Skip to main content

Why it's a really bad time to be a rich, white male politician Comments

It's a bad time to be a rich white conservative leaning male with political aspirations. This is because the era of rich white male dominated politics is over. Yes, it is about race, it's also about a long-running historical narrative, a backlash spanning generations, and the changing demographics of American society. Mitt Romney's failed campaign is one for the textbooks, for this very reason. Continue Reading

1 - 10 of 34 Comments

  1. vance
    2 years ago

    Rob, Caesar did convert souls. He got your vote.

  2. Cathy S
    2 years ago

    I think all the writer was saying is that the GOP needs to wise up and see that the old model no longer works. We are no longer a nation that thinks old white guys are the only answer. In today's America, anyone truly can become president.
    The GOP misstepped when they insisted that Romney was our candidate. While I believe him to be a good and decent man, and would have made a decent leader, we the people could never get fully behind him. Over and over again, the complaints I heard - from both sides - all surrounded the fact that he was a rich old white guy who represented the establishment - just as this article states. The GOP did nothing to dispel that belief. When it comes down to it, that's why Romney lost.

  3. Ken
    2 years ago

    This election is not about race or money. These were never the priorities. Almost 500 years ago, there were Europeans who were disatisfied with corruption in the Roman Catholic Church. Rather than work from the problem from within, they rebelled and broke away from the CHurch. They started new sects of Christianity and Protestantism was born. As Europeans moved West and into the Americas, the founded a country and developed a Constitution which supposedly gave all people equal opportunities to practice their religious beliefs freely. But the truth is religious freedom was mainly restricted bo particular sects of Protestant Christian thinking. Coupled with this narrow point of view were such concepts as "manifest destiny" and the "Protestant Work Ethic" which supposedly justified the slaughter of Native American Civilizations and the commerical colonization of many places in the world. Many Roman Catholic Americans, who may practice their faith on Sunday practice this "Protestant Work Ethci" in their business practices during the week.
    Why did President Obama win the election again? Because it is God's will. God put President Obama back into office to expedite something that has bothered Him long enough. God is tired of the Church being divided after 500 years. He took the very "heart and soul of Protestantism (the American Protestant Work Ethic and Manifest Destiny) and subjected it to a secular socialist administration. God wants the Church to re-unite under the Eucharist again. If Protestants and Roman Catholics won't unite against the spread of terrorism, secularism, and hatred for Christ, what will it take?

  4. Joy Bradford
    2 years ago

    Romney lost because he is one of the 1%. The 99% of hard working Americans could not relate to him and vice versa. He flip-flopped on everything he stood for in 2004. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read between the lines. He pointed the finger at the 47% of "moochers" but he pays less taxes than most folks. He says that he lost because President Obama gave "gifts" away, but he would be all for his rich friends not paying any taxes at all. And as for the 47%, does he want those retired people over 70 to start paying taxes again? What about the disabled veterans who cannot work again due to losing a leg or two? Should they pay more? All this from a man who sends jobs overseas but he got rich off of that practice. Only rich guys can relate to him and you need more than that to win an election.

  5. Rockerbabe
    2 years ago

    One of the main reasons Romney failed in his quest for the Presidency, was his and the GOP's ongoing war on women and their rights. Men have not learned that speaking about rape and its aftermath with such callous, crass and disrespect only fuels the desire to get rid of such folks. Women in this country are learning that they do not have to backdown when their rights to their own agency and bodily autonomy are at stake. America is changing and the GOP is not giving due deference to this change or its ramifications. I no longer vote for republicans - they can't be trusted on any level to protect the common good.

  6. Rob
    2 years ago

    Romney lost for a very simple reason, no ideas. We've been down the tax cutting deregulating road before and it lead to where we are now. You can't bring those old ideas to the table, couple it with statements that disparage half the country and expect for people to rally around you. The social issues gimmick is now being turned out for what it is and folks aren't buying it anymore. You can't flip flop all over the place and expect folks to trust you. You can't go through a primary process, say all sorts of outlandish things and expect folks to take you seriously when you try and walk them back.

    I know as Catholics we must stay engaged with politics, but we had better get much more serious about the work of the church if we ever hope to turn the tide. Caesar is not going to covert souls....that is our job.

  7. vance
    2 years ago

    Bridgette, I've been asking some of the same questions you are asking. I blame the 50% Catholic Vote for Obama and his Party of Death and Deceit on our own church leadership. No president or politician has attacked the Catholic Church like Obama, yet the majority of the Bishops said nothing about it to their parishioners. As a result, the Faithful received Holy Communion and ran straight out to Vote for Obama and every other Death Party politicians.

  8. judy claar
    2 years ago

    What a country! Bias. Racist. Non-religious. Boy, we are going down hill fast to read this article.

  9. Rush Glick
    2 years ago

    If the author's premise were valid, why would the Kennedy's - at last count, white and very rich - have been so revered by those on the political left, including "minorities"? How is this still true of so many politicians on the left? in fact, I am hard pressed to bring to mind ANY left-leaning white male politician of major stature who would not be classified as wealthy - especially when using the "Obama scale" of determining when one is "rich." And campaign money? I am pretty secure in my wager that it will turn out that the Obama campaign was the winner in that race, too.

    In spite of the sad dose of politically correct poison that was dished out in this raciocentric article, race - the only weapon that the Obama campaign really had in its arsenal - was not the only reason why Mr. Romney lost (as did our beleaguered nation, in my humble view). In more rational times, virtually ANY candidate of the most meager stature would have defeated a first term president who carried the excessive negative baggage as does Mr. Obama. We need only go back in time to the 1980 election to see how a similar sitting president was given his walking papers by the American people. One thing we had then but which has diminished through the intervening years and nears extinction today is our nation's "Greatest Generation." These are the folks who, having experienced the ravages and war, pulled this country's collective fat out of the fire when called upon to do do on the battle field or at the ballot box. Sadly, we are on our own, now. Tragically, subsequent generations, who have been fed a steady diet of America-bashing and the trashing and destruction of everything that comprises our cultural foundation through our education system, news media, entertainment media, now comprise an ever-growing voting bloc. This, combined with the cultural scales now reaching the tipping point where the "takers" outnumber the "makers," I fear that we will never again see a candidate of either sex (Remember how poorly Sarah Palin - a woman - was treated?) or any race (How was Herbert Cain - a black man - treated?) elected to the presidency who dares to speak honestly about this or other related issues from a conservative perspective.

    One need only look to my own state of California, which was held up as something of an ideal in the article, to see our nation's looming future. In California we now have a virtual one-party system. In California, the once-Golden State, we are in financial free fall. Those of us who are among the "producers" are the highest taxed people in the country and businesses and companies (jobs!) are fleeing to more business friendly neighboring states. Here the "takers" now hold sway, beholden to their allies the unions and union-supported politicians (Talk about MONEY!).

    One of my greatest sadnesses is to see once again how many "Catholics" have bought into all that goes into "progressive" politics. Why, with all that is known - no thanks to the complicit media - about Mr. Obama and those who surround him and those who comprise his party (no, not one of THOSE many parties that he attends with regularity that he flies to aboard Air Force One - OUR plane and OUR fuel and OUR Secret Service and staff - you know the party of which I speak), how is it that a MAJORITY of "Catholics" once again cast their precious vote for a man and a political party who tread a path that opposes the strongest held values of the Church? To some degree, I hold the Church herself to at least partial blame. Just what is it that makes up the concept of "social justice' that is espoused by the Church? How many "Catholics" used that doctrine as an excuse to support a man and a party whose values (anyone recall the dubious voice vote on the floor of the Democratic Convention to allow God back into the party platform?) are contrary to Christian core values? The racially charged, politically correct, "we are on the right side of history" article we just read is illustrative of this, I believe. The Church in this country, from all I can tell, chastises those who espouse the notion that a sovereign nation needs to control its own borders and regulate immigration. Mr. Romney was, as is his party, in favor of immigration - LEGAL immigration. Does the Church favor open borders? How can that bode well for any sovereign nation? The Church seemed to feel that Obama Care was great, until the Bishops discovered that there were strings attached in the form of the HHS mandate (Surprise!!!). There seems to be an underlying current of belief that the government - through our taxes - should take care of the needs of the poor. I'm sorry, but are we not called to do that as individuals? Tip of the iceberg aside, is it any wonder that our nation stands poised to take a blind leap into the abyss?

    Has God given us over to our own lusts and desires? Has God turned His back on a people and a nation upon which he once - in spite of the anti-past, anti-tradition, anti-that-which-was-once-held-in-high-regard PC rhetoric contained in the article in question - "shed his grace"? The events occurring all around us and throughout the world at break-neck speed, the once-inconceivable alterations in our cultural and moral fabric which today lies in tatters under the jack boots of so many "enlightened" feet may offer an answer...

  10. Bridgette
    2 years ago

    I was so disgusted reading this article I could not even finish it. How could this be on a Catholic website. How could any Catholic vote for a man who, as a senator, voted in favor of late third trimester abortions? How could any Catholic vote for a man who is a socialist, marxist, an ideology which in no way conforms to the Catholic church's view on social justice? How could any Catholic judge a man because of his skin color and his wealth? How would any Catholic charities survive without benefiting from the benevolence of wealthy parishioners? I am sick of the way progressive liberal ideology has infiltrated our schools, churches and government and I think all Catholics who support this culture of death should be excommunicated. I am ashamed that so many Catholics rejected this white, decent family man whose wealth has been generously shared with many people. By the way, a much greater % of his income went to charity than his hypocritical opponent. How does this author justify the hypocrisy of Obama asking us all to cut back on our consumption while he takes his family on lavish vacations funded by the citizens of the USA. He rules like a dictator!!!

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Daily Readings

Reading 1, Ezekiel 18:21-28
'If the wicked, however, renounces all the sins he has ... Read More

Psalm, Psalms 130:1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8
[Song of Ascents] From the depths I call to you, Yahweh: Lord, ... Read More

Gospel, Matthew 5:20-26
'For I tell you, if your uprightness does not surpass that of ... Read More

Saint of the Day

February 27 Saint of the Day

St. Leander of Seville
February 27: St. Leander of Seville, Bishop (Feast - February 27th) Leander ... Read More