SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
Mitt Romney reportedly teared up during his withdrawal speech yesterday but so far the pundits aren’t analyzing his moist eyes. Did he really get choked up? Was it merely a ploy to build sympathy for his likely presidential run in 2012? Alas, that sort of penetrating insight is reserved only for tears shed by Hillary Clinton.
Nor have there been strenuous objections about Romney’s lamentable remarks, revolting even by his own low standards, in which he essentially accused Clinton and Barack Obama of being in league with Osama bin Laden. “If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win,” Mitt said. “And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”
Yes, as Jon Stewart noted last night, if Mitt were to keep on campaigning–the terrorists would win.
Romney didn’t drop out for the perceived good of the country; he bailed because his campaign has been a fiasco. Despite the construction of an impressive political machine and the expenditure of vast sums of money, including tens of millions of dollars of his own fortune, Mitt couldn’t win a single important state.
And why was that? Well, as another Daily Show segment last night put it, Romney is a douche. Beyond that, he was surely hurt by the Mormon issue (especially in the South) and by the fact that he’s an inveterate flip-flopper with no core values, and hence most voters just didn’t trust him.
Come 2012, there’s a good chance that Romney will be back for another shot at the presidency. Given his inherent political liabilities, a second bid is likely to end in crushing defeat as well.
More from Ken Silverstein:
Commentary — November 17, 2015, 6:41 pm
The Clintons’ so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.
i. stand with israel
I listen to a lot of conservative talk radio. Confident masculine voices telling me the enemy is everywhere and victory is near — I often find it affirming: there’s a reason I don’t think that way. Last spring, many right-wing commentators made much of a Bloomberg poll that asked Americans, “Are you more sympathetic to Netanyahu or Obama?” Republicans picked the Israeli prime minister over their own president, 67 to 16 percent. There was a lot of affected shock that things had come to this. Rush Limbaugh said of Netanyahu that he wished “we had this kind of forceful moral, ethical clarity leading our own country”; Mark Levin described him as “the leader of the free world.” For a few days there I yelled quite a bit in my car.
The one conservative radio show I do find myself enjoying is hosted by Dennis Prager. At the Thanksgiving dinner of American radio personalities (Limbaugh is your jittery brother-in-law, Michael Savage is your racist uncle, Hugh Hewitt is Hugh Hewitt) Dennis Prager is the turkey-carving patriarch trying to keep the conversation moderately high-minded. While Prager obviously doesn’t like liberals — “The gaps between the left and right on almost every issue that matters are in fact unbridgeable,” he has said — he often invites them onto his show for debate, which is rare among right-wing hosts. Yet his gently exasperated take on the Obama–Netanyahu matchup was among the least charitable: “Those who do not confront evil resent those who do.”
Average number of Americans who are injured by chain saws each year:
A farmer in Kenya bit a python who tried to eat him.
A former prison in Philadelphia that has served as a horror-movie set was being prepared as a detention center for protesters arrested at the upcoming Democratic National Convention, and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump fired his campaign manager.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“Matt was happy enough to sustain himself on the detritus of a world he saw as careening toward self-destruction, and equally happy to scam a government he despised. 'I’m glad everyone’s so wasteful,' he told me. 'It supports my lifestyle.'”