Insidious? How's that? Because it tells the truth? You don't even make an attempt to argue against any of the points in the story, just continue with your inane waaaaayyy too funny observation. Don't you ever have anything intelligent to add?

There are rich people who want to make life better for everyone, like the Kennedys, and there are rich people who want to make life better for themselves. It's pretty easy to tell the difference, just look at their tax policies and their attitude toward spending money on public education, publicly funding health care, and what kinds of things they subsidize (corporations who produce corn syrup, or people who need to feed their children something healthy?).

Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple. -- Barry Switzer

The part that came from his family, was that he grew up with a married mother and father, who instilled in him the values of education, hard work, and the obligation to give back to society. The money is nice, but the bigger picture means so much more. For all the kids who are raised by single mothers, who value "things" more than education, who feel the need to take from society-rather than give back to it, the problem is far more than a lack of money. NEW PARAGRAPH: The point about Romney being self made is just to contrast him with the wealthy liberals-like Kennedy and Kerry, who were born into wealth and married into it. BUt money aside, both men were raised with the right value system.

Romney's father benefited from welfare when his family came here from Mexico after his grandfather's polygamist colony left Mexico for the US. Look it up...those families benefited from a 100K refugee fund. The father got government assistance and hit it big. The son started on third base and thinks he hit a triple!

System is way to funny and apparently wealthy, but I took the "third base" line from Kate!

Go sock it in, Farah! You write like a Comp 101 freshman. Can't you think of some other inconsequential subject? Who cares?

This is a waste of print space. I have no clue what the issue is. did he analyze all similar cases such as romney's and found others who were not as successful or less successful or not successful? and what would this mean?

Back when he was pretending to be a moderate Republican in Massachusetts, Romney gave an interview about his life so far. At one point, trying to burnish his "just plain folks" credentials, he talked about how early in his marriage, he and his wife had found it necessary to "dip into the principal [of their investments]". So, at least we know this isn't a new position for Mitt, unlike so many of his.

Well said, Kate. It reminds me of the following quote: The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good. Samuel Johnson

It is not a "non-issue" when Romney himself continually professes to have "earned everything" he has. This is BS of the highest degree.

The issue is self-awareness of how Mitt achieved what he did. He rightly credits his hard work and business acumen, but leaves out the huge advantages and head start he got from his father and his background. He has a very selective view of how he achieved success, and without acknowledging his advantages, how can he be trusted to lay the groundwork for a society where so many people do not have those advantages? He and his wife need a serious reality check. Selling stock to entertain is not a hardship. Making $400K from speaking engagements is not "not much" income. When Romney tries to sound like the common man, suggesting he once worried about losing a job, he comes across as completely phony. Compare his, for example, to the Kennedy's - also with huge advantages and wealth, but with a real ability to connect to average Americans.

In this statist dominated society, where allegiance to the state have supplanted church, community and family, most who grow up with two parents in the same household, work hard, and do likewise, were born on third base. Conversely, those who never grew up in an intact household, and dependent upon the state for what daddy and mommy should have been giving you, seldom get to first base.

Interesting comments. Why do we feel such disdain for anyone blessed to be born with any advantage in life. Jealousy and envy will eat away your soul. Is it a Christian virtue to condemn someone born with intellectual gifts or physical beauty? Could this column be a political tool used to bring down some candidate whose party the writer disagrees with? If it be so, then that horrible sin of claiming to be "self-made" seems easily forgiven. Many men start with what seems an advantage in life and fall into deep pits of failure and mediocrity. Success should be recognized and valued in a political candidate who we hope possesses the ability to get beyond the "third base" he started on. Such small minded meaness as exhibited by this writer deserve no plaudits.

Excellent. Add in that the majority of personal bankruptcies are due to a loss of job or major illness.

There is no disdain here or jealousy. Good for Mitt that he has done well. It's a matter of recognizing what contributed to his success, and conversely, where people don't have those advantages, what public policies should be put into place so that those without those advantages have a shot at achieving like good fortune.

I applaud those who succeed on their own merits, hard work and willingness to give others who are less fortunate a chance. Education is the true equalizer. That said, I don't applaud the elitest exclusionary element who think they're better than others because of the caliber of their education.

Well thought-out. I've always believed that it's not how much money someone has or where they stand on the social hierarchy. It's whether they consider themselves inherently better and look with disdain on those who have less. Anyone who makes it "big" should be looking at a homeless person and saying something like "There but for the grace of God..." Some do, but most don't.

That was the best you could come up with, eh missy?

I agree that this will be a year of class warfare in the campaigns. A point to emphasize is that some rich do not recognize the "welfare" (benefits) that they receive from the government -- not only military protection, but highway systems, a secure banking system, water and sewerage, education of their workers, and so on. It is clear that a big business uses more government benefits than individuals. Paying higher taxes is the outcome of careful thought on this, and at least Warren Buffet understands. Other "self-made" businessmen deny it. Another point is that the USA has been, and still is, a land of opportunity, where one can rise from poor to rich in even one generation. We want this to continue. Stockman's figures show that the odds, however, are not equal for everyone. The government cannot make them equal, but it is important for us that they be well above 0 and government services, eg education, are needed to do it.

I will say it again-the biggest advantage anyone can have is the values. It is being raised in a married two parent home, and being taught the right skills to succeed: Manners, industriousness, hard work, the value of education. It is these intangibles that are missing from the kids who are not "born on third base".

The author of the article seemed born in a home with "values", probably better values than any of Gingrich's kids, I'm thinking, just without the money and opportunities so many wealthy people take for granted. She is NOT using class warfare,just remarking that Romney is by NO MEANS a self-made man, that he had opportunities that most people, middle class or poor, do not have access to,so to identify himself with the downtrodden is dishonest and patronizing.In 1963,women,particularly Black women, had NO opportunities for advancement and faced prejudice that a Romney would no concept of. People only feel disdain for those, who for whatever reason,achieved much in life, but are determined that those opportunities shouldn't be available for all. As for being Christian, it is incredibly un-Christian to be greedy and selfish. The author is not being small-minded,profox can not say the same.Romney can tithe to his church, but has no concept of what it is like to struggle. Selling stocks to entertain while at HBS is not the same as struggling to make ends meet.

This article is truly pointless. Some people find FAULT with EVERYTHING; and it seems Farah Stockman fits in this castegory. WHAT IS YOUR POINT!! Other than your penchant to contribute to the "class warfare" bickering,I fail to see anything of value in this article. Mitt Romney is self made, regardless of the "starting line" you choose to use. Should Mitt Romney apologize for his wealth. Maybe "Chapter Two" can be on the Kennedy Family, since they also had a headstart when it comes to wealth.