When You're Hot You're Hot, When You're Not You're Mitt

Wait, wait.  Before I get into the whole Romney mishegas more than I want to—but as much as a have to, being a political blogger, can I just start with the running mate story?  M’kay. Here’s a perfectly well-programmed Randroid getting booed for lying in front of people who are old enough to know better than he probably ever will:

I understand his own mama was in the audience. and some of the seniors walked out on his ass. Somehow, Lyin’ Ryan and his mam benefited from government survivor benefits just enough for him to want to fiddle with them to make them dependent on market forces and less available to people who could use them.  Obama is leading Romney in Wisconsin per the polls.  That’s all I have to say about all that.

But when I’m not mentioning that Romney relied on a rock star privatization/supply side ideologue to be his running mate to give him a boost with a base that distrusts him—why don’t I point out that they still don’t love him enough to refrain from talking shit about him?  Because Herman Cain just did:

“Stupid people are ruining America, and we’ve got to take it back,” he said.
Cain told members of the media after the speech that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s recent “47 percent” comment was a “non-story” being blown out of proportion by the media. But Cain said he would have been doing better if he was the nominee, saying that he’d probably have a “substantial lead” on President Barack Obama at this point.
“The reason is quite simple: I have some depth to my ideas,” he said.

Yeah. The guy who gave us the “999” plan and said he wouldn’t sign any bill more than three pages long, believes he has more depth to his ideas.  Because, of course, he would handle the Libya situation that much better.  And of course he wouldn’t be as especially crass in his language about the poor in America.  By which I mean—seriously, whatever. The Hermanator isn’t running for president—Mitt is.

So, I think that Romney had a Friday doc-dump of his 2011 return and a notarized statement about his previous 20 years of returns is one ginormous subject-changing.30-second over the pants handjob. I expect there to be more educated opinions than mine, but I would say that even if he paid taxes as attested, he did release the info when he said he wouldn’t—didn’t he? Huh? Right. And folks are picking over it, such as it is, huh? Also right.

Does it distract from whether he’s still a bloody awful candidate with a rotten campaign going on?  Not especially. It’s like proof of it.  Cheers.

(X-posted at Rumproast.)