Was Governor Romney Effective in Massachusetts? Pundits Should Find out!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-ready-for-his-close-up/2012/04/27/gIQAR1nImT_story.html

Patrick B. Pexton deserves a banner headline with his Ombudsman column link above.

Pexton writes about a survey he initiated of Governor Romney's past record as the political leader of Massachusetts. Pexton rightly says Romney's past performance as governor is a good indicator of how effective a President he would be, if elected.  Pexton read 700 articles published in The Boston Globe about Romney's one term as Massachusetts governor.

Moreover, Pexton recommends a journalist inquiry in the style of the late David Broder, asking reporters and pundits to go to Massachusetts, to ask the people how they perceived Romney's one term as governor.

Pexton's op ed summarizes the quality of Governor Romney's one term as Massachusetts governor was mediocre at best and inconsistent at its worst, with the emphasis on the latter.

Pexton writes:  "Romney, for example, is nothing if not agile. (Julie speak says agile is a euphemism for 'inconsistent'.) In his gubernatorial campaign, (Romney) tried many messages before finally landing on themes along these lines: 'I fixed the Salt Lake City Olympics and I’ll fix the patronage and budget deficits of Massachusetts. I’ll veto any tax increases. I support the statewide ballot initiative to abolish bilingual education. And I’m the only guy who stands in the way of an entrenched Gang of Three — Democrats controlling the governor’s chair, and House and Senate." (Yawn!  Does this rhetoric sound boringly familiar?)

Pexton goes on:  "(Romney)...also, in the final three weeks, ran a relentless and expensive negative TV ad campaign against his opponent, Shannon P. O’Brien, just like he did this year against GOP rivals Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and others. Voters interviewed by the Globe in 2002 said they couldn’t wait for the election to be over and called it the most negative campaign for governor they could remember."
(OMG! Even children will be exposed to this horrid political negativity - they'll grow up believing all politics is negative.  There must be safety equipment or computer chips we can purchase to protect us from the same smelly-same old, heard during the nasty primary election!)

My point in this blog :  Romney gets a C-minus grade for his one term as Massachusetts Governor.

Our country can't trade the experience of President Obama, who gets some high marks for moving forward on many challenging initiatives,  for a risky Romney, who's term as Massachusetts governor was inconsistently mediocre.

Somebody in the world of political pundits must be assigned to Massachusetts, to ask people, many of them descendants of the original T-Party activists in Boston Harbor, whether or not they like Romney Care- the model for "Obama-care", aka, health care reform.  Pundits must also review the 700 articles in the Boston Globe about Governor Romney's administration, to evaluate his one term administration.

I agree with Mr. Paxton - A David Broder approach is needed.  Wake up America! Don't let the next president be elected based upon the decadent amounts of money spent on negative ads.  Instead, let's be thoughtful - let's evaluate the past performance of both candidates and create a side by side check list - the one with the higher grade deserves re-election.  I suspect President Obama's accomplishments to shine through the expensive smut the one term Governor Romney is bound to heave in Obama's re-election direction.