Mitt Romney has got to stop taking out his wallet on the campaign trail. After a Satuday rally in Sumter, South Carolina, the candidate attracted attention by handing a wad of cash to Ruth Williams, a loyal follower who he’d met earlier that week under rather odd circumstances.
Last Wednesday, Williams, a struggling South Carolinian who lost her job in October, spotted Romney’s campaign bus on the highway. Caring for a sick son and unable to pay her electricity bill, Williams was inspired.
“I was on the highway praying and said, ‘God, tell me how to get [my] lights on, and I pulled up to a stop sign and his bus was there,’” Williams told CNN. She then followed the vehicle to an airport where Romney’s aides invited her to meet the candidate.
Recognizing Williams after Saturday’s rally, Romney shook her hand, then handed her a wad of bills—$50 or $60 said and aide, to help pay her bills.
Though kind, the publicly staged handout was a weird move for Romney, not unlike last week, when he expressed his views on healthcare saying, “I like to fire people.” For one, handouts can be a bit condescending. Williams is a politically interested, if not slightly potty woman struggling to make ends meet in a troubled economy—not a panhandler.
That said, money is money, and electricity is a pretty immediate need. The exchange could have been passed off as odd but ultimately nice if Romney’s party didn’t pride itself on not giving handouts to the poor.
Just one month ago, during a speech in Conway, New Hampshire, Romney said, “I know there are some people who run for president that will say, ‘Hey, I’m going to give you more. I’ll find a way to give you some more. I’ll change the rules and give you more money. I’m not that guy. If there’s a competition for who will give you the most free stuff, go vote for that guy.”
Romney is outstandingly rich. He has multiple homes, and an estimated net worth of about $200 million. That’s rich enough to give $60 to a stranger and not feel the pinch. The candidate surely doesn’t oppose individuals being charitable, but after a presidential rally, when he’s supposed to be representing his party’s values, is an ill-advised time to hand out Jeffersons. By giving cash to Williams, Romney was silently admitting that rich people who can afford it ought to help out poor, out-of-work, desperate fellow citizens who can’t pay their electricity bills.
Romney can’t stop reminding us that he’s cuckoo and rich, nor that he’s helplessly tone deaf about his wealth and status. But more than anything, Romney can’t stop reminding us that he’s a kind of a Democrat.
[Via CNN]
January 16, 2012 at 12:38 pm, Anonymous said:
Carmel Lobello has completely missed the point. Conservatives do not believe in the government giving handouts to the poor at the expense of taxpayers. Most conservatives do, however, believe in charity- private individuals doing nice things and even giving financial or other means to people, without the expectation that it continue indefinitely.
Governmental handouts cripple the recipient because they continue to come, removing the incentive to solve one’s own problems. A one-time kindness does not have that effect.
January 16, 2012 at 1:09 pm, Anonymous said:
The story is too fishy… she was led to Romney by inspiration? And Mitt just happened to have less than the one hundred dollar bills on him he usually carries? Romney is not a kind hearted soul, this sounds like something cooked up to off set the complaints about Romney being a Vulture Capitalist.
January 16, 2012 at 1:13 pm, Wweston said:
Unbelievable. The author of this piece assumes that conservatives are against helping the poor. That could not be further from the truth. It’s called charity. Charity is different than the government mandated redistribution of wealth. And the distinction is important because while Romney may have helped this lady in the short term, she is not “entitled” to Romney’s money. I think most people would do the same for this lady if they were in a position to. Also, this was not a “staged” campaign event. From every report on this in the media, this author is the first to state this. A reporter witnessed the exchange, and then later asked the lady what it was about. Go back to journalism classes at the community college.
January 16, 2012 at 1:18 pm, Anonymous said:
This articles faulty deduction is that conservatives do not want to give money to those in need. This is so not true. What is true is that conservatives do not want government to tell them they have to give to the poor. It is a choice and given that choice most “give” freely and from the heart and that is what gives strength to this nation. The idea that giving should be legislated is the issue. It is should not.
January 16, 2012 at 8:19 pm, DoYouReadEVER? said:
Carmel Lobello, do you really think you’re a good writer?
Please don’t write articles on anything that requires intellect. I hope you’re not getting paid to write.
January 17, 2012 at 5:42 am, mystere said:
OH COME ON! GET REAL! Mitt Romney did what Mormons do for others: he had compassion for her, and helped her. His late father George taught him to look out for others. George Romney limited his salary to $100,000 when he was CEO at American Motors Corporation. The elder Romney taught Mitt the value of a dollar, and how to look out for others. I’m not a Mormon; I don’t share their belief in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, but I admire their work ethic in helping people who are down and out. Mitt Romney gave his own money to help a down and out woman out of his compassion for her. 0bama, on the site other hand, used taxpayers’ money to buy a woman a house during the 2008 campaign, not a cent from his own stash! You conveniently omitted that fact. Oh, and how about that Halloween Party 0bama threw at the White House seccretly at taxpayers’ expense last year?
January 17, 2012 at 2:30 pm, Rockerdancsi said:
Conservatives love to claim that they are charitable, and that that somehow makes up for shutting down attempts to really help people by funding education and medicine. The only reason this woman got help was because she vigilantly followed a rich guy around, and he decided that giving in this case could benefit him by making a scene out of it. There won’t always be a rich guy around to help the single mother with her bills. On the other hand we could have a government that provides a safety net for when someone does fall on hard times to make it easier for him or her to get back on his or her feet.
And enough of this “entitlement” crap. Yes, there is a sense of entitlement in this country, but it does NOT come from the working poor. It seems to come from young, privileged (gens x, y).It’s kind of a slap in the face to say to someone who can’t find work with a sick son like Williams that she, herself is to blame for her child’s sickness or her inability to pay for it, or that he, her son, shouldn’t be taken care of because they “remove the incentive to solve one’s own problems.”
January 19, 2012 at 12:12 pm, Reason said:
Romney also gives 10% of all his gross income to the Mormon church. For a guy who wears underwear he considers to have supernatural powers, don’t assume anything he does will make sense.
January 19, 2012 at 12:12 pm, Reason said:
Romney also gives 10% of all his gross income to the Mormon church. For a guy who wears underwear he considers to have supernatural powers, don’t assume anything he does will make sense.
February 04, 2012 at 10:06 am, Goto_Jail_Mitt said:
Mitt Romney giving money to a woman on campaign trail is a clear violation of The United States Code.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 210 : US Code – Section 210: Offer to procure appointive public office
Whoever pays or offers or promises any money or thing of value,
to any person, firm, or corporation in consideration of the use or
promise to use any influence to procure any appointive office or
place under the United States for any person, shall be fined under
this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/11/210
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/210.html
http://corpuslegalis.com/us/code/title18/offer-to-procure-appointive-public-office