"He has recast his positions so many times, he doesn’t seem to know who he is."
Dowd concludes that Romney is now wed to the extreme right wing of the Republican Party and can no longer change course, i.e. shake the Etch A Sketch:
"And that is what’s disturbing about the prospect of a President Romney. Even though he once seemed to have sensible, moderate managerial instincts, he won’t stop ingratiating himself with the neo-Neanderthals."
Nonsense. Romney is not and never will be "cool," but as acknowledged even by Bill Clinton, Romney's career at Bain Capital was "sterling" (see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/bill-clinton-bain-capital_n_1561208.html). He did not build that career on the basis of procrastination, for which Obama has come to be known. Nor could he have achieved lasting success in the arena of cutthroat capitalism by exhibiting spineless toadyism. Under the amorphous veneer lies an unyielding constancy that allowed him to earn joint law and business degrees at Harvard (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/us/romney-merged-law-and-business-at-harvard.html?pagewanted=all).
If elected and placed in charge, will Romney morph to the middle? I would put money on it.
Which doesn't mean that I "like" or "would like" Romney. Most of the politicians whom I have known have never revealed what they really think, i.e. for me are not "likeable," given that their primary motivation is to be elected. But then why should "likability" matter?
I am far more "disturbed" that if Obama is reelected, he, too, will be guided by his true inclinations and veer far to the left.
As much as I despise the Republican policy on abortion, I have always preferred the middle.
No comments:
Post a Comment