The VP in a presidential race is chosen widen the candidate’s stance, open him up to a wider base of voters, rounds out any rough edges.  The VP adds spice to the ticket.

So, who did Mitt Romney chose to announce in a Friday night dump as being his running mate?  Who will bring strength where there is weakness, excite the voters and make the ticket that much more palatable?

Paul Ryan.

Of Americans polled, thirty-eight percent, over a third, stated that they had never heard of him and another 16% had no opinion of him whatsoever. Way to make a splash, Mitt.  Instead of a resounding cheer, the sound responding to his announcement will be that of half the voters saying, “Meh.” or “Who?”

Romney’s camp is counting on the fact that because Paul Ryan, the young attractive politician came from a blue-collar, Irish-Catholic that they can attempt to pull in that ‘we have a Republican Jack Kennedy’ vibe.  The problem with that is, when people hear about the Ryan economic plan, there’s no doubt that they will remind Mitt that Ryan is no Jack Kennedy.

Paul Ryan’s Ayn Randian economic plan of ‘I have mine, screw you’ has been rejected strongly enough by members of the Catholic clergy that they have actually banded together to protest at his Wisconsin offices.  The United States Conference of Bishops were so incensed by Ryan’s plan to cut funding of the poor and the elderly while keeping full funding for the military and the rich that they actually referenced Matthew 25:

 31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ 44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life. ”

One has to doubt that quoting the New Testament will mean much to the lover of all things Rand because as any true acolyte knows, Ayn Rand stated that, “Faith is a sign of a psychological weakness. . . I regard it as evil to place your emotions, your desire, above the evidence of what your mind knows.  That’s what you’re doing with the idea of God.” She also went on, when accused of  being “out to destroy almost every edifice of the contemporary American way of life, our Judeo-Christian religion, our modified government regulated capitalism, our rule by majority will.  Other reviews have said you scorn churches and the concept of God” to admit that this was true.

For someone like Mitt Romney who came into the presidential campaign as a dark horse because of his own religious differences with standard Christian religion, this doesn’t appear to be a means of making the majority of Protestants and Catholics feel more comfortable.

Mitt’s choice won’t widen his stance, it tightens it.  Instead of opening him up to a wider audience, having a semi-unknown who hero worships someone who admitted to wanting to destroy the contemporary American way of life is not the way to bring in folks who want America back.  And instead of softening the rough edges, this choice may very well highlight the concept that Mitt Romney is a rich man who is out for what’s good for Mitt Romney and others just like him, not for the American people.

He picked a VP who made him feel comfortable about himself.  And like buying a few hundred invisible friends, it’s proof that he just doesn’t get it.