In last night’s debate, Mitt Romney repeatedly responded to questions about his investment portfolio—including his Swiss bank account—with a shrug of the shoulders. He didn’t know anything about his investments, he said, because they were in a blind trust. “My investments are not made by me,” he said. “My investments for the last 10 years have been in a blind trust, managed by a trustee.”
In 1994, however, a Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Massachusetts said using a blind trust as a political shield was “an age-old ruse.” That candidate? Mitt Romney—and he meant it, attacking investments in Ted Kennedy’s blind trust. (Talk about hating on capitalism!)
According to ABC News, the Mitt Romney of 1994 was right. Romney’s trustee is in fact a close family friend. ABC reports Rick Santorum’s campaign questions how Romney’s trust could possibly be completely blind given that it was investing hundreds of thousands into his one of his sons’ businesses, for example. And National Journal points out that not all of Romney’s investments were actually in the blind trust—including one of the ones he was questioned about last night. Romneyland’s defense? That even though the investments weren’t blind, Romney still wasn’t responsible for making them.
All of this is vintage Romney, of course: he’s got an explanation for everything. He just wants you to be blind to the fact that it’s different than the one from the day before. And the day before that.