Mitt and Ann Romney were the only guests on Fox News Sunday today. During a mostly lapdog interview, Wallace asked a few tough questions, including about those infamous “47%” remarks – which Romney said he regretted. And yet he did not apologize to anyone he may have offended. Even more telling, when asked about his remarks, shortly after the campaign, that President Obama won because he gave away “free stuff” to his “base coalition,” Romney replied, “ObamaCare was very attractive, particularly to those without health insurance.” Oh, and Romney also suggested he didn’t mean it when he said he’d turn down $10 in spending cuts if they included $1 in tax hikes

In Part One, Ann Romney said about losing the election:

It was a crushing disappointment. Not for us. Our lives are going to be fine. It’s for the country. …The dream was to make a difference. The dream was to serve.

And yet there was a certain lack of “service mentality” in Mitt Romney's reflection on the “47%” comments.

Wallace played the video in which Romney was caught saying, “There are 47 percent who are with him (Obama), who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them.” Then came the following exchange, as per the Fox News transcript:

WALLACE: George Will said you’ve got a problem when voters don’t like you. You’ve got a real problem when voters think you don’t like them. MITT ROMNEY: Yes, it was a very unfortunate statement that I made. It’s not what I meant. I didn’t express myself as I wished I would have. You know, when you speak in private, you don’t spend as much time thinking about how something could be twisted and distorted and—and it could come out wrong and be used. But, you know, I did. And it was very harmful. What I said is not what I believe. Obviously, my whole campaign—my whole life has been devoted to helping people, all of the people. I care about all the people of the country.

Here's what troubles me: Romney said it was “not what I meant,” it was “unfortunate” and “harmful” (I believe he meant “harmful” to his campaign). It was all about him. He never said he was sorry or anything to suggest he actually likes those voters he insulted. He “care(s) about all the people” and has been “devoted to helping” “all of the people” but it smacks of the same kind of imperiousness, merely cloaked in kinder, gentler words. Romney never said anything about how people less fortunate inspire him, move him or even matter other than as a group to “help.”

That impression was further validated during another exchange about Romney’s “free stuff” remarks after he lost the election.

MITT ROMNEY: It’s a proven political strategy which is, you have a bunch of money from the government to a group and, guess what, they’ll vote for you. (END AUDIO CLIP) WALLACE: To some people, it sounded like the remark you made in your campaign about 47 percent of Americans looking for handouts. MITT ROMNEY: The president had the power of incumbency. ObamaCare was very attractive, particularly to those without health insurance. And they came out in large numbers to vote. So that was part of a successful campaign.

In another exchange, Romney discussed the lengthy Republican primary and some of the “silly” questions “that end up hurting you in the general.” He cited the question in which the panel was asked if they would accept a $1 tax increase for every $10 in spending cuts.

WALLACE: But now, that’s a good question. Why not be the one who stands up there, raises your hand and said, of course, if it was 10 for one, I’d do it? MITT ROMNEY: Again, because if you’ve said that you’re not going to raise taxes, then they’d say Romney’s changed his position. He said he wouldn’t raise taxes, now he’s saying he will. He’s changed his position. This is – WALLACE: But you would have accepted $10 in spending cuts— MITT ROMNEY: Well— WALLACE: -- for $1 in revenue. MITT ROMNEY: Yes, that’s—that’s a fairy tale, because no one is going to give you $10 in spending cuts for $1 in revenue increase. You’ve got to—if you’re going into a negotiation, you’ve got to stand for your position, know they’re going to stand for theirs and then recognize that there’s going to be some compromise.

In other words, yes he would have accepted that deal but didn't because he figured it would have been politically harmful to say so at the time.

Mitt Romney: same as he ever was.