Four years ago, shortly before the presidential campaign, John McCain was participating in a town-hall forum, and heard from a voter who wanted to share a concern. "I can't trust Obama," she said. "I have read about him and he's not, he's not uh, he's an Arab."
The Republican nominee, to his credit, took back the microphone and said, "No, ma'am. He's a decent family man [and] a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not [an Arab]."
Mitt Romney in 2012 is a very different kind of candidate, and we were reminded of that this afternoon.
For those who can't watch clips online, the presumptive Republican nominee held an event in Ohio today, and heard from a woman who thinks President Obama "should be tried for treason."
It was an opportunity for the former governor to show some leadership -- as McCain did in October 2008 -- and reject this garbage publicly. But true to form, Romney responded to the voter's question as if he didn't have a problem with her ridiculous rhetoric.
Later, after the Q&A was over, Romney was pressed by reporters on whether he agreed with his supporter's "treason" line. He said, "No, of course not."
That's nice, I suppose, but having courage after the fact isn't the quite the same thing as showing some guts when the moment calls for it.
It's not the first time Romney shrank when confronted with an opportunity to lead, and I have a strong suspicion it won't be the last.
Leave a Comment:
I can recall radio host Al Franken - when his Senate run was just a glimmer in his Air America's audience's eye - refusing to tolerate callers who called in with what would be similar comments about Bush (although Lord knows Bush gave us enough real material so that we didn't have to resort too often to "teh crazy" to express our displeasure). Franken would issue a brief chastisement and end the call. Why can't Romney, who is running for POTUS, summon up as much gumption as Al Franken did when Franken was "just" a radio host? Would it be coming to too much of a conclusion to think that Romney enjoys hearing this kind of drivel?
I'm looking forward to the 2012 video montage of Romney's base similar to what was taken of those who showed up to Palin's 2008 rallies. Their behavior makes for a very ugly portrait of Republicans.
This is NOT a man i want for President! How in the world will he handle other leaders,or terrorists!When he won't even stand up to his own right wing!
How did Bush II handle it?
Dubya handled it by passing it off to his spine, aka Dick Cheney.
Romney's "Sister Souljah non-moment."
One of many, I'm sure.
gutless to the end
It's more than just cowardice; it's also a case of having no honor and integrity. I've been reminded of that John McCain moment more than once this year, and it hasn't all been with Romney either.
BTW, that McCain moment was one of the few times I've been proud of him. I seldom agree with his politics, but I still have to give him credit for having class. That's almost a nonexistant trait in congress anymore.
And I thought it was only democrats in Congress that exhibited spinelessness, gee, it's nice to know there is bi-partisan spinelessness. :>)
There's quite a difference between being obnoxiously pig-headed when you are trying to create legislation and being too scared to confront an idiot -- what a teaching moment it could have been for the dumb dumb woman to tell her, as firmly as McCain told that whacko "No" (re "he's an Arab"), "No, of course not."
I am beginning to think the GOP and its bezillionaires are such because they are basically socially inept cowards who have to use their power (and bullying) or their money as a shield, because they sure can't hold their own in face to face interaction.
"I am beginning to think the GOP and its bezillionaires are such..."
Actually the GOP is behaving this way because the evangelical/tea-potty crowd that they courted aren't behaving the way that they are supposed to! These groups have "the nerve" to believe that they are the tail wagging the dog - which has every GOP'er moving further and further to the reich. Since Mittens didn't start off favorably with this crowd, he really has to toe the line and keep quiet when they speak or face the voter backlash come November.
As he displays his cowardice once again, it is becaming obvious Romney's campaign strategy is to harness the electoral forces of bigotry, prejudice and low-informnation emotionalism as his pathway to the presidency!
I just hope Americans are above the debased intellectualism of the Republican party, and will begin to demand Romney make good on explaining his proposed polilcies should he be elected in November.
I say Americans in general because the American mainstream media has so far punted in this election cycle, and have forfeited any meaningful analysis of Republican candidates' policy viewpoints, proposed legislative measures and what in general they think our society ought to be as we move into the future!
Save our democracy and vote against the Republican candidates who appear on your ballot in November! -Kevo
A week or so ago Romney fired a foreign policy spokesman simply because he was gay. As a result the "religious right" concluded Romney has no core principles and is very "manuverable." This week he refuses to tell a "supporter" that she is wrong about President Obama. In addition to lacking a core, Romney lacks a spine. I have never seen a major candidate so utterly lacking in leadership skills or understanding. The man is useless.
(singing)
Brave Sir Romney ran away.
Bravely ran away away.
When danger reared it's ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Romney turned about
And gallantly he chickened out. ****Bravely**** taking to his feet, He beat a very brave retreat.
Bravest of the braaaave, Sir Romney!
I call upon the power of Youtube to bring forth a video of the above. Is there a special term for a parody of a parody...?
'Politics'?
Mitt Romney gets this set to his mouth which makes me think only of the word "wimpy". This incident only strengthens my opinion that he is wishy washy and not an adult.
Let's not forget his response when a US soldier was openly jeered by a Republican crowd at a debate back in the fall.
crickets...crickets.
I fear you have missed the mark. Mitt is too dumb to be a coward. No not cowardice but business like disclaimers with no money back guarantee are his style just as lies and bigotry are the new republican platform.
Obama campaign responds to Mitt Romney's silence on treason allegation
Statement from Obama campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith on Mitt Romney failing to repudiate accusation of treason against President Obama and his campaign surrogate's attack on travel by President and Mrs. Obama.
Though McCain's response was less cowardly than Romney's, I think saying "He's a decent family man... He's not an Arab" is pretty ugly in its own right.
C'mon, Steve. This is not a bug in the Republican mind. It's a (positive) feature. I'm not being facetious. Republicans hated what McCain did in that situation. Rmoney won't make the same "mistake."
Someone here hit it on the head. Romney and his ilk have absolutely no ideas of how to move America forward. So they want to turn time and social policies backwards. Right back to the middle ages.
This is just another situation showing Romney's character that will encourage a reasonable person to vote for Obama in November.
Do we have enough reasonable people to overcome the low information voters and the racist and those who will be persuaded by the amount of Freedom of $peech this fall?
The comment was an aside to an aside, not exactly something directed for Romney to address would you say. And this argument coming from a blog that has regularly posted comments calling for the prosecution of President Bush and VP Cheney is a little odd.
Personally, I have not called for the prosecution of Bush and Cheney for "Treason". They should be investigated and probably tried for "Crimes Against Humanity" because of their inexcusable invasion of Iraq.
I agree. The woman's comment (African-American woman at that) was directed to someone in the crowd near her, and not a direct question to Romney. Therefore he's not obliged to answer it. I think he took the high road not to comment on the negative rhetoric. Not a relevant campaign issue and hardly worth the effort to make it one.
She said it on a microphone while her body was pointed directly at Romney. How's that directed at someone nearby and not at Romney himself? Excuses, excuses.
Romney steps into these events with a narrow set of practiced Q&A responses. He took the safer step by not saying anything when something happened beyond the path's fence. Otherwise, filet of sole.
Won't stand up to his own crowd! How about terrorist??? Or other world leaders???
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012 without a doubt.
I wish MSNBC would get rid of Michael Steele, who (with incredible ineptitude) lied in discussion with Al Sharpton about Obama behaving in a similar manner. He claimed that unnamed Democrats had made statements "on the record" (and presumably in Obama's presence) calling tea partiers terrorists as well as making other slanderous remarks. Steele couldn't name a single concrete example.
I can understand why the RNC gave this jackass a paycheck. But MSNBC? He is no more articulate than Sarah Palin, excreting a slurry of buzzwords, cliches and non sequiturs to spoil the intelligent discourse that is more typical of MSNBC. He is an embarrassment to MSNBC, and would be, if he had the self-awareness, to himself.
This is despicable. Romney IS a coward. I guess we'll have to wait for SNL to show how stupid and insulting this woman was.
To help Robdon defend Mitt, come on! Mitt needs every vote he can get. Had he chided this woman, however gently, he might have lost her vote.
And Robdon, I don't wish to put you on the spot, but what is your answer to her question?
I don't mind being put "on the spot," I appreciate civil dialog. Didn't see your post until today, though.
Not sure which "her question" you are referring to? I do NOT believe President Obama has committed treason (nor should be tried).
If it is to restoring the balance between the branches, the President did say in effect he was going to work around Congress. While I appreciate the challenge of working with a body that is being obstructive (perceived or reality), I think true leadership can be beneficial and I don't (and this is opinion) believe that President Obama has provided that.
For instance, in his budget from just a couple of months ago, he did not included keeping the student loan rate down, but NOW he says we should do that. Why not have it in your budget if that is what you believe instead of playing politics with it (which BOTH sides do)?
Hope this answers your question from my viewpoint. Thanks.
OK, the woman began her question with a statement about her opinion regarding President Obama should be tried for treason. This story compares the same scenario, the woman "stating" to Sen. John McCain that she could not trust Obama because he's an Arab. Not a question, McCain took the high road and Romney let her say that without a flinch. Only later when asked he says of course not. My conclusion is McCain still has some guts, but Romney is all weasel. More importantly, his business was essentially merging companies and cutting jobs to make himself and buddies money. At least McCain was a pilot in Vietnam, not on a mission in France. McCain has said some awful things too, but he is not going to let someone make a statement like that with him in the frame. Romney just says "whatever you say" and let's it go.