Towards the end of a speech in Jacksonville over the weekend, Romney tried to rally his supporters by telling them what they "deserve."
"We're going to take America back. The future demands it. The future is out there for us to take it. Our kids deserve it. You deserve it. The nation deserves it. Peace on the planet depends on it."
Wait, what? Peace on earth is dependent on electing the Romney-Ryan ticket? On Tampa on Thursday, Romney mocked President Obama's lofty rhetoric, but what are we to make of a presidential candidate who believes "peace on the planet depends on" his victory?
This has come up before. In January, after he won the New Hampshire primary, Romney complained about Obama's "lofty promises," before explaining:
"Our campaign is about more than replacing a president; it is about saving the soul of America."
First, I didn't realize there was something wrong with our soul that we need a politician to fix. Second, what was that about lofty promises?
On the one hand, he wants to complain that President Obama has grandiose ideas about an American transformation; on the other hand, Romney wants voters to believe he's going to save our soul and create peace on the planet. There's a problem with pushing both lines at the same time.
Leave a Comment:
He's the Moron... er, I mean the Mormontologist, White Knight, The One Foretold. If he wins, the crazy old "prophet" in Salt Lake City has told him he gets to be "God" of this planet without having to wait to die and get his pie in the sky later.
:Yup. And of course there's peace on earth, when everyone's died from climate change.
Peace on the planet by starting a war with Iran, and angering Russia?????
Peace on the planet? This is the same guy who can't wait to rattle sabres. He'll be led by the nose by the neocons into whatever wars they can't wait to have our young people fight for them.
Nothing screams PEACE like Dan Senor...
First Mitt all but says, he's going to war with Iran. Then he blatantly insults Putin on National TV. Just to end his speech with. Peace on the planet, Now that I can guarantee, if you vote for me. Has anybody given Mitt a Mental Competency Hearing?
"I'm going to Nuke Iran! (YES!!) I'm going to b*tchslap Putin! (YES!!) I'm going to be-store peace on Earth, and good will towards man!(Yesss!!! Wait? What?)
I don't know whether Romney's rhetoric is all that lofty. He's just speaking to the desire hardwired into the "conservative" soul for a big daddy figure to save them from all the monsters under the bed. It's way more creepy than lofty.
He forgot to mention Mom and Apple Pie.
I do NOT want my soul saved by the likes of him and his religion.
Maybe he means peace on the planet he'll get to rule after death?
Truth be told, lines like that just strike a weird chord in me. I have nothing against your average normal(ish) mormon. But, someone like Mitt Romney? No thanks. Mormonism is scary and weird enough without someone who's scary and weird even by their standards having the power of the presidency.
Given how deeply involved in the Mormon church Romney is, and given the Mormon church's history with the US government, why the hell would anyone think a Mormon president would be a good idea? It's not. It would be scarier than Bush's rootin' tootin' fundamentalist numbskullery.
One should bear in mind that is the campaign that does communication like its 1984. Orwell's 1984, not Reagan's. And given that Romney's foreign policy advisors are the fringiest warmongers spawned by the Bush crowd, people like John Bolton and Elliott Abrams, it's hard not to conclude that that's "peace" as in "war is peace."
It's worth remembering Robert Altemeyer's research on Right Wing Authoritarians (RWAs). He conducted a simulation that involved balancing interests around the world given various events (e.g., large-scale crop failures).
Groups composed of RWAs tended to protect their own at the expense of others - and frequently made choices that led to "die-offs" of up to 2 billion people.
In contrast, more progressive groups made choices that led to much smaller (or no) die-offs.
If Romney is elected, particularly if Republicans maintain control of the House and gain control of the Senate, I would not be surprised to see large-scale die-offs (or "kill-offs"). So the "peace of the planet" may well be at risk.
Don't forget that Altemeyer's simulations also involved geopolitical problems, and that outbreaks of war--including nuclear war--are common in runs involving just highly-authoritarian personalities. They are not only more self-centered than other people, they also tend to pick the most aggressive option available.
Maybe he meant Kolob.
This planet or the next one?
"We're going to take America back. The future demands it. The future is out there for us to take it. . . . Peace on the planet depends on it."
Well I'm certainly glad Mitt doesn't waste his time thinking "lofty" thoughts. Pompous, yes. Egotistical, certainly. Narcissistic? For sure.
And why am I doubtful that "stewardship" of the White House, Wall Street, the country's remaining natural resources and the very futures of the entire population isn't in Mitt's perview, unless it produces $$$$$ for his Robber Baron puppeteers. Greed is just ugly.
Hi, my name is Willard Mitt Romney. I'm running for Mr. President because I want peace on earth.
"I personally believe, that U.S. Americans,
are unable to do so,
because uh,
some, people out there, in our nation don't have maps.
and uh…
I believe that our education like such as in South Africa,
and the Iraq,
everywhere like such as…
and, I believe they should uh,
our education over here,
in the U.S. should help the U.S.
or should help South Africa,
and should help the Iraq and Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future,
for us."
Thank you Willard, and next from Wisconsin...
Not for nothing, I think I'll cast my lot with the candidate that's actually won a Nobel Peace Prize, rather than with the candidate who cut such a winning swath through our allies' countries that he was dubbed by them to be, "Mitt the Twit," a "Romneyshambles," and "the American Borat."
Mittens was simply trying to pander to people with higher consciousness, the words he used were okay, but kind of mixed up. The problem was with the messenger who really had no idea of what he just said or what he even meant. Someone shuld have asked him to explain himself then we would have witnessed some strange explanation, I'm sure. Just words. He's just talking.