The other side of Romney

Okay this is kind of a cheap shot, as far I know Mitt Romney doesn't wear that much makeup.

Now that the video of the Romney fundraiser is out, I think people will have a more clear idea of what the man stands for. He spoke openly, honestly and didn't veil his message in code. Before yesterday the political argument centered around the privileged 1% verse the 99% or the rest of us; now there's a new number to consider -the 47% of the government dependent.

So who is that 47%. One of them is my brother-in-law who has been forced into early retirement. He was a pipe fitter for three decades. It was hard work and because of things like repetitive motion injuries the bones in his spine became arthritic. In the end half a dozen vertebra where replaced with four titanium rods and the baked bones of a cadaver. Through past union contracts that provided health care and a pension, as well as social security benefits, my sister and brother-in-law have been able to keep their home. It's not a luxurious lifestyle but it's dignified one and earned government benefits kept them from destitution.

Another member of the 47% is one of my neighbors. He had a company in the construction trade. A contractor that built a dozen luxury homes on speculation stiffed my neighbor for a lot money -and then the housing crash came in 2007. They have four children and they are the model of a traditional Christian family. They were also on food stamps for two years. For them it's a huge mark of shame. I find it odd that he blames Obama for all his problems even though his problems started long before Obama was even nominated to run for president.

Other members of the 47% would be my elderly parents (both in their 80's) who get social security benefits. When social security was first devised back in the 1930's the average life expectancy was about 68. Look what happens when you give senior citizens a little money and some proper medical care -they live longer. Social security gets criticized because it actually works. Though there are plenty of people who think the program should be cut and hope that future generations will either work until they die or just quietly die.

It's all about money. If you are rich enough not to need any government assistance then you might be resentful for paying for it. We usually have no problem helping our fellow citizens when floods, tornadoes and 'acts of God" strike but can be pretty cold-hearted when a factory closes or some kind of economic disaster happens. The question of who deserves aid becomes an interesting Rorschach test of personal prejudices.

My youngest son is taking an AP class in economics. We were talking about socialism. Socialism comes in many varieties but all of them try to act as an insurance policy that spreads out both the risks and benefits of  living in that society. Since socialism can be a dirty word not everything that is socialism gets called that.

Part of this upcoming election is about who are the"maker and takers" in our society. Everyone wants to see themselves as a maker but if we are truly honest we are also takers too. We all benefit from government and collective efforts; and we can have a more prosperous society by expanding the social contract instead of shrinking it.

I have not warmed up to Mitt Romney. I don't dislike him because he's been successful. Making money is a talent but it is only one talent that makes up a person. What sticks in my mind most is when the Romney's were on vacation and they strapped the family dog in his carrier on the roof of the car. The dog's safety and comfort didn't really come to mind. Even after the dog vomited and soiled himself halfway through the trip, Mitt just hosed the dog down and put him back in the carrier.

Some people look out on a landscape and see the trees -others see the forest. Romney sees only the forest, he's a man with a big vision that also seems to make him tone deaf to the needs of ordinary individuals.