I have to admit that I developed something of a soft spot for Mitt Romney over the last couple of months. Partly this had to do with the fact that my conservative brother was deeply invested in Romney's campaign, volunteering time and energy to spread Mitt's message. It also had to do with the fact that Romney towered over his opponents in terms of substance and competence, which isn't saying much, but which is still saying enough.
Romney got a bum rap, castigated for being a Mormon, as if the beliefs of Mormonism were any more absurd than the beliefs of Mike "I majored in miracles, not math" Huckabee or John "I'll stay in Iraq for 100 years" McCain. He was also castigated for having earned a fortune, which necessitated the bizarre spectacle of a bunch of Republicans playing Lenin to Romney's White Russians.
Lost on his attackers was this: are we really at a place in America where a man's faith precludes him from being President? Clearly, we are. Are we at a place in America where, when a man sacrifices a lifetime's wealth in pursuit of a thankless job in which he honestly believes he can serve his country, we cannot refrain from questioning his motives? Clearly, we are.
Romney got a bum rap, castigated for being a Mormon, as if the beliefs of Mormonism were any more absurd than the beliefs of Mike "I majored in miracles, not math" Huckabee or John "I'll stay in Iraq for 100 years" McCain. He was also castigated for having earned a fortune, which necessitated the bizarre spectacle of a bunch of Republicans playing Lenin to Romney's White Russians.
Lost on his attackers was this: are we really at a place in America where a man's faith precludes him from being President? Clearly, we are. Are we at a place in America where, when a man sacrifices a lifetime's wealth in pursuit of a thankless job in which he honestly believes he can serve his country, we cannot refrain from questioning his motives? Clearly, we are.
Say what you will about Mitt Romney, but had he been elected, nobody would have owned him.
Can we say that for anyone else? To ask the question is to answer it.
I was also very uncomfortable with Romney's speech on religion some months back, in which he lauded quotidian drivel masquerading as praise on all religions ("I admire the Muslims' commitment to frequent prayer...") and then castigated all secular people by insisting that "freedom requires religion." No small irony that secular folks were the only demographic other than Mormons who proved willing to vote for Romney. Know your enemy, mor(m)on. It wasn't the godless that rejected Romney; it was the God-fearing.
That said, I got a fresh reminder via Mitt Romney's concession speech of why I hate these assholes. The speech, which my conservative brother witnessed (and loved) contained two lines that let us know exactly who Mitt Romney has become and of what the price is for any length of exposure to presidential politics.
First, Romney articulated his greatest fear. Terror? Disease? Environmental catastrophe? Bankruptcy? Civil unrest? Anything remotely logical? Nope. France. Romney resurrected one of the jingoistic chesnuts from 2002, when right-wing America suddenly realized that France was the mortal enemy of the United States.
France's crime then was refusing to join with the United States in the invasion of Iraq. It was shameful for a country so rich in culture and democracy to selfishly refuse to liberate and uplift the wretched masses of Iraq. If only the French knew how well everything was going to go for us in Iraq, surely they would have joined us. Oh well, their loss. I'm sure there's some pithy French phrase for that.
Romney's biggest fear was that the "United States would become the France of the 21st century." Huh. We know that France is right-wing for "pussies", but what exactly is Romney getting at here? France is one of the richest, freest, healthiest, safest countries on Earth. Top ten, to say the least. It is more left-wing than America, and less given to waging agressive war and torturing prisoners, but hey, variety is the spice of life.
Surely we have bigger fears than ending up like France. If that's the worst case scenarion we're in pretty good shape, since 190 of the 200 nations on Earth are worse off than France.
Can we say that for anyone else? To ask the question is to answer it.
I was also very uncomfortable with Romney's speech on religion some months back, in which he lauded quotidian drivel masquerading as praise on all religions ("I admire the Muslims' commitment to frequent prayer...") and then castigated all secular people by insisting that "freedom requires religion." No small irony that secular folks were the only demographic other than Mormons who proved willing to vote for Romney. Know your enemy, mor(m)on. It wasn't the godless that rejected Romney; it was the God-fearing.
That said, I got a fresh reminder via Mitt Romney's concession speech of why I hate these assholes. The speech, which my conservative brother witnessed (and loved) contained two lines that let us know exactly who Mitt Romney has become and of what the price is for any length of exposure to presidential politics.
First, Romney articulated his greatest fear. Terror? Disease? Environmental catastrophe? Bankruptcy? Civil unrest? Anything remotely logical? Nope. France. Romney resurrected one of the jingoistic chesnuts from 2002, when right-wing America suddenly realized that France was the mortal enemy of the United States.
France's crime then was refusing to join with the United States in the invasion of Iraq. It was shameful for a country so rich in culture and democracy to selfishly refuse to liberate and uplift the wretched masses of Iraq. If only the French knew how well everything was going to go for us in Iraq, surely they would have joined us. Oh well, their loss. I'm sure there's some pithy French phrase for that.
Romney's biggest fear was that the "United States would become the France of the 21st century." Huh. We know that France is right-wing for "pussies", but what exactly is Romney getting at here? France is one of the richest, freest, healthiest, safest countries on Earth. Top ten, to say the least. It is more left-wing than America, and less given to waging agressive war and torturing prisoners, but hey, variety is the spice of life.
Surely we have bigger fears than ending up like France. If that's the worst case scenarion we're in pretty good shape, since 190 of the 200 nations on Earth are worse off than France.
I've been to France three times. I'll tell you, while there are certain things about French culture that I find pretentious and unappealing, there are a great many more things that any reasonable person would be amazed by. To put it simply, as I walked through Paris or Avignon, I thought alot of things. Here's something I didn't think: "Oh my God, what if the United States looked like this?!" Actually, I did think that, but in the opposite sense that Mr. Romney did; I experienced it as a hope, not a fear.
How can any sane person walk through Paris and be filled with the cold dread, the horror of the thought that such a awful fate could one day befall Akron or San Antonio? While walking along the Seine past Notre Dame, I never thought "thank God Detroit doesn't look like this." When I walked past hospitals staffed by doctors who have no idea what health insurace is, I didn't think "God, I can't wait to get back home."
I dont wan't to live in France. I'm an American. I belong here. But, let's be honest. France provides a much better life for its people than does the United States. This is the only world power that the United States has never fought a war against. This is the country that secured America's victory in the Revolution. If this is the enemy, if this is something to be feared and viewed as inferior, then we literally have no friends in all the world.
Mr. Romney's second rhetorical flourish, after invoking the horror that the United States could one day resemble one of the most beautiful and civilized places on earth, the birthplace of democracy, existentialism, and the blowjob, to quote a decidedly American movie, explained why he would devote his energies to assuring that neither Senator Clinton nor Obama would be president. Such a result would, in Romney's words, be "a surrender to terror."
First of all, only someone stupid enough to accept the rationality of a "war on terror" could contemplate a "surrender to terror." Second of all, it is preciself this rhetoric which caused the Iraq War and causes it to proceed. Romney is talking about Iraq, since no candidate has talked of withdrawing from Afghanistan or renouncing the goal of caputring and killing terrorists wherever we find them.
To say that leaving Iraq would be "a surrender to terror" implies that the war there is an American war against terrorists, pure and simple. The American military says that at least 95% of the violence directed at Americans is carried out by Iraqis of all stripes. That leaves, at the very most, 5% of the violence being carried out by Salafist jihadi groups. These are the Pentagon's numbers, not MoveOn.org's.
What about the 95%? Well, in Mr. Romney's universe, they are terrorists too. In Mr. Romney's universe, anyone who would defend their home from invasion is a terrorist, as long as the invaders are Americans. I don't need to patronize the reader by explaining how such a mindset guarantees endless war. Kick in the door. Any resistance? Terrorist!
Mr. Romney lives in a world where anyone who would not welcome an American soldier into their country or their home would gladly fly a plane into a building. It's hard for Americans to put ourselves in the position of Iraqis because we havent been invaded and violated for 200 years, but we still have our common sense. Right?
In summation: France is not the gate to hell, and Iraq is not populated strictly by camels and terrorists. The fact that these things need to be stipulated is evidence enough that, as successful and attractive as Romney seemed at first, he was seduced by the patronizing siren we call presidential "politics." Thank God he lost. If only all the others could, too.
How can any sane person walk through Paris and be filled with the cold dread, the horror of the thought that such a awful fate could one day befall Akron or San Antonio? While walking along the Seine past Notre Dame, I never thought "thank God Detroit doesn't look like this." When I walked past hospitals staffed by doctors who have no idea what health insurace is, I didn't think "God, I can't wait to get back home."
I dont wan't to live in France. I'm an American. I belong here. But, let's be honest. France provides a much better life for its people than does the United States. This is the only world power that the United States has never fought a war against. This is the country that secured America's victory in the Revolution. If this is the enemy, if this is something to be feared and viewed as inferior, then we literally have no friends in all the world.
Mr. Romney's second rhetorical flourish, after invoking the horror that the United States could one day resemble one of the most beautiful and civilized places on earth, the birthplace of democracy, existentialism, and the blowjob, to quote a decidedly American movie, explained why he would devote his energies to assuring that neither Senator Clinton nor Obama would be president. Such a result would, in Romney's words, be "a surrender to terror."
First of all, only someone stupid enough to accept the rationality of a "war on terror" could contemplate a "surrender to terror." Second of all, it is preciself this rhetoric which caused the Iraq War and causes it to proceed. Romney is talking about Iraq, since no candidate has talked of withdrawing from Afghanistan or renouncing the goal of caputring and killing terrorists wherever we find them.
To say that leaving Iraq would be "a surrender to terror" implies that the war there is an American war against terrorists, pure and simple. The American military says that at least 95% of the violence directed at Americans is carried out by Iraqis of all stripes. That leaves, at the very most, 5% of the violence being carried out by Salafist jihadi groups. These are the Pentagon's numbers, not MoveOn.org's.
What about the 95%? Well, in Mr. Romney's universe, they are terrorists too. In Mr. Romney's universe, anyone who would defend their home from invasion is a terrorist, as long as the invaders are Americans. I don't need to patronize the reader by explaining how such a mindset guarantees endless war. Kick in the door. Any resistance? Terrorist!
Mr. Romney lives in a world where anyone who would not welcome an American soldier into their country or their home would gladly fly a plane into a building. It's hard for Americans to put ourselves in the position of Iraqis because we havent been invaded and violated for 200 years, but we still have our common sense. Right?
In summation: France is not the gate to hell, and Iraq is not populated strictly by camels and terrorists. The fact that these things need to be stipulated is evidence enough that, as successful and attractive as Romney seemed at first, he was seduced by the patronizing siren we call presidential "politics." Thank God he lost. If only all the others could, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment