both men are “elitist,” or neither is. This reinforces the absurdity of attacking either one as “elite.”

After attending the prestigious Cranbrook School, a private college preparatory boarding school in Bloomfield Hills, MI, Romney received an undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University. He then received a law degree from Harvard Law School and an MBA from Harvard Business School. 

Obama received an undergraduate degree from Columbia University and, like Romney, a law degree from Harvard Law School. He also served as editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Their educations alone would place them among an elite group of Americans. Their careers only serve to enhance the notion that neither man has a whole lot in common with you or me.

Romney worked for the management consulting firm Bain & Company before founding and running Bain Capital. He also served as president of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee and supervised the Salt Lake City Olympics. He was governor of Massachusetts and is a bestselling author.

Obama was a civil rights lawyer for a firm in Chicago. He also taught at the University of Chicago Law School. He served as an Illinois State Senator before becoming a U.S. Senator. Obama is also the author of two bestselling memoirs. 

Combining education and career, each man has a very impressive biography. They have been highly successful and have achieved many great things. One is president and one will be a major party presidential candidate (and could also be president). They are wealthy beyond most people’s comprehension.

You do not become president (or a party’s nominee for the job) without amassing a biography like that of Romney’s or Obama’s. Once you have reached that level, it’s safe to assume that you are a member of the elite.

Unfortunately the attacks calling Romney out of touch and Obama an elitist are not going to stop. They are too potent and too easy. There’s also evidence suggesting that they make an impact with voters. Partisans will point fingers and make one-sided accusations, but the fact is Democrats and Republicans alike partake in this game with equal aplomb.

As Super PACs and campaign staff and the like casually make those claims whenever they get the chance, it’s worth remembering that both men are members of the elite. They are elite even among the elite.

mike paczesny

10:12 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Both funded by Goldman Sachs . 2 sides of the same coin.

Reply
Comment_arrow

James R Hoffa

11:29 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012

@mike -

Money to support isn't the problem - it's when the money is used to gain favoritism from and/or change a candidate/elected official that it becomes a problem. And even then, the solution is to hold the candidate/elected official responsible and not Goldman Sachs.

Quit blaming the drug dealers (campaign contributors) of the world and start holding the drug users (corrupt politicians) personally accountable for creating the demand, as all the supply in the world would be for naught if there wasn't a demand.

Steve ®

11:40 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Why is the MSM vetting Romney so hard this go around and completely negated Obama 4 years ago? Are they really worried about his money or you just want to add fuel to the liberal class warfare fire?

Reply

James R Hoffa

11:42 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Despite all their education, neither man is as intelligent as Hoffa and despite their CV of personal accomplishments, neither man is as awesome as Hoffa.

Maybe Hoffa should run for President…

Reply
Comment_arrow

mau

12:50 pm on Sunday, July 15, 2012

<applause> from the crowd :)

You got my vote.

Bren

3:03 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

I don't mind these men being rich. I wouldn't mind a bit more treasure myself. It's the overseas accounts that trouble me. We know their purpose. So it is difficult to accept without cynicism Romney's inferences that he knows what's good for America since he hasn't precisely served as an exemplar in this area.

I still want to know more about how his experience as a venture capitalist translates to civil service at the highest level.

Reply
Comment_arrow

James R Hoffa

3:58 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

@Bren -

Anything you learn about Romeny from now to election day isn't going to change your vote at all and you know it.

So why be disingenuous? You already have your mind made up and it's following a party line.

Comment_arrow

Jay Sykes

9:19 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

@ JRH, just borrow the succinct wording of Bob McBride: 'You're voting for Obama'.

Comment_arrow

June Ruble

11:31 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

Bren you are going to vote for the magic Negro, so why even ponder the though?

Comment_arrow

Keith Schmitz

7:50 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Magic Negro. Yup, no racists in the GOP.

Comment_arrow

CowDung

8:21 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Didn't the 'Magic Negro' thing come from an LA Times article?

Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:27 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Yo David Ehrenstein, in uh Los Angeles Times op ed column o' March 19, 2007 coined da phrase Magic nigga. Ehrenstein be uh liberal democrat, Keif Jus' like Orenthawl James.

Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:31 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Yo "Yeah, da negro from da L.uh. paper Said he makes guilty whites feel pimp-tight dey’ll vote fo' him, an' not fo' me 'Cause he's not from da hood. Jus' like Orenthawl James.

Comment_arrow

J. B. Schmidt

8:31 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

@Keith Schmitz
I know facts have never been your strong suit; however, it should be pointed out that the non-GOP LA Times labelled Obama as the Magic Negro.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,3391015.story

Prior to that the origin appears to lie with Hollywood, academia, and a discuss lead by Spike Lee. I might add those 3 entities are also non-GOP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro

Comment_arrow

Jay Sykes

9:13 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

@ June Ruble.... Yesh, it's Betty Ruble or June Cleaver. Here are a couple of links to help you keep it all straight.--- Ward Flintstone(signed)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_Cleaver
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Rubble

Comment_arrow

Bren

9:28 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

I've said I believe Barack Obama deserves the time to let his economic strategies work, same as George W. Bush was given the opportunity to demonstrate the longer-term impact of massive tax cuts. I'm not being disingenuous Mr. Hoffa, you aren't paying attention! ; )

If Romney should win the election I'm still going to live here and want to know that whichever candidate wins is going to do a good job. Understanding that there's not much a candidate can actually lay out (tactics) until actually in place, I'm still waiting to hear Romney tell us, "As a venture capitalist, I did x and so. These skills directly translate to leading the free world by y and z." Hasn't happened. Do his offshore accounts give him foreign affairs expertise? No, because he has a fund manager. I hear a lot of Someone Else's Morality talking points, personhood amendments (which would ban most forms of hormonal birth control), anti-ACA (imagine speaking in front of African Americans and calling ACA "Obamacare." No wonder he was booed. There's some people skills going on there. Will he also mandate haircuts for gays as he demonstrated as a student?). Yes, I'm waiting to hear the words that will give me confidence that America will have elected the "best and brightest" if Romney wins. Obama has kept Wall Street afloat, helped save the U.S. auto industry, stepped up anti-terrorism and deportation of illegals, and addressed healthcare. Not too shabby.

Comment_arrow

J. B. Schmidt

10:04 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

@Bren
What flavor is your Kool Aid?

Everything Romney did at Baine is public knowledge including that fact that he saved 80% of the companies they invested in. Which is a better record on investment then Obama.

I enjoy the idea that GWB and Obama should deserve a chance, but we need to kick Scott ASAP.

"Kept Wall Street Afloat", if I am not mistaken with the amount of campaign contribution given by Wall Street kept Obama afloat. Not to mention most of the money going to Wall Street did not go towards the altruistic plan of mortgage help, but went to buying smaller banks and CEO payouts. Not to mention some of the banks are still practicing as there were prior to Obama.

"Saved US Auto Industry" Jeremy Anwyl, vice chairman of Edmunds.com says, "benefits surrounding the launch of the Volt, lately it has become more of an albatross ''emblematic of the bailouts" and closely tied to President Obama." GM needed restructuring not money to pay off unions.

"Stepped Up Anti-Terrorism" by releasing the US convicted OBL driver.

"Deportation" That completely goes against he recent EO that says to do the opposite.

"Addressed Healthcare" Have you been paying any attention. The recent brilliant decision by Justice Roberts on the unconstitutionality of the exchanges will burden the Federal government with trillions of additional dollars not originally projected. All Obama did was force your children and grand children to pay for today's healthcare.

Comment_arrow

mau

12:37 pm on Sunday, July 15, 2012

Gotta love this "Clinton said queries into Mitt Romney's foreign bank accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands are relevant to evaluating his fitness for the presidency — "just as relevant as the going over my record as governor got when I ran for president." Though Romney’s Swiss account was closed by his lawyer in 2010, he still has money in the Caymans."

The Clintons have 3 accounts in the Cayman Islands.

Nuitari

3:48 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

Mitt can release his tax returns when Barrack Hussein releases an undoctored birth certificate.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Keith Schmitz

7:57 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Don't you read? He has. But hey, nobody has laid this kind of insane demand on a white president.

Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:28 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Yo Where iz Barack Husseins college transcripts? sho 'nuff!

Comment_arrow

CowDung

8:35 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Keith:

Perhaps we just haven't had a White president that wasn't known to be born in the US.

It isn't Obama's race that brought up the birth certificate issue, it's the fact that he spent so much of his youth outside of the US that brought his birthplace into question...

Comment_arrow

Bren

9:35 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Mitt's polygamist grandfather (3 wives) fled to a Mormon colony in Mexico where his father George was born. The family chose U.S. citizenship for their children. Even though he was born outside of U.S. soil George was consider eligible to run for president (1968). Questions arose back then about this issue. Conversely, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, which was a U.S. territory for decades and became a state in 1959.

The Constitution called for presidents to be natural born citizens or living in the country at the time of the document's signing. This was to accommodate the young nation's hopes that Alexander Hamilton (born in the West Indies but emigrated to the colonies) would run for president. Those awake during U.S. history class will remember how that worked out.

James R Hoffa

4:35 pm on Thursday, July 12, 2012

I thought that Citizens United gave Republicans an unfair advantage in campaign fund raising? If that's true, then how does this happen:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/07/in_tight_senate_race_elizabeth.html

Maybe the left should start dropping the conspiracy theories already!

Reply

Lyle Ruble

6:25 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

I think wealth is the last thing we should be comparing. If material success is a sign of readiness to serve as the Chief Executive, then Romney wins hands down. Now if we look at where each man started from, that's another story.

Willard was born into money and privilege. He didn't have to overcome the same challenges that those who were not born into such wealth face. On the other hand, Obama rose to his position on merit. One was born into the "American Dream" while the other worked for the "American Dream", rising out of obscurity to power and prominence. If the American myth of opportunity for all has any credibility, then it is Obama who presents evidence that it is, in fact, a reality. ,Who knows better, the man who walked the walk or the man who talks the talk?

Reply
Comment_arrow

Chris

7:00 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Lyle, so you are discounting Romney based on who his parents were?

Comment_arrow

Keith Schmitz

7:54 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

There are a lot of rich people who serve in public office. But many of them see it as a duty, not an entitlement.

Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:23 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

barack hussein obama gots through life wif Affirmative Action daddy, don' you forget it in the hood

Comment_arrow

J. B. Schmidt

8:43 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

@Lyle
You only have the Obama autobiography to prove your point. As more and more is actually learned, that book may not be completely true. Also, he has yet to release his college transcripts. In which many believe he claimed to not be an American born in order to gain unfair privilege. (thus the creation of the birther claim)

While Mitt may have had more money in his family when he was younger, both lived a life of privileged that most other Americans aren't able to. Worked for the American, is BS. Even his first job out of college was attained through his Chicago connections. You liberals are trying to make Obama to be more of a mythical figure then what he really is.

Comment_arrow

Steve ®

9:05 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

►I think wealth is the last thing we should be comparing.◄

so why 2 paragraphs following comparing wealth? Obama had not walked any walk, this is the first thing he has ever run and it is showing, big time. You are correct, he gained the presidency by talking that talk.

Comment_arrow

mau

12:45 pm on Sunday, July 15, 2012

Gee, did the Kennedy's or Rockefeller's have to work for the American Dream. How about John Kerry and his wife's ketchup money. Obama had Tony Rezko money backing him.

Keith Schmitz

7:53 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Coud care less if someone is rich. God bless 'em. Except, when someone made themselves rich by making others poor like Romney did, or worse, wants to make themselves richer by running for President.

No matter how you slice it, Romney is as entitled as a candidate can get. This country should not endorse that. The Presidency is a duty, not a prize.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:24 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Yo Keif Schmitz what you jivin' about? you be jealous o' rich peeps, dat iz why you jacked all o' dat money from da poor folks wif dat bookstore, you liar Jus' like Orenthawl James.

Comment_arrow

Chris

8:32 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Keith, I've read your drivel, and the ONLY way you think people get rich is by making others poorer.

How, exactly will Romney benefit more from being President than anyone else who gets elected, including Obama?

Comment_arrow

Bam Bam Ruble

8:35 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Yo Keif Schmitz jacked $30,000 from da Village o' Shorewood ta start uh failed bookstore. He also jacked 'coop fees' from little old beotches, Keif iz da one who steals from da poor, problem iz, Keif iz still poor an' uh failure you know das right!

Comment_arrow

Steve ®

8:59 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

46 million on food stamps under Obama. Who is making who poor now?

Comment_arrow

Steve ®

9:00 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

►Coud care less if someone is rich. God bless 'em.◄
►Except,◄

yep, you do care, more BS

Satori

9:32 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

Bam Bam = Alfred
Same drunk loner, different handle.

Reply

Keith Best

10:43 am on Friday, July 13, 2012

I don't care what Romney does with HIS money, he earned it. I care more with what Obama wants to do with mine.

And why won't Obama release anything from his college days? No transcripts, no papers, no thesis, no relationships with Marxists professors........oh wait.

Reply

Johnny Seed

12:26 pm on Sunday, July 15, 2012

Rich is not a problem, there are plenty of wealthy people that qualify, but as far as I am concerned Wall Street need not apply.

Reply

Dave Koven

9:51 am on Monday, July 16, 2012

Both men seem like decent people with excellent resumes. I'd be proud to have either of them as my friend. Being the leader of a country, however, requires you to make decisions that will irritate someone somewhere. This is unavoidable. As for the candidates being wealthy, it MIGHT mean they'd be less likely to be wanting to line their pockets with the people's money...but this is more of a forlorn hope for me. We need to pass legislation that forbids trading on insider information, and we have to beef up our "watchdog" agencies so they can do their oversight properly. The people to watch out for are the extremists, like the Tea Party. They appear to want to keep the people uneducated and desperate for jobs so the unethical wealthy will continue to have a cheap labor force to draw upon. The unions have been weakened or destroyed, and the schools and teachers have been "improved" by having larger classes, less funding, and so much turmoil that nobody knows what is going to happen next. Teaching has been turned into a job that no one would want EXCEPT the desperate. Desperate people do desperate things. As they say, "When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose."

Reply

Leave a comment