Silliness pervades today’s (and the weekend’s) Mitt coverage.  I’ll start today with People Magazine’s Sandra Sobieraj Westfall and her piece on Ann.  Let me first say for the record that People Magazine doesn’t exactly occupy a serious space in the journalism world.  That said, some people actually read the tabloid.  A good chuck of Westfall’s article focuses on [drum roll] Ann’s conversion to Mormonism some four decades ago.  I wonder if People Magazine had the same type of religion question for Hillary in 1992.  Methinks not.
 
Foster’s Online’s Bob Cook basically rehashes the same old issues about Mitt and his religion.  Yawn.
 
Tuscaloosa News’ Alexandra Steigrad continues the MSM exercise of flogging a dead horse. Memo to Alexandra:  As someone who reads almost everything there is to read about Mitt, please understand my plea:  Originality.  Try it.  Please!  End memo.
 
It’s almost like the aforementioned two authors took their guidance from this AP story.  Even the AP lacks original thought.  Can they keep this up for 18 months?
 
The Houston Chronicle’s Roth and Davis dissect the zip codes from the latest Mitt Money Report.  Ugh.  That kind of work makes my eyes bleed.
 
Newt suggests the eventual Republican nominee will face a Hillary/Obama ticket.
 
The AP’s Glen Johnson reports on the Romney family as an asset to Mitt on the campaign trail.  At least Johnson is original, though he saw fit to include some corny moments from the Romney Christmas.  Memo to Tagg:  Never mention defeat – especially in front of a camera.  Also, try and stay away from words like “laughingstock”.  The MSM doesn’t need help coming up with new labels.  End Memo.
 
Newsday’s Tom Brune says both Mitt and Rudy will skip the CNN/YouTube Circus Debate.  I’m pretty sure that leaves McCain and Ron Paul.  I’m going to side with Blogfather Hugh on this issue.  I think the majority of the questions posed during the Democratic Circus were pathetic and meaningless.  Frankly, I’m pretty sure Mitt has other better things to do.
 
The Orlando Sentinel’s Kevin Spear has a story about Mitt and one of my favorite subjects.  I love the smell of Tax Cuts in the morning.  Smells like money.
 
The Cincinnati Enquirer’s James McNair writes about Mitt’s fundraising prowess in the Buckeye State. 
 
The Boston Globe publishes an “investigative” (read hit) piece on Mitt’s economic record.  Sum and McLaughlin set out to paint Mitt as the reason behind the Bay State’s economic woes, but what they succeeded in doing was exposing the fact that Massachusetts isn’t exactly a business friendly environment.  Mitt did wonders for Massachusetts – facts borne out by actual economic data.  Massachusetts has been run by liberals for most of its existence.  What Sum and McLaughlin should have investigated is what would the Bay State’s economic status be but for Mitt.  Don’t look for that exposé anytime soon.
 
Mitt has a plan to cure Latin America’s poverty problem.  Its called free market capitalism and trade.   Freedom works everywhere its tried.  Hugo Chavez, call your office.
 
The New York Sun’s Ryan Sager has Mitt on the Death Watch.  Again.  What precipitated this latest foray into silliness? A 2002 quote from Mitt expressing his uncertainty about the nation’s interest in a “progressive-on-social-issues governor of Massachusetts.”  So let me get this straight:  A five year old quote expressing uncertainty about an election six years from then is relevant?  Scraping the barrel, Ryan.
 
The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza weighs in on Mitt’s possible “religion” speech.  Memo to Chris:  I wrote that speech last week.  Its really short.  When Obama gets the same questions Mitt faces, come talk to me.
 
Political Derby’s Ethan Boivie misses the point about Mitt skipping the CNN/YouTube Circus.  Mitt’s not afraid of answering the questions, Ethan.  If you’d bother to check out footage from an “Ask Mitt Anything” event, you’d know that.  The fact of the matter is, CNN isn’t exactly a fair arbiter of the YouTube video questions.   Add to that the fact that most of the questions are so far left they only appeal to the Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich people and you have an environment that only a fool would willingly enter.  Mitt may be many things, but he’s not a fool.  Maybe I’m wrong.  I just don’t see how this debate helps Mitt or any other Republican candidate.