Mitt Romney loves to talk about "leadership," but to borrow a line, though he keeps using that word, I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
This morning, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down parts of Arizona's anti-immigrant law, SB1070, which Romney heralded as a "model" for the nation during the Republican primaries. Romney is in Arizona today, and a lot of folks -- including his own supporters -- would like to know what he thinks of the ruling.
Here's the Romney campaign's official statement in response to the high court ruling.
"Today's decision underscores the need for a President who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy. President Obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration. This represents yet another broken promise by this President. I believe that each state has the duty -- and the right -- to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibilities. As Candidate Obama, he promised to present an immigration plan during his first year in office. But 4 years later, we are still waiting."
This one paragraph helps highlight so much of that's wrong with Romney's approach to campaigning for the presidency. He managed to say 104 words about a Supreme Court ruling, without actually taking a side -- I know no more about Romney's beliefs on this after reading his statement than I did before reading it.
The irony is almost jaw-dropping. Romney is certain we need a president "who will lead" on immigration policy, while at the exact same time, Romney refuses to lead on immigration policy. Put it this way: refusing to take a stand because one constituency or another might get angry isn't leadership; it's cowardice (and for the Republican presidential hopeful, it's far too common).
This as an opportunity for Romney to step up and prove he's ready to lead, but he lacks the intestinal fortitude to do so.
Apparently, voters are supposed to believe Romney will will lead on immigration, right after they vote for him. And where, exactly, will he lead the nation to? Presumably he'll let us know once he's in office.
As for the notion that President Obama has "failed to provide any leadership on immigration," Romney have missed the news from two weeks ago, when Obama led on immigration. The Republican added that we've been waiting for years for Obama to "present an immigration plan," but that's demonstrably false -- the comprehensive plan was released more than a year ago.
Update: A campaign press aide told reporters that Romney will have "no further comment" on today's court ruling, and will not address the issue in person.
Leave a Comment:
That is why he walks so funny...all that straddling of the fence to say NOTHING!
He is a total fraud:
http://www.saltlakemagazine.com/blog/the-myth-of-mitt-1/
http://www.politicolnews.com/romney-son-investigated-for-8-billion-ponzi-scheme/
I am so stealing that first line. Thumbs up to this comment. :oD
Although he can't say it, Romnee is a BushIII presidency.
I don't know how Romney feels about ANYTHING!!!! He's a waffler!!!!
Romney might love his wife. I think it is the only thing he hasn't publically flip flopped on.
"I am a rich, white, American- and most of the planet's billions want to be just like me!"
(Plus, like Nixon, I have a "secret plan"- to defeat the Soviet Union, get us out of the UN, legalize Indentured Servitude.)
"Indentured servitude" vs. "student loan policy." Compare and contrast.
Romney speaks corporatist doublespeak. A small cabal know what he means, the rest of us will never know in fact what he means, until it is too late to do anything about the @!$%# storm his policies, were he to be able to steal the election, will rain down upon us.
Based on my experience with corporate doublespeak, I'd say a small cabal knows that what he's saying is entirely meaningless BS, and a larger cabal is congratulating the emperor on the quality of his garment in hopes of gaining entrance to the small cabal.
Too bad the Emperor is running around naked and there is no child brave enough to point that out to all the fools around the Emperor.
I would say he is a wolf wearing sheeps' clothing, but that would be an insult to the wolf.
And by "bipartisan fashion," he means he expects the Democrats to give him whatever he wants and get nothing in return.
Oh. I thought 'bipartisan fashion' was a sex act.
It could also be referred to as the 2 step, if you are 2 faced.Which is why I think Congress isn't working, they don't understand the word compromise, and I think the hour is getting late for that one to work, another missed opportunity for the GOP, they certainly keep missing opportunities to square it with the American people. They just walk around humming"Jimmy crack corn and I don't care."
Well, I guess we will have to go back to what he said in the debates/primaries then. You know, back when he was trying to appeal to the wingnuts and was to the right of the Arizona law...
I see you filed this under "mitt-romney" AND "cowardice." Isn't that redundant?
Even after a relentless stream of these kinds of blatant lies from them, the completely insane denial of reality/unabashed Big Lie in the very first sentences of the Romney campaign's statement is still breathtaking.
this is just pathetic ... i anticipate that soon any scheduled "appearance" by mittwit will consist of the staff placing a full size cardboard cutout of the "candidate" on a dolly and rolling it down the rope line ---
which begs the question - would anyone notice? is there any real difference?
Mitt is just trying to fulfill the requirement for being the Republican President of this country: "[Somebody] with enough working digits to hold a pen." He doesn't need to lead, just sit on the chair and be pretty.
This morning at dawn as I was out for my daily jog, I noticed the sun rose in the east. Equally obvious, Mitt Romney is a coward unwilling to take any side of any position. All by itself such unrelenting political cowardice is a disqualifier for any presidental candidate of either party. Steve, what else is new?
Ron that is exactly what I think. I wish I could add the jog part to my daily routine.
Romney has missed dozens of opportunities to lead. He had opportunities to condemn bigotry during the debates. He had opportunities to disavow the birthers. He had opportunities to say "I support the President on foreign policy", which every candidate in my memory has done.
He needs to fire a few speech writers. He needs to *publicly* tell a few big donors that he doesn't need or want their money. He won the nomination and it's time he started acting like the leader of the GOP. Otherwise, they'll go into November with a ludicrous, unpopular platform that no new voter or independent will get behind.
He was probably trying to save a buck by hiring inexperienced campaign workers.Out with the old in with the new. Isn't this the new Corporate philosophy(model), since Nixon advocated for it. Get rid of our knowledgeable good, hard workers and replace them with cheap labororers who get as little done as allowed. The new improved version of Corporate waste, so much for correcting ones' mistakes, and they are still trying to abolish unions. Unions=people, Corporations=numbers.
Ron I completely agree with you. Sooner or later most Americans will see that Romney has no moral compass. He will say whatever his handlers tell him to say.
"And where, exactly, will he lead the nation to?"
Rawmoney will "lead US" right off the cliff!
Immigration is certainly a complex issue. It would be nice if we didn’t have to have any borders, but unfortunately that is not the reality of things. On the one hand, you can feel for the people just wanting a better life. But on the other hand, you worry about these drug lords causing such violence. But to say President Obama hasn’t looked to resolve these issues would not be true. President Obama has always shown to try to resolve these issues at the border and immigration reform. Hopefully, someday we will have some good solutions in place to take care of both of these problems plus open borders for people to freely travel wherever they wanted to. That would be a dream come true.
Romoney is a coward. In other breaking news, sun continues to rise in the east and set in the west.
I'm beginning to think that the Romney take on public policy is that it simply doesn't matter. His support comes mainly from the fact that he's "not Obama." Policy positions, detailed outlines of what he's for or against, are not the grist of his appeal - and I think he knows that. All that anyone needs to keep in mind about Mr. Romney is (1) he's not Obama and (2) he'll be the bouncer-in-chief come January 20, 2013. Honestly, the Republicans could be running Charles Manson for all they care, on the same "platform" and have pretty much the same appeal as they do with Mr. Romney. Geeze - how do run against that?!?
I find the level of disconnect even deeper. Romney does take a position, but consider the logical implications of his statement.
His position on AZ SB1070 seems to be "lead from behind". Of course the States have their rights and responsibilities. Seems just a bit hypocritical, doesn't it?
Also, consider that his "state's rights" position is pretty much what SCOTUS just held was unconstitutional. How can he claim to provide leadership by supporting state's rights arguments be effective leadership if the Court continues to block the majority of this agenda??
Kudos for the Princess Bride line, it was fitting.
And there's that "we're still waiting" line. He's used that in regards to job growth, too, but it was a lie there and it's a lie here. Obama has presented and fought for plans, but Congress keeps killing them. Maybe it's possible he could have found a way to get them passed, but he definitely has presented them.
What I find interesting is Obama 'fails to lead' 'not a leader' but he is a 'TYRANT' when he uses the bully pulpit or the signing powers.
Bain is the bane of Romney's existence