The myth of George Romney

AngeGal

Romney, the Romney campaign, and indeed Romney supporters have oft cited the influence of George Romney as an inspiration for Mitt. They have leaned heavily on the independence and leadership George allegedly displayed, with Mitt frequently telling a story how about his dad stormed out of the RNC in '64 in reaction to Barry Goldwater's speech.

One example of Mitt telling this is here - about a minute in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ek_jkwGg3I

However, it has now been revealed that is nonsense. Not alone did Romney Sr. not storm out, he formally seconded the nomination of Barry Goldwater. See here - http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/10/the-myth-of-george-romneys-walkout-138449.html

The article was published 10 days ago. Given this is such a blatant lie which has been repeated so often, is it surprising this hasn't received more coverage?

Duck Soup

AngeGal wrote: »

Romney, the Romney campaign, and indeed Romney supporters have oft cited the influence of George Romney as an inspiration for Mitt. They have leaned heavily on the independence and leadership George allegedly displayed, with Mitt frequently telling a story how about his dad stormed out of the RNC in '64 in reaction to Barry Goldwater's speech.

One example of Mitt telling this is here - about a minute in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ek_jkwGg3I

However, it has now been revealed that is nonsense. Not alone did Romney Sr. not storm out, he formally seconded the nomination of Barry Goldwater. See here - http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/10/the-myth-of-george-romneys-walkout-138449.html

The article was published 10 days ago. Given this is such a blatant lie which has been repeated so often, is it surprising this hasn't received more coverage?

Because it goes back to what a Dubya White House aide said in 2004: "We create our own reality."

Perhaps it's taken bloggers, commentators and even opposing politicians by surprise, but you can get a surprising amount of people to believe the last words out of your mouth. It's perhaps been one of the failures of the Obama campaign that they haven't been able to make headway by cataloguing Romney's multitudinous flip flops.

Part of it is a voter attention span and memory rivaling that of a goldfish. Part of it is that 90% of the electorate have their mind up made in favour of one side or another, so they're filtering out what they don't want to hear and accepting what they do - regardless of veracity. There might also be an element of "All politicians lie and mythologize. I expect that. I just want to know how they'll benefit me if they get into power."

It's understandable, but it's also depressing. It means that politics becomes a game of who's the best salesman.

Even St. Ronald of Reagan was fond of talking on his stump speech about the 'welfare queens' driving around in Cadillacs collecting multiple welfare cheques. Even when some advisors - perhaps worried that someone might point out that there was no such real story - told Reagan it wasn't true, Reagan just smiled and carried on repeating it.

Similiarly, Romney is creating a fiction about himself and his family history. Reagan's racially-loaded tall tale fitted his narrative of a venal welfare culture. Romney's family mythology fits his narrative of a legendary father, whose greatness, it is suggested, will now be fulfilled by his son.

Even if George Romney was a man of conviction, principles and honour, I'm not sure he'd necessarily recognize those attributes in his son.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Brian?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How about you address the points made instead of jumping straight into to "what about......"


As to the OP, I think Romeny's lies have become so common people have become numb to them. It's sad.

Valmont

Brian? wrote: »

How about you address the points made instead of jumping straight into to "what about......"


As to the OP, I think Romeny's lies have become so common people have become numb to them. It's sad.

And I think your excruciatingly and endlessly biased defense of everything Obama needs to acknowledge that many of the criticisms directed towards Romney can be equally directed towards Obama. Honestly, your posts on the various election threads have given me a new conception of how extreme ideologically bias can become during a presidential election.

Obama is not Jesus Christ.

Brian?

Valmont wrote: »

And I think your excruciatingly and endlessly biased defense of everything Obama needs to acknowledge that many of the criticisms directed towards Romney can be equally directed towards Obama. Honestly, your posts on the various election threads have given me a new conception of how extreme ideologically bias can become during a presidential election.

Obama is not Jesus Christ.

You've clearly not read my posts very closely then. I defend Obama when needed, but I am definately no great fan of him or any of the other dems, apart from Joe Biden.

I do however attack Romeny at every opportunity because of my ideological bias. I have made my ideological bias quite clear and will not apologise for it ever.

To the thread at hand; an attack on Obama =/= a defence of Romeny IMO. It's a cheap and throw away point to make.