Mittens: Wimp or Weenie?

Posted on by

This is the real cover, not a Photoshop job:

In the cover story, Michael Tomasky says,

In some respects, he’s more weenie than wimp–socially inept; at times awkwardy ingratiating, at other times mocking those “below” him, but almost always getting the situation a little wrong, and never in a sympathetic way.

Which brings me to the next item on the agenda — in Israel today, the Weenie said he was ready to follow Israel over whatever cliff that damnfool Bibi pushed it over.

Which brings me to one more item — this quote has popped up on a lot of blogs lately. It’s from a GOP debate last December:

ROMNEY: “I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say, ‘Would it help if I said this? What would you like me to do?'”

I looked up debate coverage to find the context. The context makes it even worse —

Gingrich Defends Comment On Palestinians

The topic shifted to foreign policy, specifically Gingrich’s controversial statement two days ago in which he called the Palestinians an “invented” people. Romney called Gingrich’s words incendiary and a mistake. Gingrich stood his ground.

“Somebody ought to have the courage to tell the truth: These people are terrorists,” he said. “They teach terrorism in their schools. They have textbooks that say, ‘If there are 13 Jews and nine Jews are killed, how many Jews are left?'”

Romney said such talk did Israel little good.

“Therefore, before I made a statement of that nature, I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say, ‘Would it help if I said this? What would you like me to do? Let’s work together because we’re partners.’ I’m not a bomb thrower, rhetorically or literally,” Romney said.

So he’d check with Bibi so he’d know what to say?

This was the same debate that Romney bet Rick Perry $10,000 that he had never favored a health insurance mandate at the federal level, and the bet got all the media attention.

8 thoughts on “Mittens: Wimp or Weenie?”

  1. I didn’t hear about this until recently, but apparently, when Mitt Romney was on his Mormon mission in France, he was in a horrific car accident that killed a passenger in his car.
    A policeman who responded to the accident, declared Mitt dead. Instead, thankfully for him and his family, the policeman was wrong – but he was in a coma for awhile:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2085412/The-shocking-pictures-Mitt-Romney-died-young-Mormon-missionary.html

    I wonder if Mitt Romney didn’t suffer some sort of serious, traumatic brain injury in the accident?
    This is purely conjecture, since, before the accident, Mitt was not a great student, and was still the undamaged @$$hole who cut the gay kid’s hair.

    Still, I’m left to wonder if this didn’t have some effect on him. It obviously did nothing for his sense of empathy – so I’m wondering if the accident, and subsequent coma, didn’t exacerbated any underlying sociopathic tendencies.

    Mitt doesn’t talk about the accident. And you wonder why, since it might help humanize him?
    And maybe that’s what he’s afraid of.
    Galtian Supermen don’t almost die in car accidents on church missions in foreign countries. And there’s nothing Mitt hates more than showing some weakness.
    Extremely rich people condition themselves to eliminate any semblance of “There but for the grace of God, go I.” And they hate to be reminded that luck had as much, if not more, to do with their success, as skill.
    A passenger died, Mitt the driver, survived. To me, there’s certainly a large element of luck there.

    Having said all of that, I would think that Mitt’s apparent blind sense of loyalty to Bibi and Israel, should be more than cause for concern, for Conservatives, as well as Democrats.
    Since when do we let foreign countries, even if they are allies, determine our actions?
    Conservatives will never admit it, though, since the Evangelical part of their base thinks that Israel is the 2nd most important country in the world, since, without it, Christ can’t have his “2nd Coming,” and they’ll be stuck for the rest of their lives with us heathen on this baking planet.
    And Mitt, like the of the Republican Party, is afraid to disturb these religious lunatics, for fear that they’ll lose their ground troops, and breeding ground for future ultra-Conservative politicians.

    And what Mitt showed with his comments about Israel, and Bibi, as he has his entire political life, is that, weenie or wimp, he’s NO leader – he’s a follower.

  2. Yes, Barbara, I am also bothered by how Romney phrased his pretend conversation. So, we are going to be taking direction from Israel if we elect this apparent political fool? I don’t like this scenario one bit and I can’t figure out why Romney saw no problem with what he said.

  3. At least Romney (who is so stupid to say it out loud) is saying how the relationship between Israel and America’s far right really works.

    How I wish a magazine like Newsweek would talk about the Weenie Factor instead of merely the Wimp Factor.

  4. As a lefty Jewish Israel-lover, I find it puzzling that Israel is worshipped by so many non-Jewish, non-Evangelical right-wingers. What is the great attraction? Sometimes I wonder if they are just vicariously aroused by Israel’s steadfast oppression and occasional incineration of brown people…

  5. @Gator90: As a non-jewish lefty, I’m not a pro-Israel fanatic, but I do consider them our strongest ally in a very dangerous, backward area of the world. Number two would perhaps be Turkey, but the situation there is unstable and has been deteriorating for years. Saudi Arabia is an “Ally In Oil Only”; a reprehensible rat hole in all other respects.

  6. I find it puzzling that Israel is worshipped by so many non-Jewish, non-Evangelical right-wingers. What is the great attraction?

    I spent a lot of years in that space (evangelical). Evangelicals spend a lot of their waking hours studying the bible, both old and new testaments. If you open any decent bible you’ll see maps of the Holy Land, and timelines, not only of Christ’s activities but of all the major figures in the bible, particularly the old testament, because it dwarfs the new testament in size. Jesus is seen as a fulfillment of old testament prophecies, and Israel is seen to figure in Christian eschatology (prophecies or writings about what Christians call “the end times). And so it’s all one seamless thing, Israel, Judaism, Jesus and Christianity.

    When you contrast this with a new religion, Islam, that arose in Judaism’s and Christianity’s backyard, and when there have been endless conflicts between it and Christianity, revolving around the very existence of Israel – this is why fundamentalist Christians get so involved. They really believe Israel’s existence is tied to their own.

    Sometimes I wonder if they are just vicariously aroused by Israel’s steadfast oppression and occasional incineration of brown people…

    Fundies don’t know anything about that. Israel is only Good in their eyes – despite all the times historically it fell short of God’s directives in old testament – events that are studied over and over by fundamentalists, which forms their understanding of how God deals with humans. God’s chosen people, and all.

Comments are closed.