Mitt, racist? Nah. But, given the history of his church, there is irony to the first woman governor of that state being pushed aside by the first Mormon governor. And to the possibility that the first black president is defeated by that same Mormon.

I do think Mitt has some Mormon traditionalist notions when it comes to women.

So, I think it only appropriate that, in 2016, the first Mormon president gets defeated by HRC or perhaps by the first black lesbian president.

He defeated the chosen one?

Oh, no!

The racist bastard!

She was not that “swift” as governor, and Mitt had every right to run against her. The GOP establishment in the state was backing him. So, she took the hint and dropped out.

After Mitt became governor, it was her turn to have her official portrait displayed in the state capitol building. Mitt attended the ceremony but declined to speak. Real class!

So, Mitt’s biography one day may say that among his noteworthy contributions to history were that he bumped the first woman governor of his state (one of his own party) and then defeated the first black president.

The Governor before him had a higher percentage of women in “high-ranking positions”.

The Governor after him had a higher percentage of women in “high-ranking positions”.

The state of Massachusetts (from what I can tell) did NOT melt down into some shambles of enviro-economic meltdown as a result of the female-biased hiring decisions made by the Governors that preceded and succeeded “Herr Romnuts”.

Facts matter, even for Cheney types (like yourself) who spout that “deficits don’t matter”.

Publius, I’ll pass along your draft to Mitt’s speech writers and pray that they use them, verbatim. Should be a real crowd pleaser with women!

If he answered truthfully the answer would of gone a little like this……..

“Equal pay for equal work is exactly what I believe in. Due to the liberal state I governed I was forced to search high and low for females and minorities to fill certain jobs. In many cases I had to hire people that were not qualified, but they did fit into the race and gender class that I needed to “diversify” my cabinet. I believe that a woman has the right to demand equal pay for equal work, if the employer does not recognize the work and will not compensate her what she believes is right then the female has the right to find another job, the employer will be at a loss. I believe that sometimes women give birth to babies. When that happens usually a woman will choose to stay home and raise her family. As strange as it sounds I agree with this decision. I am businessman, I have spent my life in the private sector, and it is my belief that if an employer discriminates and chooses not to hire qualified capable employees then they will suffer. Its called the Free Market.

Please Candy, don’t interrupt I am almost done. As for your original question; what do I plan to do about pay inequality? Absolutely nothing! This is a trumped up issue created by the Left Wing Media to get me to say something that pisses off the female voters. There is no place in our Constitution that gives the federal government the power to tell businesses who to hire let alone what wage to pay them.”

“The past has to be acknowledged but not by showering goodies on the descendants of the mistreated.”

The word “descendants” implies ancient history. We are less than 50 years removed from lynchings, Jim Crow, legally mandated segregation, Willie Mays not being able to buy a house in “liberal” SF, socially acceptable use of the “N” word, prohibited inter-marriage etc. There are still people around who think all that was just fine and politicians who are ignorant enough to say that “slavery was the best thing that ever happened to blacks.” “Showering goodies” may not be the solution to the deeply entrenched problems that afflict those “descendants” and society at large as a direct result of the past. But I don’t think we’ve made it to the “we’re all equal now, so get over it” stage either.