With the passing of each and every day we see that Bain Capital Master of the Universe Mitt Romney is in not one to suffer being questioned by his lessers:
A defensive Romney was peppered with questions today on exactly what he meant when he said — most recently on Meet the Press — that he "saw" his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. Recent articles have indicated that his father, the late Michigan Gov. George Romney, didn’t march with the civil-rights leader.
Admitting that he didn’t see the march with his own eyes, he said, "I ‘saw’ him in the figurative sense."
"The reference of seeing my father lead in civil rights," he said, "and seeing my father march with Martin Luther King is in the sense of this figurative awareness of and recognition of his leadership."
"I’ve tried to be as accurate as I can be," he continued, smiling firmly. "If you look at the literature or look at the dictionary, the term ‘saw’ includes being aware of — in the sense I’ve described." The questioning did not relent. "I’m an English literature major," he insisted at one point. "When we say I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn’t necessarily mean you were there." (He meant the Super Bowl, of course.)
We will pause here to interject that Romney once said that his favorite novel was Battlefield Earth, and I’ll go out on a limb and say that he is probably the only English literature major to name that book as his favorite. Ever.
Sorry, Mitt. You were saying?
The back-and-forth continued to go south for Romney, who had intended for the story of the day to be about his slams on Mike Huckabee for easing penalties for meth users. Romney had to correct an earlier statement that he had himself "gotten tough on methamphetamine" (His proposed legislation as governor never made it through the Massachusetts House.)
"I’m making sure that that’s correct as quickly as I possibly can," he said. "If there’s any confusion there I’m sorry for any confusion."
Romney was increasingly exasperated with the questioning, especially when a reporter tied in these instances of word-parsing with the governor’s past missteps on the trail — such as his suggestion that he was endorsed by the NRA.
"Again, you can decide to hyper-analyze a word and try and create an impression that would not be accurate," he responded. "Frankly, I didn’t realize that the NRA had an official endorsement program that was different than them phone-banking for me."
‘I didn’t apply for that, wasn’t aware of it," he added.
Romney added with a weary smile that he knows that his words will be scrutinized, and that he’s "up for it."
"If now and then I miss a word or I get something slightly wrong, I’ll correct it, acknowledge what’s wrong. But the overall thrust, the overall meaning of the story is very accurate."
Except that it isn’t and the condescension act ("I’m an English literature major…") isn’t going to play very well with the press unless he’s got a Karl Rove or Karen Hughes up his sleeve to run interference for him or enforce media discipline. This isn’t the first time that Mitt has gotten snippy with the press:
Romney got aggressive with reporters after a military-focused event early this afternoon. Several times Romney tried to move on from reporters trying to ask follow-ups or not take certain questions in one of the largest and testiest gaggles he’s had on the trail. He was deluged with questions about his speech, and specifically about the line, "freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom."
[...]
Near the end of press conference here after an Ask Mitt Anything town hall, he was asked if he thought a non-spiritual person could be a free person, and he returned with: "Of course not, that’s not what I said." Pressed again about the freedom requiring religion line, he said, "I was talking about the nation."
He was also pressed about the politics of his speech and reiterated, "You know, that’s not what the speech was about," and then again said it was about the role of faith in America. Romney was also grilled on the lawn service company that he used at his home in Belmont and how it had employed illegal immigrants, which he came under fire for about a year ago and the problem has since resurfaced.
Asked if he should take additional precautions, he said, "It’s not something as a homeowner that I’m able to do, and it’s not something which is available under our current system in this country."
After being pressed again, he turned the question back at the reporter and asked if he should ask every waiter in each restaurant he dines in if they are legal. Romney tried instead to tout his own employee verification system to identify illegal immigrants and suggested that the onus should fall on employers, not homeowners.
Romney was then asked about his rhetoric on sacrifices from the American people during war, but a reporter charged that his answer could be expected during peace time and what did he think about war. Romney shot back, "next question."
You know, the press was willing to put up with this kind of crap from Bush because he was reportedly the kind of guy they could have a beer with; but with Mormon boy, that’s not really an option.
The real problem here is that Mitt really believes that he is the answer to all of life’s problems. He has his Stepford family, his big bank account, and his resume and he’s not going to let some ink-stained wretches keep him from his destiny.
Pull up a chair. This ought to be fun.




37 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About TBogg
RSS/XML Feed
Kind of like he “saw” his kids serving in Iraq because he’s aware of them and that godawaful war?
What a moment that was, when the Patriots won the World Series! I haven’t been as excited since the Red Sox won the Kentucky Derby. I can hardly wait to see (figuratively, of course) if the Celtics manage to take the World Cup.
Mitt Romney: Field of One.
Mitt Romney: Red Queen protegé.
WTF? You’d think we’d let this shit pass after Bush, but hell, maybe this means at least some of us have figured out that it’s a bad idea to elect an idiot with poor communication skills to a job that requires at least some effort at diplomacy. Honest to God, I understand that Hollywood Video clerks and McDonald’s fry cooks don’t have to be that coherent, but they can’t really start wars by saying genuinely stupid things, either.
Can someone *please* sit the GOP down as a party and explain–politely but firmly–what job exactly they’re interviewing for? Because they don’t seem to know. They don’t even seem to be able to offer us a candidate whose resume includes “wants to make government work”.
I’m rich. But only in the figurative sense.
Football requires a baseball, and baseball requires a…
I saw Mitt Romney in a public bathroom with Larry Craig engaged in perverted sex acts!
(Disclaimer- this sentence uses “saw” in the English Major type of way, just like Mitt Romney uses it. It does not imply that I was there, or that I actually witnessed anything. I ’saw’ him in the figurative sense, performing sex on another white, old republican, while wearing magic underwear. The reference of seeing Mitt in a sexual act and seeing Mitt with Larry Craig is in the sense of this figurative awareness of and recognition of GOP pervertedness. I tried to be as accurate as I can. I have a math degree and really do not understand crap about the written word.)
I saw that, too. It was inspirational how Tom Brady pitched while wearing that bloody sock. I think Mitt recounts it in his book “Profiles in Courage.”
I’m not a journalist, but it must make really good copy when you can get a candidate to lose his cool. So, I am keeping well stocked in popcorn. We already know that Johnny Mac has a short fuse, maybe we’ll find that Gomer Huck does as well.
If you let the press drink beer from their water bowl, they’ll curl up beside you and go to sleep.
If you try to strap them onto the roof of your car, they’ll shit all over you.
Willard “sees” himself as President. That’s not gonna happen, either.
Battlefield Earth? Isn’t Mitt getting his made-in-America cargo cults mixed up?
JoFish- I’ll have you know the Romney boys wanted to join the military, but that awful Bill Clinton wouldn’t let them.
From yesterday’s WashingtonPost.com chat:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01598.html
I’m sure the Cons who slammed Kerry over “Seared…seared into my memory” will give Willard the same treatm….oh who am I kidding?
The only thing that keeps me from total despair when I look at the democrats, is that this nitwit is the likely gooper candidate.
Wait, so he would have joined when they didn’t need him, but since they didn’t want him when they didn’t need him, they can’t have him when they do? And this is DFH Bill Clinton’s fault?
I suppose we should find Tagg’s honesty refreshing, it takes, well, not a real man but you know, to admit that he’s not enough of a real man that he could gain admission to a smaller military. Apparently he can only make the cut when they’re so desperate they’re even recruiting the severely mentally ill and the developmentally disabled for cannon fodder.
dsidhe, I think what Tagg meant to say wss that he had, in fact, “joined” back under the repressive Clinton days, in the same sense that his grandfather “marched” with MLK, and Mitt “saw” that happen. We’re in a whole new world of word games here; it’s going to make Clinton’s “meaning of is” seem like a beacon of clarity. And so, even though Tagg didn’t actually “do” any time on the front line, he’s clearly “done” his part in the war on terror — even if he’s really spending his time on the sidelines waving that big foam “We’re #1!” finger that daddy got when the Cleveland Yankees took home the Stanley Cup.
Oh, and as far as “figured out that it’s a bad idea to elect an idiot with poor communication skills” — we kinda tested the waters on that one with the ol’ Gipper (”a mind is a terrible thing to waste”) and I think Garry Trudeau dealt quite effectively with the issue back then. Still didn’t stop the American Sheeple from electing another cretin in 2000, so we must have soft spot for teh stupid. That should give the whole field of Republican candidates some much needed hope for their campaigns.
It just dawned on me what Romney is doing here. He’s trying to send a coded message that he really was around during the ’60s while the “Summer Of Love” and “Woodstock” were happening.
How you ask? Why, he’s admitting that he has hallucinated with these stories of seeing events that didn’t happen so he must have been doing some serious drugs in those days.
Right? Right? Bueller?
“Mormon boy”.
Umm. Excuse me?
If this was Russ Feingold running for Prez, would we tolerate someone calling him “Jew boy”.
You’re one of my faves Tbogg. But this time, your snark got a little ahead of you.
The media seem to enjoy picking on Mitt the way they picked on Gore in 2000, only this time the guy deserves it.
dstatton, has maureen dowd written a disparaging piece on mitt’s wife’s wardrobe yet? that’s my benchmark for picking on a candidate…
While Dr. King was alive, the LDS still barred blacks from the priesthood. What was Mitt’s dad’s position on that?
I think, since Willard was the one to claim that “freedom requires religion”, that referring to his religion is fair game for TBogg and anyone else.
Should Sen. Feingold make a similar claim, of course, the same goes for him.
And should I ever run for President, I hereby give permission to refer to me as “Athiest boy”.
Wasn’t it amazing? I thought that Battlestar Galactica was going to take the series, but then Batman hit that pitch off of Wyatt Earp and it was all over.
I’m not worried about Willard’s feelings being hurt. And I agree that he is an insufferable hypocrite who may or may not think that America should be an incipient theocracy. And that he deserves whatever grief can be heaped on him.
But we shouldn’t resort to schoolyard religious taunts. It allows Mitt to play the martyr, and is beneath us.
I guess that as someone who was called “Jew boy” plenty of times when I was a kid, I’m a little sensitive to these things.
captphealy, I’ve always wanted to be known on the campaign trail as “Faithless Freak”, but “Pagan Punk” would do, too.
pdxmike:
I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean it in that vein. If it was Feingold, it would have been “Jewish Boy”. If it was JFK it would have been “Catholic Boy”. If it was Tom Brady, it would have been “Wing Nut World Series Pitcher Boy”.
At least I hope he wasn’t saying Jew Boy. (Although, according to D. Pantload, White males are the new Jews, so there’s that).
Why is this a revelation to anyone?
I pegged this guy for an insufferable asshole the first time I saw him open his mouth.
pdx,
Think of “Christian boy,” and adjust your instruments
accordingly. Mormon and Jew are not even close to parallel–
but if 6 million Mormons are slaughtered by Christians for
their religion (rather than left alone for over a hundred years), I may
revisit that.
Otherwise, this is the 10,548th version of “Why can’t I say the N-word?”, and that question has yet to generate anything other than bad-faith pearl-clutching.
Syndicalist-
I’m not really sure which of my “instruments” I’m supposed to adjust. Just sayin’.
But, until 6 million or so Mormons are slaughtered, they’re fair game for taunting and name calling? That can’t really be what you’re saying. After this Holocaust occurs, you’ll “revisit that”? This is a version of “Why can’t I say the N-word”?
Whatever.
what if someone called Tom Cruise “Scientologist boy”? Is that offensive?
It seems to me there is some issue here about what is dignified as a “religion.” Mormonism doesn’t get a lot of respect.
And while we’re at it, suppose someone referred to Barack Obama as just……”boy”?
These are interesting questions, but I think the bottom line, if you look back at the post, is that “Mormon boy” actually is not being used any kind of epithet.
I think “boy” can be more degrading, depending on the context. Obviously, in Obama’s case there is a rather different history of the word “boy” being drawn upon.
My point was poorly put, pdx, but “Mormon” just doesn’t have the history or connotation that “Jew” (with or without “boy”) does. So “Mormon boy” is much more like “Christian boy.” The term “Mormon” doesn’t in and of itself mean an insult (Compare “Mormon!” with “Jew!”– different history). I think the “boy” part is more the insult, so I don’t think the parallel is there.
Now, that said, there’s a lot of anti-Mormon sentiment that can be unfair and flippant– whether about polygamy, not drinking, Joseph Smith, racism, etc. Southern Baptists simply can’t preach much to Mormons about racism. But again, the term “Mormon” is not what is wielded as the weapon of insult. That may change, granted, but I don’t think it will.
So, again, my hyperbolic imagery ruined my point to you, which was just to say that history matters: “Mormon” isn’t that close to “Jew” and “honky” isn’t that close to the N-word. Taunting and name-calling are bad precisely because we exercise some judgment about what counts as how hurtful a “name.” Judgment, aka “instruments,” that can be adjusted from making identifications that aren’t close enough for equivalent moral objection.
Mitt wanted to try LSD and join the Love Generation in the 60’s. Is it his fault that his go to guy was dyslexic?
that, my dear sir-or-madam, is the funniest dang thing I’ve read today.
Of course Mitt’s son saw the Patriots win the World Series, since he’s their quarterback and all…
For laughs, go to Hot Air to watch the wingers fight over what this means. It’s hysterical. Link is here.
“Bain Capital Master of the Universe” (and Mormon Stake President) Willard Romney is Dilbert’s Pointy-Haired Boss made flesh, or some near simulacra. In the Romneyverse, it is the job of the CEO to assert whatever sounds most resonant at that point in time, and it is the job of his many minions to make PH-B’s assertion true or at least libel-proof. The Tragedy of Mitt is that the ‘fortunate son’ currently squatting in the Oval Office has given America seven years of this particularly noxious brand of MBA-Speak, and the concept of “making our own reality… which you will have to adapt to” has not worked out very well for that portion of the American voting public not related to Bill Gates or Sam Walton.