The most acute division on the right — the one that will give Mitt Romney the most trouble — is not between moderates and hard-core right-wingers, between electability-minded pragmatists and ideologues, or between the Tea Party and the Republican establishment. It is between those Republicans who disagree with Barack Obama, believing his policies to be mistaken, and those who hate Barack Obama, believing him to be wicked. Mitt Romney is the candidate of the former, but is regarded with suspicion, or worse, by the latter. The former group of Republicans would be happy merely to win the presidential election, but the latter are after something more: a national repudiation of President Obama, of his governmental overreach, and of managerial progressivism mainly as practiced by Democrats but also as practiced by Republicans.
It is unlikely that those seeking a national act of electoral penance for having elected Barack Obama are going to get what they are after. For one thing, the number of Americans who believe President Obama to be merely incompetent is far greater than the number of Americans who believe him to be, not to put too fine a point on it, evil. For another, that larger group of voters is, for once, probably right.
I disagree pretty strongly with this, as you might guess, given what I've written in the past. I don't think Williamson has anything but anecdote to go off of for that second paragraph. And personally, my opposition to Mitt Romney is borne out of his record, simply that. Whether Obama is evil, incompetent, or just wrong (as I think he is) has nothing to do with my judgment of what Mitt Romney has done.
- Comment (39)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Comment removed after reading Williamson's whole article.
If you responded to me, sorry. I've decided not to participate in this discussion for now.
Edited on Jan 12 at 6:13amDec '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
After having read the whole article, I think he is trying to make an inaccurate simplification. Its not incompetent versus evil, its a degree versus kind dispute. I dont have to believe that Obama has ill intentions to want a change of kind, and not a change of degrees.
Nor am I a flaming ideologue. I rather like moderates, moderates that are in fact moderates. Bush was a moderate, I have no issue with him as a moderate. I would vote for a moderate again happily. I have a problem with unscrupulous weasels who will say anything to anybody to get elected. Romney is such a weasel.
I disagree with Mr. Williamson's characterization of gingrich. He cannot simultaniously be too conservative and too liberal. Whereas one will actually see a nice combination of scorched earth and reasonable cooperation. Are we really going to lambast Gingrich for sitting on a couch with Pelosi, or advocate areas of commonality between republicans and democrats, and in the same breath condemn him for being the scorched earth far right candidate?
Gingrich is actually running on what Williamson is indicating we need, with the ability to deliver the big policy goals and the compromises.
Edited on Jan 12 at 6:34amJun '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
The "he's evil" argument was tried back in 2008. It may be correct, but it didn't work. The new information (not surprising to most of us) is that Obama has no idea what he's doing. That's the new evidence. That's the evidence that's almost impossible to ignore.
May '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
I think Williamson is wrong in his characterization of people like me.
I don't hate Obama; I have never called him wicked. I don't think like that. My opposition to his discernible governing philosophy, his policies and his methods is not irrational, not personal, not visceral, not wildly out of touch with the reality of the man, and hence not comparable to Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Based on my knowledge of his background, his policies, his associates and appointees, and his MO in office, I judge him far worse and more destructive than a conventional liberal. I think people like Williamson, who accuse people like me of a kind of Obama Derangement Syndrome and are doing an enormous disservice.
Edited on Jan 12 at 6:34amDec '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
And to be fair, Gingrich is starting to get a touch of the weasel too.
Nov '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
I'm with Guruforhire -- this is an inaccurate simplification. I happen to sit in a third camp: I believe Barack Obama is a perfectly well-intentioned individual but that his policies are evil and his view of America is harmful. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
Aug '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Asserting something strongly doesn't make it true. Williamson's entire piece seems based on his opening assertion rather than any evidence.
Apr '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
katievs: I think Williamson is wrong in his characterization of people like me.
I don't hate Obama; I have never called him wicked. I don't think like that. My opposition to his discernible governing philosophy, his policies and his methods is not irrational, not personal, not visceral, not wildly out of touch with the reality of the man, and hence not comparable to Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Based on my knowledge of his background, his policies, his associates and appointees, and his MO in office, I judge him far worse and more destructive than a conventional liberal. I think people like Williamson, who accuse people like me of a kind of Obama Derangement Syndrome and are doing an enormous disservice. ·
Would you say that you thought him to be a particularly virulent conventional liberal, or do you find the Kenyan anti-colonial argument convincing? From spending time with Kevin and reading you here, I'd be very surprised if he thought of you as suffering from any form of derangement syndrome. It's obviously true that in any "the world is formed of two types of people" generalization that involves multiple qualities, some people will have unprescribed mixes.
Feb '11
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Evil or incompetent, it doesn't matter, the end result is the same. The policies of the Democrats are destructive and of the "eat the seed corn/kill the golden egg-laying goose" variety. Obama must go. Now. Obamacare must be overturned and doing so in 2013 will be a lot less difficult than in 2017. After looking at all the facts available I have concluded that of all the people running this time around, Romey has the best shot at doing all of the above.
Edited on Jan 12 at 7:03amRe: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
I have never understood the personal hatred anyone has for a particular politician. I've met some I liked and some I didn't, but I could never bring myself to feel hatred for anyone. I have a feeling, in fact, that I would like President Obama if I ever had the opportunity to hang out with him.
And yet, I think some of what's happened under his watch and some of what's happened under President Bush's watch, is an unmitigated disaster for the future of our country.
Hatred has absolutely nothing to do with it. Again, I actually find the guy likeable and particularly as a husband and father. His policies? Very bad. That there seems to be no effective spokesman for liberty? Also very bad.
Jun '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Williamson misses the point. The hate campaign against Mr. Bush was entirely contrived by the liberal media. The vitriol and propaganda had no basis in reality. Its only purpose was to damage Mr. Bush and see him removed from office. If legislation passed under Bush was so evil, why has the left made no effort to repeal it? The Patriot Act is still on the books, Gitmo is still open, and targeted assassinations have not only not stopped, but have been expanded under the current administration.
Now contrast what was said about Bush versus what went unsaid about Obama. He was never properly vetted by the press. What we know about his early childhood and upbringing is based on an autobiography he didn't even write. His past associations with radicals was swept under the rug. His political philosophy, assuming he has one, has never been revealed by a published paper. What are we to think?
The point is we still don't know our president. The speculation ranging from incompetent to evil is all entirely justified precisely because so much has been deliberately covered up or ignored. And we likely won't know until he leaves office.
May '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Paules is right.
The justice, or due moderation, of rhetoric is determined by its relation to the object.
Bush = Hitler is immoderate because, in reality, Bush is nothing like Hitler.
Stalin = Hitler is not immoderate.
May '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
James Of England
Would you say that you thought him to be a particularly virulent conventional liberal, or do you find the Kenyan anti-colonial argument convincing?
I am inclined to believe that there is something to that anti-colonialism argument. I don't consider it the motive principle for the Obama administration, but I do think that aspect of his background influences him and explains some of his otherwise inexplicable actions in office.
Edited on Jan 12 at 9:39amJun '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
katievs
James Of England
katievs: I think Williamson is wrong in his characterization of people like me.
Would you say that you thought him to be a particularly virulent conventional liberal, or do you find the Kenyan anti-colonial argument convincing?
I am inclined to believe that there is something to that anti-conolialism argument. I don't consider it the motive principle for the Obama administration, but I do think that aspect of his background influences him and explains some of his otherwise inexplicable actions in office. · Jan 12 at 7:30am
I agree. On a variation of the Irishman's question (is this a private fistfight, or can anybody join in?) Obama's personality is to ask, "is this a private resentment of inequality, or can anybody join in?"
May '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Let's note that Obama's background (as given in his book, and as researched and analyzed by such a one as Stanley Kurtz) is in no way conventional. His associations--Jerehmiah Wright, Bill Ayers, etc.--are not the associations of a conventional liberal.
The kind of people he has appointed to high office: the racialist Eric Holder, the 911 truther Van Jones, Anita Dunn ("Mao Zedung is a personal hero of mine"), etc. represent something very different from the conventional liberal.
Likewise his bullying manner of governing and his habit of disregarding laws, traditions and judicial decisions that he doesn't agree with goes far beyond conventional liberalism.
But it's also true that liberalism has been becoming more radical in recent years, as can be seen, for instance, in the fact that there are fewer "blue dog Democrats" and they have less and less influence.
Edited on Jan 12 at 9:40amDec '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
I don't disagree entirely with Williamson's article. But, I think he gives too little credit to the anti-Romney faction in assessing the prospects for another nominee to 1) win the general and 2) cooperate with Democrats in a way to advance the conservative agenda.
I have a genuine concern that Romney is the wrong man to put up against Obama. Yes, I'm aware that his competence is a huge plus. But, this election was supposed to be about Obama, and in particular, about the utterly illiberal concepts embodied in Obamacare. Romneycare may not nullify the issue, but it certainly makes presenting the already complex arguments to a sleepy electorate a more difficult proposition. Big minus.
Then there's getting things done with the cooperation of Democrats. Romney's done that. Unfortunately, it's called Romneycare. Santorum and Gingrich have done that too. It's called Welfare Reform.
Given Newt's erratic nature, I've come down firmly in the Santorum camp. However, I fully expect to vote for Romney in the general election and then continue to pray that our leaders will do the right and necessary things to pull us back from the brink.
Jun '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
We've had bullies in office before; Lyndon Johnson comes to mind. But what I fear is that in Obama we have a sociopath similar to Richard Nixon. Again, this is speculation. And yet my intuition tells me that there's a dark side to Obama that he attempts to keep hidden. His childhood was something more than just unconventional. He was neglected, perhaps even abused. The dangerous part (as I describe above) is that we simply don't know for sure. I'm convinced of one thing, however, the man is psychologically unsuited to hold the power of his office. On that much I think most of us will agree.
Dec '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
This is the most I've ever disagreed with Williamson, but it's only in degree rather than in kind. I think the real dividing line is whether people view Obama as a threat to liberty or a grave threat to liberty. Repealing the damage he has already done is important, but we cannot dismiss the importance of repudiating the ideology as well. Such rabid progressivism needs more than just 4-8 years in the penalty box; it needs banishment from the league.
Dec '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Amen, KP. Amen!
Jun '10
Re: Is the Romney Fight Really About Whether Obama is Incompetent or Evil?
Repudiating the ideology won't be enough. The flaw in representative government is that the wrong people are drawn to office. "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," goes the proverb. But there's a corollary not often mentioned: "The corruptible among us are drawn to power for nefarious reasons." George Washington was elected, in part, because of his sterling character. Why is it now we have a government full of con artists, cheats, liars, thieves and scalawags? I suppose someday we'll elect our officials as much for their character as for their ability. Perhaps we'll require a psychological test for those running for office. Until then we're going to get more of the same.