. . . We already know Mitt Romney is rich; rich people can buy nice things that you and I can’t afford; that sort of advantage of being rich creates an incentive to create wealth that makes society better off.
[. . .]
Anyway, it’s not like Romney is a John Edwards hypocrite lecturing about poverty and inequality while spending campaign money on a mistress or an Al Gore hypocrite lecturing about the environment while leaving a huge carbon footprint or a Barack Obama hypocrite taking advantage of a backscratching land deal with Tony Rezko to be able to live in his own big house. One wishes Romney would stop treating the wealth as an embarrassment, rather than a signal of his previous success.
The San Diego news story is a good example of the phenomenon. Why is the story “Romney is so rich, his home has a lobbyist” rather than “California makes it so hard to create jobs that actually make things, that Romney’s home needs a lobbyist”?