First: His Wealth. The man is rich. By now, that has been well established: Romney is worth upwards of $250 million. He owns a townhouse in prestigious Belmont, Massachusetts, in a state where he was once its governor. He also enjoys a waterfront home on Lake Winnipesaukee in the resort town of Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, on 12 acres of secluded land worth $10 million. No small change.
Therefore, if anyone is inclined to strongly dislike another person for his wealth, there is plenty of material to work on here.
Obama’s people have been making a major issue of Romney’s success. They have confiscated and made their own the term “the 1 per centers,” a derogatory appellation derived from the protesters who defiled Zuccotti Park in New York City. Remember them?
That designation has become a clarion call against Romney, with incessant demands from the Obama campaign to reveal his taxes for the last 10 years. Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it?
A man with his newspaper shares a park bench overlooking Wolfeboro Harbor on Lake Winnipesaukee, NH |
I find that very strange. The Obama administration itself is and has been liberally seeded with plenty of millionaire and billionaire staffers, supporters and contributors from Hollywood to Wall Street. Take, for example, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; the fabulously admired and rich actor, George Clooney; or the hedge fund mogul, George Soros.
Then there is Warren Buffett, the ultra-billionaire, and the man who claims to pay less in taxes than does his secretary. He conveniently overlooks the fact that, over a decades-long investment career heading up Berkshire Hathaway, Buffet’s enormous wealth was derived from and sheltered by a low capital gains tax, the same IRS rule resulting in the same tax code advantage which Romney has employed to minimize his own tax liability from his Bain Capital days.
Romney’s fortune, compared to that of Mr. Buffett is chump change – so why all of the ruckus over his bank account? As an observation, I’ll refer to what the good French nuns taught me in grammar school: “C’èst tout simplement l’envie.” (French for: It’s envy, plain and simple.)
There seems to be a lot of treacherous undercurrents and eddies of controversy pulling at and swirling around the Mormonism of Mitt Romney – just like black whirlpools sucking up all truth about that denomination and trying to drown it in the depths of bigotry.
Much of it, unfortunately, seems to come from fellow Christians who claim that Mormonism is not really a part of Christianity but, instead, is some sort of illegitimate sect.
That claim seems to originate principally from the fact that Mormonism originated in the U.S. (outside Rochester, NY) with Joseph Smith, its founder. It has as its text, the Book of Mormon.
But, if one will only check the official site of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and click on ‘Scriptures,’ – the first word appearing on the ribbon of the welcome page – one will find the term ‘The Holy Bible’ listed first, and ‘Book of Mormon’ next.
If only other mainstream Christian denominations, even the Catholic Church, were to have the attendance, evangelization and level of financial support that Mormons enjoy, we would indeed have a very happy group of U.S. bishops!
I hope that I’ve not drawn any of you readers too deeply into this non-secular world, but I think that Romney’s faith could be a marginal, yet pivotal factor in the national election. I’ve also not discussed any non-Christian faiths in this essay, not because I wish to ignore their impact, but because I’ve chosen to keep my criticism in-house.
As always, thanks for reading, and stay balanced. It’s not easy.
(Click on any image for an enhanced view.)
No comments:
Post a Comment