As a Loser, Romney Does Not Disappoint

The man who promised to kill Big Bird is now devoting his foundation to children. In defeat, Mitt Romney is still the same shape shifter Americans knew so well before last Election Day.

He reappears on Fox, clueless as ever to explain that darned 47 percent again, “What I said is not what I believe” and concede “We weren’t effective in taking my message primarily to minority voters—-to Hispanic-Americans, to African-Americans, other minorities. That was a real weakness.”

Commenting on the current Washington crisis, he offers the insight, “They may be more interested in showing pain and saying, ‘See what the other guys did.’ Nero is fiddling.”

Romney’s lack of wit and grace recalls a politician with so much of both who lost the presidency twice to Dwight Eisenhower half a century ago, Adlai E. Stevenson, whose qualities of mind and heart seem as distant in these days of Sequesterland as Downton Abbey.

During his losing quests, Stevenson told supporters, “When the tumult and the shouting die, when the bands are gone and the lights are dimmed, there is the stark reality of responsibility in an hour of history haunted with those gaunt, grim specters of strife, dissension, and materialism at home, and ruthless, inscrutable, and hostile power abroad…Sacrifice, patience, understanding, and implacable purpose may be our lot for years to come. … Let’s talk sense to the American people! Let’s tell them the truth, that there are no gains without pains.”

As Romney retreats into his riches, it is impossible to envision a future in public service for him like Stevenson’s moment shortly before his death as JFK’s Ambassador to the UN…

MORE.

  

Author: ROBERT STEIN

Share This Post On

35 Comments

  1. The only consolation for today’s chaos lies in the realization of how much worse the mess in Washington would be if Romney were in the White House rather than Obama.

    True. And if Gore had taken the White House in 2K there would be likely be considerably less “chaos” to contend with in the first place – but yes, we are fortunate to have Mitt back in his own special world again.

  2. Have you no shame? Most people know who that was directed at. Well people that can’t stop attacking and smearing say things like this: “It’s hard to imagine that the people who voted for him didn’t feel the need to take a shower afterward.”

    I didn’t feel the need for a shower, but around here I feel I need wader boots to avoid what some people consider to be intelligent remarks (sometimes they are) but when they get the partisan bit between their teeth it’s a deluge of crap.
    Too bad.

  3. Well said, Robert.

    You mention “The Graceful Loser.” Well Romney certainly is not, but — regardless of how much I dislike George W. Bush for the damage he did to our nation and how much of a “loser” he was during his presidency — I must admit that he has at least been somewhat graceful in his post-presidency obscurity.

  4. Comparing the demeanor of one who WON two terms and retired to one who LOST twice in his quest for the presidency and expecting them to feel and act the same is a stretch, IMHO.

  5. @DD
    Mitten’s can play with his car elevator. Worry about vets at Michael Bilirakis DVA Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Center at the James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital in Tampa.

  6. OK

  7. Dd, rather than reacting personally with judgements about my character how about focusing your commentary on matters having to do with the subject? (That would be Mitt Romney). If you believe he deserves your support and/or defense then go for it.

  8. Subject, what subject. This is all about vilifying MR and by extension all that supported him. Here are some post headlines here at TMV:
    As a Loser, Romney Does Not Disappoint
    Mitt Romney – Still Unprincipled

    How about your remarks which I am judging not your character.
    Now I need a shower.

  9. Dd, up until this thread I didn’t know who you voted for. It’s clear you lean right but I’ve often thought moderately so. Regardless, my shower comment was general in nature. You seem determined to make it about you. As far as the “vilifying” of MR by TMV, my take on it is that Romney makes his own bed, why should others pretend it isn’t messed up? It’s clear enough the man’s standards morph as necessary to accomodate his own needs – and not just a little. I don’t respect that and see no reason to pretend otherwise.

  10. Even the dem’s were tiring of the Bush bashing…I guess it was time to move on to the next personification of the GOP to bash.

    RULE 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

    I almost forgot:
    RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”

    It’s ironic that Hillary wrote her senior thesis on Saul Alinsky and got out maneuvered by the master of community organizers.

  11. @zusa1
    Even though Hillary wrote about SA, her thesis was CRITICAL of SA.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.....sis#Thesis

    The thesis offered a critique of Alinsky’s methods as largely ineffective, all the while describing Alinsky’s personality as appealing. The thesis sought to fit Alinsky into a line of American social activists, including Eugene V. Debs, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Walt Whitman. Written in formal academic language, the thesis concluded that “[Alinsky's] power/conflict model is rendered inapplicable by existing social conflicts” and that Alinsky’s model had not expanded nationally due to “the anachronistic nature of small autonomous conflict.”[1]

  12. Joe has an interesting article just above this one. In it, a poll tells us that 38% of those interviewed blamed the sequestor on Republicans in congress. 33% blamed it on the President and the Dems in congress. And 19% blame it on both parties, equally. That means 52% see the President as a failure when it comes to the sequestor.

    I bring this up because it is a good reminder of the volumes of people in this country who (according to polls) don’t think Obama is as successful as some others do.

    I think some on the left would understand that the right can claim that some of Obama’s positions shift with the wind, and more than a little. And, that he sometimes says things that are flat out untrue (as politicians will do). It doesn’t make him a bad man. However, it does rightly anger some people. As has MR.

    “It’s clear enough the man’s standards morph as necessary to accomodate his own needs – and not just a little. I don’t respect that and see no reason to pretend otherwise.”

    Interesting, that quote could have been written just as easily by some one on the right about Obama; and with some truth. But I don’t think any of us who might have voted for Obama are stinking people.

  13. @zusai, makes me uncomfortable just reading it. Feels just as creepy when I watch done by either political party, to anyone.

  14. What Zusa1 and KP said.
    And I do lean right as a moderate, that’s why I disagree strongly with people on either fringe and those that vilify people from the opposite party.

  15. Those rules are the ultimate in bullying. On a personal level, I would prefer to have a physical beating by a bully than have a boss or spouse or enemy roll out those rules on me.

  16. rudi, Thanks for the info. I wonder if she has changed her mind?

  17. While not a fan of either Romney or Obama, having never voted for either one of them, and having my own reasons apart from those on the subject of this thread, I share Duck’s frustration at the villifiction of political “others” and those who find themselves from time to time in disagreement with the “party line.”

    Thanks, Duck, for speaking out.

    On topic: Romney has done himself no favors since the election in terms of connecting or estabishing empathy with or sympathy from the public. But, he’s a dead horse. It serves little purpose to continue beating him.

  18. beating a dead horse photo: Beating a dead horse deadhorse.gif

  19. And 19% blame it on both parties, equally. That means 52% see the President as a failure when it comes to the sequestor.

    You have to love it when…

    blaming both parties = President is a failure

    if a = b and b = c then a = z

    not exactly a logical conclusion.

  20. brc, thanks for the visual, here’s the cerebral: “When the crowd laughs at him and the ridiculous spectacle, the peasant gets angry and begins beating the old, feeble horse. He beats so ferociously that others join in the “fun.” Finally they begin to use crowbars and iron shafts.”

  21. KP, You logic makes perfect sense.
    38% R’s at fault
    32% D’s at fault
    19% R’s and D’s at fault
    Intersection
    57% R’s at fault
    52% D’s at fault

  22. ShannonLee, first, that is out of context. I suggested 52% would say the President was a failue when it comes to sequestration. He has been. Second, it means that 57% of those interviewed would blame Republicans for the failure of sequestration. I don’t see how tha can be considered arguable in context.

    But more, my comments referring to those statistics were intended to help some recall that we are divided on some issues and that bullying and personally villifying those who disagree is not helpful and is wrong. I hope you can agree and identify with my real message?

  23. typo: 33% D’s

  24. ZUSAI, yes, you must have posted as I was writing. Before this comment I posted something similar under Joe’s article as I was taken out of context there as well.

    To others, my _main_ point was about the bullying. Not the % points. The percentage points only point how silly it is for some ideologues to act like bullies.

  25. OK, I think we have to stop bullying the “bullies”, they are humans also. As Candide would say, turn the other cheek. :-)

  26. if a = b and b = c then a = z

    not exactly a logical conclusion

    Never underestimate the power of rationalization Shannon – especially when tribalism is a catalyst.

  27. I’ll simplify it: Only 38% think the D’s and Pres hold no blame.

  28. funny, I didnt think I needed to add the sequester part because you know, the thread is about the sequester.

    so to make it more complex, because making it simple does not help…

    “And 19% blame it on both parties, equally. That means 52% see the President as a failure when it comes to the sequestor.”

    And 19% blame it on both parties

    Blaming the Dem party does not equal blaming the President or vice versa. Make the two equate is illogical. Blaming Dems does not equal blaming Obama. Particularly in a poll where the two are separate choices.

    Here are some new numbers from a Reuters/Ipsos online poll posted on TMV today.

    Thirty-eight percent of Americans believe all the political actors involved – Republican and Democratic members of Congress along with Obama – deserve most of the blame for the cuts.

    Twenty-seven percent think Republicans in Congress are responsible, 17 percent blamed Obama and 6 percent thought Democrats were to blame. Nearly half of independent voters, 49 percent, said both sides deserve the blame.

    All 38
    Reps 37
    Obama 17
    Dems 9

  29. OK, now we know who to blame. We also know it is hurting some people, the degree doesn’t matter. What matters is both sides made their points and it is time to fix the problem, yes in that old bipartisan way. Now is now, so let’s get to work and then run a poll on how we did after it is fixed.
    Naive, huh.

  30. Apparently the new strategy is to go around the leadership(s). Both the President and the Chairman of the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, are meeting with Republicans that are amenable to getting some things done rather than posturing. Apparently even some Tea Party folk are interested in actally being productive.

    Which means maybe something good is actually coming out of this nightmare piece of legislation if there is no national disaster like a plane crash that sends them all scurrying back into their iron clad forts of non-cooperation.

    Of course I could be too optimistic (that would be a change).

  31. Out of chaos comes opportunity.

  32. Apparently even some Tea Party folk are interested in actually being productive.

    Hah! I’ll believe that when it’s on the books. We’ve seen how cheap and easily retractable talk is on that side of the aisle. And guess what? Matters of degree DO matter. If they didn’t we’d never talk about polls, legislation wouldn’t take place, and voting itself wouldn’t matter a whit. Romney lost because enough people didn’t trust his leadership abilities, his integrity, nor were they convinced he really cared about (or even understood) working class Americans. I believe they were right.

  33. z

    That’s what Ms. W-S said, and I have no reason to doubt her. Perhaps she is misinformed.

  34. I guess we’ll find out.

  35. ShannonLeee, once more, I hope you can agree and identify with my real message?

Submit a Comment