Talk:Governorship of Mitt Romney

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Governorship of Mitt Romney article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This page is about an active politician who is running for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Governorship of Mitt Romney is part of WikiProject Massachusetts, an effort to create, expand, and improve Massachusetts-related articles to a feature-quality standard.

	To-do list for Governorship of Mitt Romney:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Convert source citations that are web links to footnotes.

Contents 1 Previous Talk Pages 2 Housing 3 NPOV Tag 4 POV tag, same-sex marriage 5 Too much space to proposals 6 In line links identified for conversion to footnotes 7 This just isn't true: 8 Discussion about title of Political views of Mitt Romney article

[edit] Previous Talk Pages

This article was split off from Mitt Romney on January 8, 2007.
Previous talk, before that date resides at:

• Talk:Mitt_Romney -- and also,
• Talk:Mitt_Romney/Archive1

-- Yellowdesk 01:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Housing

Housing was one of the main things Romney did... ask anyone... why was my section deleted? myclob 03:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Mitt_Romney#Cut_housing_section?. I think the section would survive, if reinstated, if it had outside context supplied that demonstrated someone besides Mr. Romney's press office thought it was a major effort, and those published outside perspectives also evaluated the consequences of the program. -- Yellowdesk 16:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I gave a detailed explanation on the Talk:Mitt_Romney#Cut_housing_section? page. Indeed, if you asked most people in Massachusetts about the housing situation here during Romney's tenure, they would probably say that it got worse. See for instance: [1].Notmyrealname 19:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV Tag

I simply am moving the NPOV tag off the Mitt Romney article to the Governorship article based upon the discussion from users ZimZalaBim, Wizardry Dragon, Dmarney, Yellowdesk, and Notmyrealname. It seems after Dmarney reviewed the article he could only find obvious non-NPOV statements regarding the "tar baby" issue. Since the governorship section was turned into it's own article, the NPOV tag is simply following the issue. Sorry if I didn't make this clear earlier. Click the link for the discussion above if you want to look further into the issue. It seems once that issue gets cleared up the tag can be removed.

I must admit I am no expert on the issue and know absolutely nothing about it. I would recommend someone try to rewrite the "tar baby" with a more unbiased perspective and then remove the tag.

I originally placed the tag on the entire Governorship of Mitt Romney, however it is now placed in the Controversies while governor section as this is the section that contains the disputed issue at hand. Chupper 21:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV tag, same-sex marriage

I added the tag for the following reasons:

1. The section contains a wealth of weasel words. While this is contradictory to Wikipedia policy in general, several are in conjunction with particularly sensitive and controversial statements and syllogisms. Some striking examples include:

Critics of Romney countered that the politically ambitious governor, who would need the support of religious and social conservatives to win the 2008 Republican Party Presidential nomination, had used the opportunity afforded by the legalization of gay marriage to burnish his conservative bona fides.

It was felt by many critics of Romney's move that replacing the experienced Gorton with an inexperienced real estate professional lacking not only a law degree and university education but any tax judge experience was an attempt by Romney to keep the ATB from ruling in favor of gay couples.

2. The section is satiated with - one could say the relating of the segment, which reads monophonically, is driven by - unsourced statements. Consider the following:

To prevent couples domiciled in other states from getting married in Massachusetts, Romney instructed town clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state gay couples, except for those announcing their intention to relocate to the Commonwealth.

This was disingenuous, as the Laws of 1913 clearly were targeted against miscegenation and were part of a nationwide backlash engendered by the introduction of the Anti-Miscegenation Amendment to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1911.

3. The final reason is, I would suggest, not one of "bias of bias" and selective interpretation, but rather the reasonable deduction from the above noted foibles of the text. Hence, I would claim a palpable anti-Romney bias, at least on the issue at hand, the section throughout. Examine these inferences in relation to the above quoted, unsourced and weasel-worded allegations:

Thus, Massachusetts was complicit in circumventing the Full Faith and Credit Clause (Article IV, Section 1) of the U.S. Constitution.

With the conservative Roberts Court unlikely to follow the Warren Court's moral example in Loving v. Virginia, the ruling upholding the constitutionality of the controversial Law of 1913 likely will stand, and will continue to, in the eyes of same-sex marriage advocates, deny due process rights to gay couples domiciled outside of the Commonwealth.

In addition to resurrecting a morally repugnant law to deny out-of-state gay couples the opportunity to marry...

Thus, without the gay Gorton on the board, it was more likely that the same rights enjoyed by straight married couples would not be extended to same-sex couples legally married in the Commonwealth.

Regarding my own sensibilities, since the tendencies of which were implicitly questioned by Yellowtask in his/her message, I would only add that I find Governor Romney's beliefs to be deplorable on this topic. Of course, this view does not rectify a tendentious article segment, and it seems to me the text in question is inclined to a degree that bona fides need not be contested. Shoplifter 02:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Smith -I agree that this article is biased and needs to be fixed.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.101.183.92 (talk • contribs) February 9, 2007.

[edit] Too much space to proposals

There is a lot of space devoted to proposals that Romney had that never went anywhere. I don't think these should be included. If we do keep them in, it should be made clear that they were never enacted/voted upon, etc. Otherwise it is unclear to the reader what Romney actually accomplished, and what was perhaps posturing. In education, I'm referring to the proposal for extra teachers and the laptop initiative.Notmyrealname 19:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

These things are actually a record of political positions stated or taken, and also demonstrate a leader's efforts when that leader is well aware that a proposal is a dead letter when putting it forward. A useful historicl record, and worth expanding upon by finding out who thought they were dead letters, and why. Relevant background to the presidential political campaign. -- Yellowdesk 06:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In line links identified for conversion to footnotes

I Identified all (or nearly all) of the in-line links to source web pages with formatted comments like so:

  <!-- Note: convert this link into a footnote:
  -->[www.published_web_source.com] 

This should make it easier for the intrepid editor to convert these things to properly formed footnotes showing:
- Author
- Article title
- Publication
- Date
- Date Retrieved

-- Yellowdesk 06:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This just isn't true:

"Upon leaving office, Romney argued that he had left the state with a large budget surplus, after he cut hundreds of millions of dollars of programs. However, the Patrick Administration, upon examining the budget, claimed that Romney had instead left the state with a deficit of around $1 billion."

It is under the controvery section... how does this assertian square with the fact that Romney had a surplus every year... you can't have two controvery statements... there can not be a surplus and a deficit at the same time... myclob 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion about title of Political views of Mitt Romney article

• There is an active discussion about potentially revising the name of Political views of Mitt Romney to Political positions of Mitt Romney, or, depending on how the conversation develops, some other name. In case you're interested, go to Talk:Political views of Mitt Romney#Requested move.
  
• A brief history; the article started as a section called Political positions in the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2008 article, following a discussion at Talk:Mitt_Romney#This page lacks personal political beliefs. It became a stand-alone article in mid-March.

-- Yellowdesk 04:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)