Ya know, if this clown wasn’t such a big, fat load of wasted human flesh, he would have known that a quick hit on Geraghty over at NRO would have provided him with tons of links to DadMitt fighting off the racist hordes.

But no, fucking Jonah the Ass-candle is too busy. Normally people this stupid end up at WalMart for life, he writes for the Times. I don’t get it.

I just hope Natalie Portman participates in this. Because then, you know, I can, uh, say, well, yes, in a real sense we did… do that together…and I “saw” everything…

Sadly, I must admit that after spending the past few days reading the excellent reviews on Jonah’s book over at Sadly, No! I am all orgasmed out.

Really, it’s a turn on.

Jonah was busy arranging his shelves of cliff notes that will be used as a backdrop in his upcoming interview on the subject of meritrocacy.

OK, Romney was born in 1947, which means he was 18 or so when his Dad “marched” with MLK. Unless he was either developmentally disabled or doing copious amounts of LSD, it’s hard to imagine an 18-year-old “thinking” his Dad marched with King in Selma, when he really was in Detroit.

On the other hand, if there really is a NYTimes headline “Romney leads a protest” from 1965, and it really involved civil rights, I’m impressed. I don’t have access to the Times back that far, but that’s intriguing.

From Wikipedia:

Romney was a strong supporter of civil rights and was generally considered a moderate Republican, perhaps a bit to the right of Nelson Rockefeller, but well to the left of Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan.

Anybody know if the headline about George could be true?

Well, begin here, and then check the link …

FACT: In The Summer Of 1963, Governor Romney Participated In Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Freedom Marches” In Grosse Pointe, Michigan.

In 1963, George Romney Gave The Keynote Address At The Conference That Sparked The Martin Luther King “Freedom Marches” In Detroit. “The establishment of these human relations groups came in the wake of several major events (besides the embarrassing racist practices of such suburbs as Dearborn), which took place in 1963 and helped galvanize interracial support and cooperation for integrated housing. The first event was the Metropolitan Conference on Open Occupancy held in Detroit in January 1963. The second event was the Martin Luther King ‘Freedom’ March in June of the same year, the spinoffs of which were several Detroit NAACP-sponsored interracial marches into Detroit suburbs to dramatize the need for black housing. … Governor George Romney gave the keynote speech at this conference, in which he pledged to use the power of the state to achieve housing equality in Michigan.” (Joe T. Darden, Detroit, Race And Uneven Development, 1987, p. 132)

Governor Romney Marched In July 1963 In An NAACP-Sponsored March Through Grosse Pointe. “The next couple of NAACP marches into the suburbs were more pleasant. Both Grosse Pointe and Royal Oak Township welcomed the interracial marchers. Close to 500 black and white marchers, including many Grosse Pointers, marched in ‘the Pointes’ that July. Governor George Romney made a surprise appearance in his shirt sleeves and joined the parade leaders.” (Joe T. Darden, Detroit, Race And Uneven Development, 1987, p. 132)

· Detroit Free Press: “With Gov. Romney a surprise arrival and marching in the front row, more than 500 Negroes and whites staged a peaceful antidiscrimination parade up Grosse Pointe’s Kercheval Avenue Saturday. … ‘the elimination of human inequalities and injustices is our urgent and critical domestic problem,’ the governor said. … [Detroit NAACP President Edward M.] Turner told reporters, ‘I think it is very significant that Governor Romney is here. We are very surprised.’ Romney said, ‘If they want me to lead the parade, I’ll be glad to.’” (”Romney Joins Protest March Of 500 In Grosse Pointe,” Detroit Free Press, 6/29/63)

http://campaignspot.nationalre…..ZlNGE5NTM=

Sorry, I aint smart enough to know how to shrten the hyperlink.

Thank you Santa for the Jonah book. I don’t know what we’ve done to deserve it. We must have been very,very good. I hope the NYTimes review is every bit as positive as the reviews it has gotten here and at SadlyNo.

You see, this is what gets me about the modern GOP. I certainly remember as a very young man in the 1970’s that there were still some Republicans who respected our nation and its citizens.

Then came St. Ronny and the motherfuckin’ “trickle-down” con artists, backed up by the looniest crackpot christianists and it all went downhill from there.

Actually Goldwater and Nixon killed the “decent” Republicans. Reagan was their bastard stepchild.

I used to know a decent Republican.

He switched to being a decent Democrat, before that became fashionable.

Be a bit careful here with the “sins of the fathers” thing: when I look at my daughter in many years hence, I look forward to telling her that I supported candidates like (now Speaker) Donna Edwards and seemingly-quaint “rule of law” thoughts.

Doughboy Jonah isn’t worth much discussion in my household, except as an example of how not to argue a point.

“Be a bit careful here with the “sins of the fathers” thing:”

I think the info in the link backs up the fact that the Pop was a solid supporter of civil rights, the movement and Dr. King.

It’s Mitt’s slight exaggeration of “seeing” it all that has folks a wee skeptical.

So Willard may be in the right to claim his pop was on the side of the angels but blew it by claiming he saw him march with MLK? Is he trying to throw the race? What can we call this, snatching derision from the jaw of faint praise?

I think Mitt’s problem was he was doing copious amounts of LDS in the ’60s.

Hey, t, this is a message for mrs. tbogg:

Give us a call on Sunday before you head back down, we’d love to meet you guys for lunch! We’re actually in SD tomorrow for granddaughter Isabella’s 1st birthday party, so we may stop by and annoy t, if we have time. But we’re coming back to L.A. Saturday night.

Love to see you, call us, or email!

We now return control over your blog to you, t.

“Romney was foolish to say what he said and, apparently explain it the way he explained it, but he has every right to take pride in what his father did.”

Says the Pantload.

I have no real problem with this, and I know enough about Romney’s father to know he wasn’t too bad, but that era seems like a million yeaars ago. And whatever nice things you can say about him certainly don’t apply to his calculating cold eyed prick of a son. Sins of the fathers, sure. Don’t make the equal mistake of bestowing credit for the virtues of the father, either.

I would also hasten to add that the Goldberg Mothership was dirty tricking for Il Milhouso around this time, so whatever ancillary credit Willard might get doesn’t flow Jonah’s way, too. Unless he can manage to suggest that Hoover was a Progressive and Man Of The Left while King was secretly a Conservative.

I know, I know…don’t tempt the bastard…

Please do not call Pantload ‘historian’.

The real historians get very cross about that kind of thing, and since we control the final result, it pays to be nice to us.

‘Enkew!

“History is stories about dead people”
-IgNoble Awards ‘07

I hope we can someday soon tell the history of J Pantload

I will give George Romney credit for his progressive (for the time and the party) view on civil rights. But marching through Grosse Pointe, Michigan ain’t the same thing as marching through Selma, Alabama.

Linda

Wasn’t pantload’s mother doing a lot of LBJ‘n in the 60s?

I remember well how George Romney torpedoed his campaign for president by saying that he was “brainwashed” about Vietnam (by Westmoreland). I remember thinking, what’s the problem? Gene McCarthy piled on by saying that a light rinse would have sufficed.

Mitt had two choices: run as a Northern moderate like his father, or go the crazy, right-wing, “double gitmo” route. He realized that a moderate Republican could never win, especially nowadays, and that’s why his campaign appears so phony. It is.

Yeah, there have long been rumors that Jonah, depending on Lucianne’s dedication to the Nixonite junta, might be Hubert Humphrey’s love child.

”King was secretly a Conservative”

For his book to have any respectability whatsoever, Goldberg has to find something conservative in the civil rights movement. The religious backing is something positive. The appeals to basic human equality, to the unfulfilled 14th and 15th Amendments, and to private moral suasion instead of violence may be other positive things. But movement conservatives rejected the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was an increase in state power. Who will he side with?

I thought of writing that MLK Day was the Christmas of liberal fascism but I thought that you had to assume that Goldberg had class. Puerto Rican Day is a better candidate. If you really marched with Dr. King, even if you are a white guy, you have every right to celebrate that day.