A Flaccid Advocate for Freedom: Mitt Romney and the Republican Response

I originally posted this on my old website back in April of 2009.  Back then, Mitt Romney was nothing more than annoyance.  The then (yes, even then) presumptive Republican presidential nominee was the asshat he is now that he's bagged the nomination, it is interesting to note that his modus operandi is still just as lame:

The National Review has an op-ed by none other than Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts and foundered Republican presidential candidate.  I know the thought of going to the National Review’s masturbatory, propagandized website just seems like opening yourself to an unwelcome spraying of vinegar and water, but the black hole at the edge of the universe warrants a good checking-in on every once in a while lest its voracious suck imperil yet another system.  You thusly may find the piece (of shite) here:

LinkToLimpness

This coming from a man named after sporting equipment.

I’m sure William F. Buckley would be delighted to note the big-top circus he once led has quickly developed into fiefdoms of swindling carnivals.  But then again, Buckley always managed to veil his more detestable elements in some grandeur of entangling intellectual excuses. 

Let’s be honest, Mitt Romney has done nothing but disappoint the nation and the base of the Republican Party, by exerting particular effort toward a tepid and childish response to an administration that has proven so popular that it got itself elected by a clear majority of the people; the very same people of this country that would rather willfully grant the new leadership their faith while they busily try to rebuild their lives that were rent asunder by 8 years of utter incompetence and greed of the previous administration.  The truest test of Romney was that even as his nation faltered economically, he was still trying to tout his relevance as a businessman, when his shop had been shuttered years before.  In other, and clearly less respectful terms, to Mr. Romney: douchebaggery noted; now sit down and be quiet.   

Vague and sweeping generalizations are the resort of those without substance.  And when those people feel compelled to blindly cast those generalizations in order to compel a contrived response, the irresponsible culminates in a flailing, or at best a spasmodic and misguided mob.  The effort then must become to focus the mob toward some definable end.  Romney seems to be half-heartedly swinging at the ball because he’s got a bat in his hands (and there really isn’t anyone sitting in the stands anyway).  The Republicans choose to make every argument a focus on "evils".  Socialism, fascism, baby killing, gay marriage, taxes, schools, action or inaction, etc....: they’re all measures of the inevitable evils that are always being forewarned by some divined Republican righteousness. 

Unfortunately for the Republicans, the idealized pictures they create are spattered with the very paint they use to paint as demons everyone else.  Romney’s claim that Obama’s so called inaction against North Korean missile tests is evidence of Obama’s failure in the foreign policy realm.  Romney, of course, fails to note that the Bush administration did little to thwart the years of missile development that allowed North Korea to even get to this point.  He does manage to assert that tougher actions are the only way to curb North Korean behavior.  I hate to repeat myself, but: Romney, of course, fails to note that the Bush administration did little to thwart the years of missile development that allowed North Korea to even get to this point.  Somehow, Romney, the Vitalis’d Mona Lisa of the Right, is consciously ignoring the background that sits behind him.  In that background is the hint of some land that is neither discernible nor particularly focus grabbing because it’s been ignored in broad strokes.  As a result, Romney sounds like a fool when he speaks about the apparent misguidance of others, when he himself could not curry enough favor with the party to buyout McCain in the primaries.  Having simultaneously railed against the Democrats while trying to be the Republican JFK, Romney invited scorn not only against his party for their outmoded adherences, but against himself for trying to invigorate a group of people who distrust anyone with a tan’ish hue to their skin.   

But what is the endgame of the Republican Party?  During the unraveling of the Right during the Presidential and Congressional campaigns of 2008, there were far too many instances of a Republican chewing his/her own Hush Puppies.  The pedantic fallback issues of elitism and socialism and even gun control and abortion, and now war, are the entrenchments of the party that revels in embattled ignorance.  And defend them needlessly they will.  But Republicans are generally clueless when it comes to other issues and other people because the complexities of other things prove too time consuming when the simpler things in life are so easily fixated upon.  The idiocy with which the Rick Perry’s of the party operate, are shameful for the party of Lincoln (who it should be noted was this nation’s greatest President precisely because he recognized the importance of a strong central government).  It’s a grand comedy to be sure, to watch the bipolar antics of the Republicans who seem to place so much importance on mottling their own ideals while also seeking reward for simply having them.  But then there has always been a gaping chasm between those who chant USA and those who know what it stands for. 

The current state of Republicanism can only be assessed as a desperation to remain relevant in a time when the collective conscience of the nation finds us seeking something better than the vapid and stale preaching of a party that has maligned itself with religious pursuits (or those topics which can be infused with religion).  It should be noted that Romney seems to be interested in distancing himself somewhat from the "God" talk and circular biblical references that are tantric messages for the doomsday Republicans, probably due in great part because he doesn’t want to remind others of his Mormonism (which is itself a little too "fringey" for even the nuttiest of the Right – and don’t get me started on Jindal’s college thesis on exorcising a girl who was probably just on a really bad trip).  But then Republicans love to pepper their arguments in the implications of the holier elements of money and war in their Republican speak.  Dick Cheney is telling us we’re all in grave danger as a result of electing a president.  So true he has proven himself, though the warning came too late to prevent 8 years of the George W. Bush administration which has us still fighting a faceless enemy in two sovereign nations in particular, and one entire world in general.

But give Romney points for trying to tie elements of historic presidential positions to the current administration, even if he can’t tie a knot or a bow.  It’s always commendable when a singularly-educated politician likes to reference history book speeches in an attempt to appeal as folksy and learned.  The perilous days of the Cold War and World War II were heady times indeed.  Great words were spoken to face down the anger of our enemies and enliven the hopes of our friends.  But then, we knew who our enemies were in those days – and we certainly could count on our friends.  The enemies of the world were clearly defined.  They were power grabbing absolutists with a vengeful agenda... not entirely unlike the Republican Party of today.  And FDR bolstered this rag-tag nation to found the true modern day notion that America is the leader of the free world.  However, it was never the intent of FDR or Truman or the fighting and working men and women of this nation to ever seek the glory of that position.  In fact, many rightly feared the prestige and hubris that that position could bring. 

The beacon of hope is not just hope itself, it is the representation of hope anew.  But this meaning is lost on people who think the nation a flag that could so easily be burned.  Romney is just another politician trying to identify the better parts of altruism by pointing out the cheapness of words while simultaneously charging for their use.  A Berliner found solace in Kennedy’s declaration, and probably cheered Reagan’s demand.  But I guarantee you they found the greatest happiness and comfort in the actions of the Soviets to relinquish the stranglehold that was the culmination of years of diplomacy and efforts that brought about the Soviet’s end.  But then the complexities of international history are probably lost on a man who finds greater meaning in the Type-A exercises of counting money.     

Do Romney’s words ultimately mean anything?  Very little, as they offer no inspiration or insight.  They offer no confirmation of leadership: his own or anyone elses'.  Romney’s words are soft and somehow excusable in their doughy feel because of the inevitable pity one must accord the Republicans due to their ass-handing in the elections.  Mildly entertaining, we allow Romney the ability to speak as a sign of our forgiveness toward an organization of people that dopily plods along in their inability to recognize their own ruinous ways and how those ways affect others – affect us all.  I don’t besmirch Romney and the Republicans for offering flaccid notions of freedom, but they must never be allowed to pass these notions off as the better ideals of our forebears. 

Again the Republicans – as evidenced in Romney’s symptomatically simplistic response – manage to complain about much, and rely upon their complaints as some magical indicator of their own and better leadership.  Had we elected Romney as President, perhaps we would care more.  But then hard based ridicule is a little less menacing when it’s coming from a fool.  So when anyone on the Right tells President Obama that he needs to be bellicose with the assholes of the world, they make a very large assumption that they are somehow mystically excluded from that list.  And since the Republican Party constantly does what it wants while telling people they should be mad at Democrats for allowing it to happen, the roundabout nature with which Republicans deal with their own confused existence, gives them little room to be offering advice... you know, if they actually had any that made sense.