I
had mentioned this earlier, but when we were coming back from Mexico, we were
watching the Republican candidates debate and catching up on the news, and I
noted that they seemed to be dropping out in the order of least intelligent/craziest
to smarter/saner. The only exception was Huntsman, because I felt like he was
relatively smart and sane, but I guess he just wasn’t getting enough traction.
At that time, it was pretty easy to predict that it would end up being Romney,
and it fact, that’s how it turned out.
Okay,
I thought it was predictable. I don’t remember what people were saying at the
time, because I already knew there was no one that I would vote for on that
side. Romney won the nomination because he was the least crazy Republican
candidate, and although things are getting uglier all the time in politics,
most people don’t like voting for lunatics.
Now,
there is clearly a lot to say about why the current GOP seems to do such a good
job of attracting lunatics, and how this is politically detrimental, but now I
want to talk about this relatively sane man who is really not that well-liked.
Most people are not thrilled that this is their candidate.
I
have mixed feelings on it. On the one hand, having such a marvelously incompetent
competitor makes me feel better about President Obama’s chances, so in that way
he’s kind of a gift. On the other hand, he is drawing a lot of attention to the
Church, and it has tended to be negative, and more on that later.
So,
what is Romney’s problem? There are obviously things he can do well, and just
for the fact that he has closed so many business deals, I have to assume he has
a certain amount of cleverness and charm, but he just ends up so consistently
off-base, he alienates people right and left. One reason he seemed relatively
sane is that he does not seem married to the hard-core Republican policies, but
he changes sides and positions so easily that you can’t feel any trust. Maybe
he’s not totally committed to gutting Medicare, but he’s certainly not
committed to saving it, so if other people are committed to gutting it, and
they are people he will listen to, on with the disemboweling!
I
have some thoughts about where this comes from. I remember reading one column
(I think it was David Brooks), suggesting that the issue was coming of age in a
service-based economy rather than manufacturing or digital, where Romney needed
to adapt into the ultimate people pleaser. I reject this, if for no other
reason than that if that was the case, he should be much better at pleasing
people than he is.
Another
theory (and this was from Rolling Stone) was that because Romney saw his
father’s political career end because of his stand on Vietnam, even though
people would later agree with him, he learned that integrity and authenticity
is the sure path to distraction, and left those behind. I hope that’s not the
case, because that really would have been a horrible lesson, and surely not the
one his father wanted him to learn.
The
impression I have gotten is that he is just so sure that he is right that he
doesn’t worry about the details. Of course he should win the election, so he
can say what needs to be said to do so. I may be wrong, but that’s what I have
felt. It’s a dangerous attitude anyway, but there does seem to be a general air
of specialness that can easily accompany great wealth.
There
was one story going around that may illustrate the point. It was used as an
example of how good and caring a man he was. A colleague’s daughter was
missing, and they shut everything down to form search parties and find her.
It’s like the family Ryan mentioned, where Romney took the Christmas presents.
Okay, great, I know about these people, and I care, and so I will do something,
because I have a good heart. Except, that there are lots of people with similar
problems that you don’t know, and your policies leave them screwed.
It’s
nice to locate the one girl, or help the one family, but having adequate police
and medical, and a healthy economic model that does not lead to an ever-widening
gulf between the richest and the poorest actually ends up doing more good. It’s
more practical. And it’s more along the lines what elected officials should
actually do.
We’re
going to explore this a little more tomorrow, but first some other related fun.
I
have noticed a drop-off in magic underwear jokes since I posted. That could
just be the people I follow, so I actually went back and searched the Twitter
feed on that term, and there was a sharp drop-off after the 22nd,
which is when I posted. I don’t think I can take credit for that, but if I
helped, I’m glad. I have been seeing more about baptism for the dead, so I’m
going to link to my post on that, and from last Monday, and my special post on
the possibility of Mitt Romney being the Anti-Christ all at the bottom.
The
most pertinent one may be the last one. Obviously it is somewhat humorous,
based on the inclusion of the Oprah references (though I am more against “The
Secret” now than when I wrote it, and I will be blogging against self-help/positive
thinking books in the future). However, if “the Beast” does turn out to be an
American president, it would make sense if it was one affiliated with the
religious right, and who looked pious. Honestly, Huckaby and Santorum have been
scarier than Romney for religiosity (Romney may just be letting Beck say the
crazy things for him).
http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2008/07/procrastinators-lament-3315.html
Posts
1 comment:
I like your point about Romney being so sure he is right that he doesn't care to talk about the details.
I'm WAY behind on my Sporkful reading, so I'm playing catchup. :) I love reading your blog.
Post a Comment