Romney in OKC
Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney made an appearance at the OU Health Sciences Center today. OU president David Boren has extended an invitation to all of the major Presidential candidates to speak at OU, and Romney was the first (and hopefully not the last) to accept. Being the bipartisan political groupie that I am, I couldn’t possibly miss such an event. But, I soon found myself in very foreign, very hostile territory – the strange, scary world of the G.O.P.
I was greeted by people holding large “Mitt Romney ‘08” signs, bearing the slogan, “A Surge of Support for Our Troops.” The “for” was, indeed, underlined. Wait – is there a surge of support against our troops? I’m confused.
Needless to say, ol’ Oven Mitt arrived to a very large and enthusiastic crowd, one that laughed and applauded appreciatively each time liberals were the butt of a joke. (Example: “Reagan once said, ‘it’s not that liberals are ignorant, it’s just that what they know is wrong.’”) Raucous laughter. I think someone may have whistled.
I remained silent and motionless, working my best poker face.
Then came an attack on Barack Obama: “I plan to meet with our friends during my first year in the White House. Barack Obama wants to meet with Castro, Chavez and Ahmadinejad.”
Whistle. Hoot. Holler.
A snipe at John Edwards: “Contrary to what John Edwards says, there is a war on terror.”
Umm, did Edwards ever say there wasn’t a war on terror? If he did, I haven’t heard about it. Romney also couldn’t pass up the opportunity to make a crack about Edwards’s pricey hair cuts.
Oh, Mitt – that is so four months ago.
Interestingly, Romney didn’t go after Hillary Clinton, although I do recall some comment about how our military went from two million strong to only 1.5 million strong during the Clinton presidency.
Another Romney comment that went over big with the crowd was when he reminded us that Bush has “kept us safe for the last six years.” Thunderous applause for that one. Apparently, the few remaining Bush supporters reside in Oklahoma.
Romney talked a bit about his platform. (Guess what? He’s for lower taxes and family values). He’s also for energy independence (who isn’t?) and he had me with him until he talked about drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Pursuing alternative fuel sources? Cool. Developing more fuel efficient cars? Of course. Hell, I’m even with you on exploring the potential of nuclear energy. But to ruin some of the last unspoiled land in the world simply to continue feeding your oil addiction? That makes no sense.
During one odd and particularly rah-rah moment, Romney mentioned that America is unique in that we’re the only country that hasn’t taken other people’s land after a victory. We didn’t take over German land after WWII. We didn’t take over Japanese land. I guess we never took over the Native Americans’ land, either. I came perilously close to piping up after that one, but after eyeing the roaming security guards, I thought better of it.
The floor was then opened to audience questions (pre-approved, of course). There was one on medical malpractice suits (how do we get rid of all these horrible, frivolous lawsuits?). There was a question on illegal immigration. One about reducing our dependence on foreign oil. So on and so forth.
The final question came from a girl of about seven or eight. (She can’t vote, how come she gets to ask a question?) Oh, because it was one final softball – “if you win the election, will you bring any pets to the White House?”
Pause while the audience lets out a big, collective “awww.”
We found out that Romney loves Weimaraners. He loves all animals. Blah, blah, blah. Again, I struggled desperately to hold my tongue. How badly I wanted to ask him about that Irish Setter of his who was once forced to accompany the Romney family on a 12-hour road trip, strapped to the top of the family station wagon in a crate. That sounds like someone who loves animals, all right.
On the positive side, Romney seems to be a very charismatic and personable guy. And, it’s kind of interesting to see a candidate up close. I overheard someone remark about what an attractive man he is, but from my vantage point perhaps 10 or 15 feet away, he seemed just a little too orange – makeup, perhaps, or maybe a little too much tanning.
An amusing postscript: as I walked out to my car after this Republican jizz-fest, I noticed three guys across the street holding up a massive Ron Paul sign. Nice.
Subscribe: 
Dwight Said:
August 14, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
That’s funny, after seeing the footage of him after winning the Iowa Straw Poll, I thought he looked unnaturally orange too.
davidbmc Said:
August 14, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
I am not saying these comments are either good or bad. Just letting you know what Romney is refering to.
Here is the speech and comment by Edwards.
http://johnedwards.com/news/speeches/20070523-cfr/
Pertinent part:
The war on terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It’s a bumper sticker, not a plan. It has damaged our alliances and weakened our standing in the world. As a political “frame,” it’s been used to justify everything from the Iraq War to Guantanamo to illegal spying on the American people. It’s even been used by this White House as a partisan weapon to bludgeon their political opponents. Whether by manipulating threat levels leading up to elections, or by deeming opponents “weak on terror,” they have shown no hesitation whatsoever about using fear to divide.
But the worst thing about this slogan is that it hasn’t worked. The so-called “war” has created even more terrorism—as we have seen so tragically in Iraq. The State Department itself recently released a study showing that worldwide terrorism has increased 25% in 2006, including a 40% surge in civilian fatalities.
By framing this as a “war,” we have walked right into the trap that terrorists have set—that we are engaged in some kind of clash of civilizations and a war against Islam.
The “war” metaphor has also failed because it exaggerates the role of only one instrument of American power—the military. This has occurred in part because the military is so effective at what it does. Yet if you think all you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.
Sarah Said:
August 15, 2007 @ 8:15 am
Thanks for doing the legwork I was too lazy to do!
What so many don’t seem to realize is that criticizing national security and foreign policies doesn’t mean that you want America to be annihilated by terrorists. I’m getting really tired of that implication, and I’m also getting tired of the whole black/white world outlook so prevalent in politics today (i.e. if you don’t agree with my point of view, then you are my sworn enemy and want the terrorists to win). Ironic that by taking Edwards’s comments out of context, Romney did exactly what Edwards was griping about.
Man, oh man…this is going to be a long 18 months. How is it that I can loathe yet love politics so much, at the same time?
davidbmc Said:
August 15, 2007 @ 9:13 pm
“How is it that I can loathe yet love politics so much, at the same time?”
My feelings exactly. I used to love to talk about politics. While I still care passionately, I just dont want to talk about it anymore. everyone has drawn their lines, chosen sides, and call the other side evil. Both sides do it and it disgusts me.
Alan Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 8:56 am
I couldn’t get my best friend, the Blackblogger, to go out to pester Mormon Mitt about his LDS convictions. Nor could I go. But maybe that’s so four months ago too. I guess he’s already had a lot of poop thrown his way from that direction…
Sarah Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
You know, I find the whole Mormon controversy very puzzling…is it really that big of a deal that he’s Mormon? I mean, you guys all believe in God…isn’t that really all that matters?
Even though I’m certainly no Romney supporter, I think a candidate’s religious beliefs should be completely irrelevant to his or her ability to be a good President. Now, all the religious folks out there are probably going to start screaming about how it is important, because a person’s morals influence their judgment (a friend of mine just said this to me yesterday, as a matter of fact). However, I have to strongly disagree. There are people with strong principles, good character and sound judgment who hail from all religious persuasions – be they Hindu, Catholic, Southern Baptist, Mormon or even Atheist. Similarly, there are plenty of “people of faith” who would make absolutely lousy Presidents.
I don’t understand why what someone believes (or doesn’t believe) affects their ability to serve this country. There is no religion or denomination with a monopoly on wanting to do the right thing by our fellow citizens. Maybe we all have different ideas on how best to do the right thing, but that should be the issue, not where, and how frequently, someone attends church (or if they even go to church, for that matter). What an odd litmus test. Honestly, it kind of seems like the only reason a candidate’s particular religious beliefs are an issue is so voters can determine if he or she is part of the “club.”
That’s just how it seems to me, at least.
Elizabeth Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
I think the predominant Protestant Christian view is that Mormonism is a cult and not Christian. I took a class in college from the head of the religion department and this professor was very liberal and respectful of all religions, but even he didn’t take Mormonism seriously. I don’t know enough about it to really know what I think, but that professor’s opinion is pretty significant to me.
You’re probably right about voters voting for someone who is also a member of the “club”, but even if a candidate had the same views as you, would you vote for him if he adamantly believed in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? That may be silly, but there are lot of people who view Mormonism in the same way.
Sarah Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
I agree. Some of the things Mormons believe are definitely bizarre. But, I guess that from my “outside looking in” perspective, it doesn’t seem that much more bizarre than believing in virgin births and resurrections. Sometimes Christianity (or any religion, for that matter, I’m not solely picking on Christianity) seems like a cult…just with a longer history and more members.
davidbmc Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 8:37 pm
Thats funny Sarah because as a Christian, that is exactly what I say all the time. the Mormon claims are outrageous but not much more outrageous than “orthodox” Christian claims. The difference lies in reasonable evidence for those claims, IMHO.
I am a Christian but i would have no problem voting for a satan worshiper if they had the qualities and policies I look for in a leader. (My christian friends are officially freaking out now.)
The only time I think a candidates religious views should be a part of the debate are:
1) when THEY make it part of the debate first, and
2) when their religious beliefs make me question their reasoning skills.
For example, if Candidate Joe says he worships the Mogo Alien because it appears to him and only him every night, I might decide to make his religious beliefs part of my decision making process.
Sarah Said:
August 16, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
Well stated, sir. I couldn’t agree more.