It is important here to remind ourselves that Mitt Romney is no ordinary person; his has been a life of perks and privileges. Son of a former governor of Michigan, he may possibly be the richest aspirant ever to the country’s highest office, with personal wealth estimated at over US dollars $250 million. Of course, cushioned with such enormous sums, you don’t have to worry about your next meal, or the next pay cheque; nor fear the banks seizing your house for missing the monthly mortgage.
Romney is known for supreme self-control and being meticulous to a fault, with aides responsible for ensuring that not a hair on his head is out of place. With every move choreographed by ‘handlers’, his remark should not be seen as a slip of the tongue, but as a deliberate message to keepers of the ‘faith’ in the Republican Party, who harbour doubts about Romney’s commitment to the extreme conservative principles now espoused by them. After all, this party has strenuously opposed even minimal opportunities or economic incentives to the poor that could pull them out of their dire straits. The Republicans have also been contemptuous of social security or national health care or any programme that could enable millions — who have lost their jobs and seen their dwellings seized by banks and mortgage houses — to survive. They have gone as far as to accuse President Barack Obama of being a socialist!
It is truly sad that a country based on noble ideals and which prided itself on opening up its borders and proclaiming, ‘give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free’, should now show no remorse or guilt in denying its poor even tiny crumbs essential for dignified living. The Republican Party is a truly strange breed today, a hostage to the extreme right wing religious fanatics who want to turn the country into a Christian state and also to undo notable aspects of the party’s legacy, such as Nixon’s environmental and labour safety laws, Reagan’s elimination of corporate tax loopholes and a score of other achievements in civil rights and good government reforms. It has now come to such a pass, that moderates simply do not stand any chance in the Republican Party.
In fact, both political parties have abandoned the ‘big tent’ approach to become more ideological organisations. But it is not simply the Republicans; the entire country appears to have moved right — in both domestic and foreign policy. No one now talks about ‘compassionate conservatism’; even the pretence of being concerned with the fate of the poor having been eliminated from the rhetoric of politicians. If it was the growing power of the ‘military-industrial complex’ that prompted President Eisenhower to use his farewell address in January 1961 to warn of this development, the country now needs to wake up to the stranglehold of corporations and financial institutions on government. Having become the biggest financiers of politicians, elections are going to be increasingly determined by them and not by the electorate, especially after the 2010 Supreme Court decision permitting them to spend unlimited amounts in favour of candidates who promote their interests. Even George Soros, the famous hedge fund manager, has acknowledged that the concept of freedom in America now finds expression “in the rise of geopolitical realism in foreign policy and laissez-faire in economics”.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 8th, 2012.
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Harry Stone: @Harry Stone Sir,Please do not discredit. me by claiming I am misinformed:.No one can harm America by simply wishing it.But more often than not we are very good at harming ourselves.America is the sole super power in the world presiding over the fate of humanity.Any misstep here results in widespread impact all over the world.As regards countries like Pakistan whatever anyone writes in these columns I can assure you America is safe.
There is no such thing as "poor", "poverty" in US as one would associate these words. The concept of poor in US is less wealthy.
There are really poor homeless people in US and surprisingly community social organizations take care of them, while the state provides for food, housing, child and health support for those who want it.
Romney is misquoted and the author fell into the trap. All said, what does it matter to PAK, the current policy will continue.
@c.m.sarwar:
You either are misinformed or very much out of step with the majority who post here. They wish America harm. If so much is dependent upon America I would say PAK has a very strange way to trying to culivate relations.
Romney can not help it. He also "like firing people"..Support Ron Paul!
@Riaz Haq: I think if the aspiring candidate had any feelings for the poor he would have said that 'I am concerned about the very poor because the safety net in place has failed to live up to its ideals and the poor are becoming poorer'!! In that sense the writer is correct to highlight the statement.
I think it's disingenuous to offer a partial quote of Mitt Romney. Here's what he really said: "“I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I'll fix it.”
If anyone knows anything about the US and makes an honest assessment, it'll be obvious that the poor do have a safety net to take care of their needs through various social welfare programs like general assistance, section 8 housing assistance, food stamps, Medicaid etc. Romney is saying he'll fix it if it's not enough.
These programs are not available to the middle class who are losing their jobs and their homes. So clearly Romney and others have to be much more worried about the unemployed and homeless middle class than the poor.
@Harry Stone: What happens in America has massive impact on the world,particularly on countries like Pakistan ,completely dependent on America.\For us in Pakistan America is not 'another nation.'The writer is rightly alarmed about drastic change in attitudes of ruling political parties of America.If they lose concern for their own poor what will they do to the rest of the world?
Sir may I know how this related to Pakistan, don't you think Pakistani leaders have done and said worst things then what mr Romney has said.christian America well arent you a citizen of Islamic republic of Pakistan why is it good for Pakistan to be Islamic and not so for Americans. Dear sir when will local body elections be held in country? When will the courts in your stop assuming extra constitutional role? When will your economy start looking up? What about your countries social indices ? See this the reason one should focus on uplifting ones own country before running to correct other countries problem
One would think there are enough poor in PAK to worry about than to spend time worrying about the poor in another nation.
This says a lot with what is wrong in PAK
Nicely articulated but I think a little unnecessarily alarmist. In Americas two party system differences have always been so, sometimes more, sometimes less. The good thing is that the system has a built in mechanism to correct the imbalance if it tends to get out of hand