I’m confused by Charles Krauthammer’s latest piece. He accuses the Republicans of committing suicide, but his reasoning seems pretty flawed. His first accusation is that the president is deflecting criticism on the economy by talking about wealth inequality.
If you can’t run on stewardship or policy, how do you win reelection?
Create an entirely new narrative. Push an entirely new issue. Change the subject from your record and your ideology, from massive debt and overreaching government, to fairness and inequality. Make the election a referendum on which party really cares about you, which party will stand up to the greedy rich who have pillaged the 99 percent and robbed the middle class of hope.
This charge, too, is straightforward: The Republicans serve as the protectors and enablers of the plutocrats, the exploiters who have profited while America suffers. They put party over nation, fat cat donors over people, political power over everything.
It’s all rather uncomplicated, capturing nicely the Manichaean core of the Occupy movement — blame the rich, then soak them. But the real beauty of this strategy is its adaptability. While its first target was the do-nothing, protect-the-rich Congress, it is perfectly tailored to fit the liabilities of Republican front-runner Mitt Romney — plutocrat, capitalist, 1 per center.
So far, Krauthammer has me nodding my head. Yes, he has pretty well described the president’s and the Democrat’s strategy. Yes, it is straightforward. Yes, it is perfectly tailored to pillory Mitt Romney. Obviously, the Republicans must be committing suicide if they’re going to nominate Romney, right?
But that’s not where Krauthammer is going. Instead of reaching the conclusion that the Democrats have a winning strategy and the Republicans would be crazy to nominate a plutocrat, he blames the not-Romney candidates for warning of the dangers.
Then came the most remarkable political surprise since the 2010 midterm: The struggling Democratic class-war narrative is suddenly given life and legitimacy by . . . Republicans! Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry make the case that private equity as practiced by Romney’s Bain Capital is nothing more than vulture capitalism looting companies and sucking them dry while casually destroying the lives of workers.
Richard Trumka of the AFL-CIO nods approvingly. Michael Moore wonders aloud whether Gingrich has stolen his staff. The assault on Bain/Romney instantly turns Obama’s class-war campaign from partisan attack into universal complaint.
Suddenly Romney’s wealth, practices and taxes take center stage. And why not? If leading Republicans are denouncing rapacious capitalism that enriches the 1 percent while impoverishing everyone else, should this not be the paramount issue in a campaign occurring at a time of economic distress?
None of the Republican candidates, even Ron Paul, are espousing policies that would stem the tide of wealth inequality in this country. In fact, all of the candidates are proposing policies that would give a nitro-boost to wealth inequality. But, among the candidates, only Mitt Romney is a true plutocrat. He’s the only one who truly embodies the rape of the middle class. The others are pretenders.
Krauthammer complains that Gingrich and Santorum (and Perry) have lent force and credibility to the attacks on Romney, but the nominating process is a vetting process. If Romney can’t defend vulture capitalism in the Republican primaries, what chance does he have of defending it in the general election? If he’s afraid to show his tax returns to Republicans, what lays in store for the summer?
The people who are trying to prevent Romney from being the nominee aren’t doing it purely for self-interest. They don’t agree that he is the most electable. And they’re making that point by anticipating the attacks Romney will face from the Democrats. Krauthammer should be watching to see how Romney is handling these attacks rather than complaining that the attacks are coming from fellow Republicans.