Romney Campaign Disarray Needs "Intervention," Writes Peggy Noonan. This Chart Shows Why.

Contributed by Michael Matthew Bloomer while high on sugar.

Many have wondered for a long time how it is that a professional presidential campaign organization chock full of old hands can have managed to mismanage so badly for so long. Yesterday, poor, long-suffering conservative Peggy Noonan, admirer of long gone Edmund Burke, and herself a mouthpiece for the Wall Street Journal and the Luddite Conservatory called the Manhattan Institute, wrote an essay for Mitt Romney entitled Time for an Intervention. And from that suspiciously auspicious title it got worse. The same day, the inimitable neocon excrescence Bill Kristol also denounced Romney with his subtly titled piece, A Note on Romney’s Arrogant and Stupid Remarks.

Even the perpetually loopy South Carolina GOP Senator Lindsey Graham expounded that

“I think what Romney needs to do is get into Virginia and run for sheriff,”

which without its context seems a non sequitor, but nonetheless, standing on its own, is an interesting idea. Virginia's always in the market for sheriffs.

In all, the Romney campaign would have to improve mightily to be considered merely "in disarray." It's far worse. Campaign mucky mucks look forward to the day they are once again only in disarray. How did this happen with so many top dawg campaigners in high places? They've go Ed Gillespie, darn it!

Here's a possible way to visualize the Romney marketing team. It may help explain things:

For a clearer image, just brusquely click it!

Keep an eye on them. There's an intervention coming!

Visualizing Romney's "Safety Net" For The Poor

Contributed by Michael Bloomer while locked in a closet by his beloved wife, Sue

In a fit of what can only be viewed as overconfidence after his win in the Florida primary last week, Mitt Romney accidentally told the truth on CNN the day after his win. His signal - in every sense of the word - quote:

"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it."

The simple fact is, of course, that Governor Romney has endorsed draconian budget cuts that would rip that net to shreds. He also spent a great deal of time at Bain Capital as a financial finagler hatching deals that fairly often added to the "very poor" population.

In his remarkable quote, too, he demonstrates what everyone on the left has known all along, and what even the right wing of the GOP is now realizing:  Mitt Romney believes that the "safety net" is a good enough place to be. He simply has no informed sense that life in the safety net is desperate, heartbreaking, and usually inescapable. In this, Romney is aristocratically tempered;  he's not merely tone deaf, he's stone deaf. Stone deaf to nearly 20% of the population is not a good characteristic in a United States President, particularly as we move ever closer to the edge of a revolutionary precipice.

Romney, though, is utterly astounding, in a very bad way. He's banal. Unlike Newt, there's, nothing fancy about him, nothing Gingrichian in rabidness. Unlike Paul or Santorum, Mitt's boring about the poverty thing, he simply cannot think "poor," cannot will up legitimate or sincere concern.

Wondering about that attribute the other day, I put together my image of what Romney - and the other GOP candidates - might actually conceive as a laissez faire "safety net." Gazing through the lens of their dog eat dog world view, it's a dark image indeed.