Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
That's Kathleen Parker's diagnosis in the Washington Post of why the former Governor of Massachusetts is still facing resistance from a substantial chunk of the Republican electorate:
Handsome, rich and successful, he is happily married to a beautiful wife, father to five strapping sons and grandfather to many. At the end of a long day of campaigning, his hair hasn't moved. His shirt is still unwrinkled and neatly tucked into pressed jeans. He goes to bed the same way he woke up — sober, uncaffeinated, seamless and smiling in spite of the invectives hurled in his direction.
What’s wrong with this guy? Nada. Which is precisely the problem. Romney could use a limp.
This is the sort of punditry one would expect out of the bullpen at TMZ. Let me go out on a limb and submit the notion that opposition to Romney from within the GOP doesn't owe to the fact that voters have never seen him under the vivifying influence of a Pepsi.
Nor is it a matter of Romney's empathy deficit, a second line of argument Parker employs later in the piece. She's right to note that Romney's analytical gifts would likely be of more value in the White House than the sort of insatiable compassion we saw perfected by Bill Clinton. But count me skeptical that the most conservative wing of the party looks askance at Romney because they find him insufficiently therapeutic.
Speaking as someone who's long been skeptical of Romney, but who (especially as his nomination looks increasingly likely) would be happy to be disabused of his misgivings, here's the problem: he's attempted to earn my vote without first earning my trust.
He possesses a past littered with disregard for conservatism, whether in the form of disowning the Reagan legacy or constructing a health care plan in Massachusetts that provide the intellectual architecture for Obamacare. He now would have us believe that he has converted to the side of the angels on nearly every issue, yet the fact that he has never done so except when it happened to be politically expedient calls his motivations into question. And his campaign is pockmarked with little tells of his less-than-conservative instincts: proposing what amounts to a trade war with China and telling Rick Santorum on the debate stage that individual liberty is "not worth getting angry about", for instance.
Parker and her ilk think that those of us who haven't been converted have placed a premium on style over substance. They're wrong. Rather, we think style tells you something about substance. Thus, we don't distrust Romney because of his mechanical delivery on the stump. We distrust him because that robotic nature -- considered in the context of his political record -- seems indicative of someone who sees this as a game to be won, rather than a cause to be advanced. We don't, I assure you, give a second thought to whether or not his jeans have been pressed.
- Comment (45)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Troy Senik, Ed.
We distrust him because that robotic nature -- considered in the context of his political record -- seems indicative of someone who sees this as a game to be won, rather than a cause to be advanced. We don't, I assure you, give a second thought to whether or not his jeans have been pressed.
A suggestion for Mitt's new slogan: "Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto."
Mar '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Did Kathleen Parker used to write for Tiger Beat?
Apr '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
I, for one, would like to thank Katleen Parker for making me realize how stupid I am.
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
In Ameritopia, Mark Levin effectively lays out the philosophical underpinnings of the utopianism running amok in America these days. Mitt Romney's legislative record in Massachusetts, most prominently his health care reform, smacks of just such a utopian mindset.
I love Mitt's morals and family values. I also admire his business success. I have no problem with him looking buttoned-up and telegenic all the time. I am worried that his instinct will be to run Leviathan a bit more efficiently rather than labor to restore constitutionalism.
Edited on Feb 1 at 10:16amMay '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Sadly, Ms Parker is reflective of her South Carolina education. Style over substance indeed.
Dec '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Troy,
Ditto.
Regards,
Jim
Jun '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
I'm sure Mitt got where he is the old fashioned way--with help from his dad's friends. Real salt of the earth fellow.
Nov '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Amen, Troy.
One more thing: all these people who tell us that we used to dislike Romney "because he didn't get angry" and now should therefore like him because he has shown his mean streak are also on completely the wrong track.
So far, we've seen a man who thinks individual liberty "isn't worth getting angry about" but gets nasty when he feels that his inevitableness is threatened. That's not the kind of anger we're looking for. We, in fact, were never particularly looking for anger; we were looking for principle, something that those people just don't seem to understand.
May '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Wait until he is nominated... Then the ship will hit the sand. Expect a full out war on his Mormon faith. It's already started in the foreign press and internet links will be flying on the stories of how his in-laws were not permitted at Ann and Mitt's religious ceremony and how he participated in baptizing his late atheistic father-in-law into the Church of the LDS.
This will not be pretty.
Aug '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Lucy Pevensie:
One more thing: all these people who tell us that we used to dislike Romney "because he didn't get angry" and now should therefore like him because he has shown his mean streak are also on completely the wrong track.
So far, we've seen a man who thinks individual liberty "isn't worth getting angry about" but gets nasty when he feels that his inevitableness is threatened. That's not the kind of anger we're looking for. We, in fact, were never particularly looking for anger; we were looking for principle, something that those people just don't seem to understand. · 0 minutes ago
A thousand "likes".
Aug '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
"He's too perfect, and we're not worthy to lick his boots!" Where have I heard that sort of nonsense before? Oh yeah . . . it's how the left talks about Obama.
No more cults!
Sep '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
An ad just appeared in my screen entitled "Shirts for the Shirtless". It took the words right off of my back.
Jan '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
They used to ask John Madden why he didn't require his football players to wear coats and ties on airplanes, like the Dallas Cowboys did.
Madden answered that a dress code isn't "discipline." Discipline is not jumping offside on third and three. If his player didn't blow it on the field, Madden didn't care what they wore on the airplane.
When Romney was on the field ... when he was actually in office ... he jumped offsides all the time. I don't care what he looks like, or whether he's a boy scout, or whether he has a perfect marriage. I care about whether he will lead the effort to establish a disciplined, limited government.
I imagine he's a great guy - probably more moral and praiseworthy than 99% of the population. That doesn't make him a leader who can persuade others about the necessity of a conservative view of government. Every time he excuses his concessions by pleading that it was what the people of his state wanted, does he not realize that he's implicitly admitting that he isn't very good at leading the conservative movement?
Apr '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
I give Ms. Parker credit for not being swept away by the power crackling in Mr. Romney's jeans, although she couldn't help alluding to it.
Feb '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Agreed, but I'd like to add something, it isn't just about him not being able to lead the conservative movement. I recognize that a successful Presidential candidate may not be the idealogical standard bearer, but he should govern as conservatively as possible within the confines of our system.
He should be able to communicate, persuade, convince, inspire, so that when he does have to compromise, as any politician will, he will not loose the base, and when he does have to draw a line in the sand, win or lose, he doesn't lose all of those in the middle he's won over.
He should have enough integrity to be able to weather than invariable scandals and failures of any administration.
He should take criticism and adjust but maintain his course over all.
He should have some common touch.
His legacy should not be to manage, but to reverse our decline.
Is this Romney?
Jan '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
The question remains for all who believe Mitt really is just a squish preparing to sell out the country and merely slow our decline - what else you got? All the apostasies, transgressions, flip flops, gaffes and untrustworthy behavior apply just as much, moreso, to Newt and Paul. Yet, we don't have the contributors relentlessly piling on day after day pointing out all the problems with them. To a degree it's understandable Paul is ignored, the comparatively blind eye shown to Newt, though, other than by Dr. Rahe, is utterly inconsistent and inexplicable from those who would claim some intellectual integrity in their steady criticisms of Romney.
Santorum is the only one who should escape the niggling doubts of the faithful "pure conservatives." So, to me the fact that all these relentless commentaries about the suspect bona fides and reliability of Romney don't come with a "therefore we have to support Rick Santorum." strike me as either whiny and redundant, or they demonstrate a suspect capacity to assess our nomination prospects objectively and make a decision. Neither of those prospects indicates there is anything worthwhile to be gained from all of these Romney-doesn't-pass-muster posts.
May '10
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Troy Senik, Ed.
......
1) He possesses a past littered with disregard for conservatism, .......... proposing what amounts to a trade war with China ....
2) individual liberty is "not worth getting angry about", for instance......
1) So does Newt.
2) Troy, if you took the question, with his whole set of answers in context, and then analyzed that statement as your 10th grade term paper, you'd flunk the assignment. He was obviously referring to the discussion in context, not the isolated concept.
Romney's natural phlegmatic-choleric temperament is analytical to a severe fault for mass retail politics. He is so used to dealing with smart people who have done their homework prep that he assumes that you actually read the whole answer. Obviously, he needs to fix that even more than he has already, given the long knives out on both Left and Right. Hyper-sanguines (e.g., Bill Clinton) are lousy managers, but they sure know how to sell the masses.
He does need an image-personality adviser to go along with all those data nuts running his campaign.
For those who are unhappy with this, the proximate cause is Newt- Jennifer Rubin speaks.
Edited on Feb 1 at 11:11amRe: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
1. This wasn't a defense of Newt, but I don't find the two comparable. Newt led one of the greatest conservative triumphs of modern times and oversaw substantive and sweeping policy changes.The analogy that keeps coming to mind is that if conservatism was a church, Newt would attend weekly and have plenty of lapses to confess. Romney would be there at Christmas and Easter.
2. Too reductionist. Of course Romney was talking specifically about the individual mandate. But that gives you insight into how his mind works. If something is plausible as a technocratic fix, he can't fathom why someone would object to it on grounds as abstract as "principle."
Duane Oyen
Troy Senik, Ed.
......
1) He possesses a past littered with disregard for conservatism, .......... proposing what amounts to a trade war with China ....
2) individual liberty is "not worth getting angry about", for instance......
1) So does Newt.
2) Troy, if you took the question, with his whole set of answers in context, and then analyzed that statement as your 10th grade term paper, you'd flunk the assignment. He was obviously referring to the discussion in context, not the isolated concept.
May '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
What is the difference between Mitt Romney and a statue of Mitt Romney?
The statue doesn't change positions.
Jan '11
Re: Mitt Romney: Too Perfect?
Which leads to the question, if one only attends church christmas and easter, but lives the principles preached in the church, aren't they more of a Christian that the guy who attends church regularly but disregards the teachings in his actual life?
But before we stretch that analogy any further, let's just mention this. You seem to think that one can only have been a champion of conservatism if they've accomplished something politically, i.e. Newt. Romney has consistently lived conservative principles in both his personal and professional life and accomplished amazing things in both areas because of it.
Newt has done some impressive things as a champion of conservatism, but he's also tarnished it repeatedly, and lied about it. He doesn't live the values he preaches on the campaign trail either personally or with regards to the politics he's supported. So I don't buy he deserves to be seen as being in better standing than Mitt.