It can be odd to read a biography of a major political figure for whom, every day while one reads it, the story continues. Everything we hear in the news now about Mitt Romney seems to have been the case in 2008, when he first ran for president; or 2002, when after leading the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City he returned to Massachusetts and became governor (still the only election he has won); or even 1994, when his political career began with a race for US Senate against Ted Kennedy, to whom he delivered a few scares before losing comfortably, 41-58.
Still the question of authenticity — what does Mitt believe? — dogs him; still the question of whether he is really an anti-abortion, gay-unfriendly, social conservative; still the question of whether he can connect with ordinary citizens who grew up without his many advantages, and who never hoped to earn even a sliver of his $250-million fortune. As voters, we’re still asking about the morality of Mitt’s long career in private equity, and whether his deals at Bain Capital made jobs or destroyed them, knowing that either way the scale was huge; the subject of Newt Gingrich’s TV adverts just weeks ago in South Carolina is the same as Ted Kennedy’s two decades ago.
We’re still perplexed about Mitt’s Mormonism, the faith itself and the immense role it has played in his private and family life, and whether a former bishop and Boston stake president, who has tithed millions to his church, can be truly independent of the rigid, closed, male, unreformed hierarchy in Salt Lake City.
And still — returning to the matter of authenticity — we’re amazed at Mitt’s capacity for talking unprompted rubbish.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in