More Eddy - Mitt Romney: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing or Pragmatic Technocrat in a Tea Party Hat?

Welcome to my new column, More Eddy, by me, Eddy Moretti. Every Wednesday I’ll be here with questions, comments, and observations on all things, especially politics. The one thing I will not write about is food. Better brains than mine have already espoused on the subject; I’d rather just show up and eat the stuff. But until it finally grinds to an end in early November, I’ll be devoting this space to the US elections.

So what do I think about this election? First of all—and I’m not being hyperbolic here—it’s the most important one of our generation. Yes, that’s what we say every four years, but if you listen to the dangerous gibberish that gets spouted by the Tea Party and all of their mouthpieces, you’ll understand that the ideological stakes of this election are as high as they’ve ever been in modern American history. As always, voters face a decision, but this one is imperative in a way few have been: The choice fluctuates between preserving the “modern America” of the post-Depression period (the functioning, populist society represented by programs like minimum wage, Social Security, national highways, and so on), and alternatively re-engineering, or if you prefer de-engineering, these institutions once and for all. Nothing less than the core social complexion of America is at stake in 2012.

But the above is only true if you actually believe the impassioned rhetoric on either side, or if you’re impassioned about these issues. If you see the campaign and its byproducts as rote political theater, then it doesn’t matter if Obama or Romney wins; you’re probably a hardened cynic and I want to have a strong drink with you. But if you believe that underneath all the pointless day-by-day sniping over gaffes that constitutes 90 percent of our political discourse, there are some important differences between the parties, you need to plunge headfirst into the debate because the country is at a crossroads and your voice matters, believe it or not.

Whatever you might think about the Tea Party (I think a lot of things about it), their undeniable value lies in the stimulating (they’d hate that word) effect they’ve had on political discourse in this country: The issues they have brought to the fore are big ones and real ones and they deserve our attention—do we need to reduce the deficit? By how much? What role should government have in our lives? I said the same thing of the Occupy movement: They elevated the political discourse in America because they were successful in popularizing the notion of income-equality by capturing the wealth distribution of the country so memorably—there’s a 1 percent and a 99 percent and never the two shall meet. But then they took the summer off to go camping and smoke pot, so actually fuck them.

Still, even though OWS has faded from public view (or maybe their protests at the Democratic National Convention are the sign of a second wind?), there’s a lot of passion in the air and stark differences between the parties. Which is why I find it odd that Mitt Romney is the standard-bearer for one of the two political parties that matter. Does Mitt’s passion match the intensity of the political moment? Does he really believe in the core principles that animate the RTP (the Republican Tea Party), or is he really just an ideologically flexible, pretty normal-thinking, even-keeled guy who can get shit done no matter what that shit is? Is Mitt Romney faking political allegiances now in order to run as a “Massachusetts Moderate”—just like Gingrich and others accused him of doing during the primaries—or, more likely, does he just not care about anything at all except being elected president? (By the way, this would make him a bona fide sociopath but certainly not the first sociopath to run for public office.)

There are more than a few signs that Mitt, should he win, is going to be a paper president, a guy who will tacitly agree to look after the interests of the rich and powerful while ignoring what the populists in his own party want. There was the selection of Paul Ryan, the “scrubbing” of the RNC convention (they didn’t invite the “bat-shit crazies,” as Bill Maher calls them, to speak), the Koch Brothers and other libertarian billionaires throwing money at him via super PACs... they’re all bad signs in my mind. If elected, Mitt will be so happy to finally be in the White House that he’ll be willing to do whatever his moneyed friends ask him to, and that’s terrifying. It sort of reminds me of a guy named George.  

@eddymoretti