Mitt Romney explains why he voted YES on the Omnibus bill.
Good for him.
I write in praise of Mitt Romney, what he said, and how he said it.
It seems unexceptional. There should be nothing special about a U.S. senator explaining a vote. What is exceptional to me is how normal it was. It felt like time travel, back to an earlier day, before Trump. Before Gingrich. Back to when being a legislator was about the resolution of competing interests. No partisan sneers. There are no subordinate clauses alluding to Joe Biden's age, Hunter Biden's addictions, the trouble at the southern border, left wing radical communists, or any of the "usual suspect" shots. Those are the devices which allow a Republican to say something neutral while still assuring GOP voters that the person is an angry partisan.
Romney praised money going to Utah projects. He assured voters that defense spending would go up 9% while domestic spending would only go up 5%. An urban coastal liberal might think Romney emphasized the wrong things. He isn't trying to please them, but he isn't picking a fight with them either. What he is doing is unfamiliar because it is so normal sounding. He sounds like a serious man doing a serious job of governing, not posturing. Here it is, a three-minute video.
 |
| CLICK HERE |
This report would not be complete, though, without showing the immediate comments posted on Twitter, which is where he posted this. In multiple posts I have described my dismay at the behavior of GOP officeholders. They have tolerated and enabled Trump, giving him credibility and status as the voice of the GOP even when he makes unhinged rants. (See yesterday's post showing his Christmas greeting.) I consider this cowardly and dangerous for American democracy. I keep hoping GOP candidates and officeholders will reclaim the GOP, but they don't. There is an explanation: A majority of GOP voters appear to prefer demagoguery. GOP voters don't like what Romney is serving up. Twitter is not a representative sample, but representative samples in polls show that an overwhelming majority of GOP voters still like Trump, Trump’s pugilism, and his message.
Here are the first ten comments that followed his post:
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to Https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
10 comments:
$100 says that Mitt Romney did not read the 4,000 page Omnibus Bill before he voted for it. How irresponsible is that? What kind of a moron would vote for a bill without knowing exactly what's inside of it? Romney is reckless, and he probably got paid-off to vote for this bill. It's pretty easy to see why most Republicans dislike Romney. He's a one-termer.
I keep wondering how the battle between Normal Republicans and Kook Republicans will end.
Calling Mitt Romney a reckless moron who got paid off says nothing about the Senator from Utah and everything about the out of touch with reality mental state of some Republicans, who need a lot of help with their issues.
When you cannot attack on substance, attack on process. When you cannot attack on process, attack the person.
Presently, I see no one challenging the personal attacks on party members, a violation of Reagan's Rule to not speak ill of fellow Republicans. Obviously that principle is not in play with Mitt or any of the handful of conservatives left in the party. The next session of Congress will have many challenges, one of which will be gridlock. So why not get what you can in the waning days of this Congress?
Romney seemed an honorable candidate when he ran against Trump, but honor is obviously not a Republican value. Trump is clearly insane but as Peter points out, an overwhelming majority of GOP voters still like him. The only explanation is that they're as crazy as he is.
That must be what they mean by "American Exceptionalism." It would explain why we have more guns and more gun violence than other developed countries but remain unable to see the connection.
It seems that if (a very big IF) there are any "normal" Republicans left, they would be speaking out against the Wingnut Coaltion, but all I hear is Crickets.
Romney would have made a great president. If he had won in 2012, I think the country would now be in a much better place.
I for one have no hesitation in praising Mitt Romney for accomplishing what can seem nearly impossible in a late-middle-aged man, let alone a prominent politician, to wit, changing his proverbial spots.
As recently as 2012 he was an arch-racist, a Harry Reid-confirmed tax cheat, a rapacious financier, and even an animal abuser, who wanted women in binders in the kitchen, and blacks back in chains.
It’s been since then too that he uttered risible foreign policy inanities such as Putin and Russia being the biggest threat to world peace and stability. Luckily President Obama corrected him, astutely.
This hearteningly rehabilitated Mitt Romney is almost home free now in terms of Beltway esteem. Only any role in a future Republican administration could imperil his reformed status and worldview.
Submitted on behalf of John C. John had trouble posting under his own name because of some programming mismatch between Blogspot and his mobile phone:
JohnC here:
Echoing John F’s comments a bit. The comments to Romney’s speech - (except the last one)- got me thinking about the power of culture. How can you simply hate reasonableness? Peter Drucker’s famous quote that ‘culture eats strategy for breakfast’ applies to any community with strong norms. Drucker was speaking about companies of course, but it works at a larger scale too. A lot has been written about this concept and one explanation I think describes our current moment and explains the seemingly reflexive responses (e.g “ I bet $100”…)
Three of the strongest attributes of Culture formation are stories, symbols and rituals. Stories (and myths) tell us who the heroes and villains are. They tell us what is good and right and virtuous. Symbols evoke powerful feelings of identity, and rituals cement them. Trump has masterfully harnessed all three of those and fashioned a worldview so powerful that defying clear facts and reason have little consequence. It’s the reason why people will buy silly pictures of a ripped, buff, Rambo-ized hero who is anything but. Non-GOPers see this as stupidity or a moral failing. I don’t agree.
Trump’s key contribution to political and social culture is making open ridicule, vilification, and contempt for his opponents (aka “enemies”) the accepted social norm. But here’s the thing, once you or I cross the line and “join the bully” we can never respect the one being bullied. They lose their humanity in our eyes. It started with his name-calling where most of his targets were publicly humiliated. And otherwise decent folks have adopted that posture. It’s “normal”
So here’s a simple test to see if you are gullible to this kind of cultural captivity (MSNBC watchers too): before you reflexively deride a person…. (Written or otherwise) anyone… see if you can say or write one genuinely redeeming fact or admirable attribute about them or their argument. Just ONE honestly positive thing (not snarky).
I’ve tried this in the corporate world where territories are fought over and competition is fierce, and something “clicks” and I have watched the temperature drop and collaboration emerge. But it requires a kind of humility that seems to be in short supply these days.
Our hope lies in our collective courage to step outside of the toxicity of hatred and contempt. But I also think we need a better story and I don’t see a more powerful story-teller with a more compelling story emerging that will reset the current one. I’m afraid Romney’s “good governance” is not sufficient.
John C.
John C. makes a good case – we shouldn’t deride others. But nor should we accept unacceptable behavior. We don’t “join the bully” by denouncing bullies and opposing their behavior.
Trump has acted in a way that presented, and to some extent still presents, a threat to the functioning of our Republic. He’s incited his followers to do likewise, resulting in an armed attack on our Capitol, illegal attempts to alter election results, death threats against election officials, and the list goes on. We’d have to be as crazy as they are to tolerate such criminality or fail to recognize that an entire political party is complicit in it. That's why Republicans prevented the creation of an independent commission to investigate the coup attempt.
Post a Comment