M.P. Nolan: Mitt was a taker, not a giver
Published: Thursday, November 15, 2012 at 3:29 p.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, November 15, 2012 at 3:29 p.m.
Now that the election is over we can give a closer look at one of the two candidates, and I refer to to Mitt Romney. Most of those who are in politics or go into it have in some way given something back to the community. This can be say military service or work in state or local government or charitable activities. But try as I might I cannot find any examples of any of the Romney family having done any of these.
For example, how could this large family have gone through WWII, Korea, Vietnam and the the more recent wars and not in some way participated? Yes, Romney was a one-term governor of Massachusetts and he did work (for a salary) on the Salt Lake Olympics. But there's no way these activities can be considered "giving back to the community."
And so we must conclude that Romney is a "taker" rather than a "giver." His vast fortune was made by "taking" from the U.S. and then investing it overseas, much in those countries he attacked in the election (China is a prime example). Even his titheing to Salt Lake is a tax deduction and is then re-invested in hotel chains. His refusal to make his tax returns available would imply that his minimal tax on $25 million yearly while not unlawful would raise ethical questions.
We should remember Romney then as the "taker" he is.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.