Mitt Romney’s statement on the Charlottesville anniversary strikes a chord Trump cannot
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
“It must be electorally disqualifying to equivocate on racism.”
George Frey/Getty Images
Mitt Romney is calling on Americans to “categorically and consistently reject racism and discrimination” on the anniversary of racist violence in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017 and on the eve of a repeat of the Unite the Right rally this year in Washington, DC. The former Massachusetts governor and current US Senate candidate in Utah issued a lengthy statement on Friday defending equality, steeped in his religious upbringing and belief that “we are all children of God.”
Romney, who ran against President Barack Obama as the 2012 Republican nominee for president, touched on a number of issues in his post. He weighed in on President Donald Trump’s equivocal reaction to the gathering of the alt-right and white supremacists in 2017, though he did not mention the president by name. He also suggested that it’s misguided to perceive pushes for equal opportunity by groups that have historically been discriminated against as grabs for a disproportionate share of the pie.
“I firmly believe in the moral foundation that underlies and is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution: ‘all men are created equal,’” Romney wrote. “I recognize that while individuals are born with unequal talents, unequal family circumstances, and unequal opportunity for education and advancement, the equality of the intrinsic worth of every person is a truth fundamental to our national founding and moral order.”
Romney last year spoke out when Trump offered a shrugging reaction to the clashes between white nationalist rally-goers and counter-protesters in Charlottesville that resulted in the death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer . Trump condemned “ hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides ” in his initial remarks about the incident. He then doubled down , saying there were “fine people on both sides” of the rally and counter-rally.
Romney at the time hit back at Trump’s equivocation, saying the two sides were in “morally different universes.”
He addressed the matter again in his Friday post. “My view — then and now — is that people who knowingly march under the Nazi banner have disqualified themselves as ‘good people,’” he wrote.
He later took a swipe, seemingly at Trump and other Republicans and public figures who have failed to condemn racism explicitly:
We must insist that those we elect as our leaders respect and embrace Americans of every race, sexual orientation, gender, and national origin. In this country, it must be electorally disqualifying to equivocate on racism.
President Trump on Saturday put out a tweet condemning “ all types of racism ” ahead of Sunday’s Unite the Right rally in Washington, DC. It was a step up from last year’s disastrous response, though he appears to still be playing the both-sides game.
Romney in his post also gave a nod to the Black Lives Matter movement, again seeming to break with Trump, who has stoked racial tensions for years. On the campaign trail, for example, Trump said Black Lives Matter proponents are “ essentially calling death to the police .” (They’re not.) He has consistently attacked black NFL players for peacefully protesting racism and police brutality in the United States.
“My understanding of the Black Lives Matter movement, for example, is that it is not intended to elevate minority lives above white lives; it is intended to draw vivid attention to the too frequent reality of deadly racial discrimination in law enforcement and in the courts,” Romney wrote.
Romney’s been walking a weird line on Trump and his bigoted statements for a while
Romney emerged as one of Trump’s fiercest critics in the 2016 presidential campaign. He conjectured that Trump was hiding a “bombshell of unusual size” in his tax returns and called him a “phony” and a “fraud.” He said Trump admiring Russian President Vladimir Putin while calling former President George W. Bush a liar was a “twisted example of evil Trumping good.” He also said he never would have accepted Trump’s endorsement for his 2012 presidential bid had he said the offensive things he did on the 2016 campaign trail.
But since then, Romney has toed a fine line on Trump. After the 2016 election, he met with Trump while under consideration for the secretary of state job. And when Trump endorsed Romney in his Senate bid, Romney happily accepted.
In an interview with NBC News in May, Romney sort of explained his shifting attitude on Trump.
“I don’t think that I would point to the president as a role model for my grandkids on the basis of his personal style,” he said. “He has departed in some cases from the truth and has attacked in a way that I think is not entirely appropriate. I think that his policies have been by-and-large a good deal better than I might have expected.”
In a June op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune , Romney explained he’ll support Trump’s policies where he thinks they’re a good idea. As Vox’s Tara Golshan put it, he’s with Trump for the tax cuts .
Romney wrote that he would continue to speak out “when the president says or does something which is divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions.” He said he wouldn’t be talking about it day-to-day but would express his views when he thinks there’s a matter of “substantial significance” to discuss.
That appears to be what he’s doing with Friday’s post, which you can read in full here .
Tags
Who is online
54 visitors
Is there a political space on the right in America today, for someone who firmly denounces racism?
Or is the right so firmly racist that only politicians who participate in shameful dog-whistling may succeed?
Yes. Most on the right denounce racism. Apparently, you define the "right" as necessarily being racist. This isn't so. Do you think there are self described "Democrats" who are also racist?
Trump pretty much controls the right. Racism is a big part of his appeal, for the MAGA crowd.
So... even if there are conservatives who aren't racist, they have no place.
I think this is a generalization and an unfair one. It assumes that there is only one kind of person who identifies as MAGA. That is, they all believe exactly the same things. Unlikely.
Are you claiming that someone who voted for the King of the Birthers is somehow not a racist or a supporter of racists?
No.
It assumes that Trump's racism is flagrant - that any observer will quickly recognize it. Then that observer must decide whether racism is acceptable or not.
Trump's supporters find racism acceptable... at least. They may of course be full-blown White-supremacists - that also fits their behavior...
I am stating my opinion that it is highly improbable that everyone in such a large group would all have the same reasons for voting for who they did. It is also my opinion that people who say people who voted for President Trump are racists do so simply for the sin of voting for President Trump rather than any actual racism on their part. Basically, a form of the No True Scotsman fallacy. In other words, no non racist person would ever vote for President Trump.
Afraid it's not that simple, although the left would love for it to be so. There are other things to be taken into account besides that issue only. I'm sure many on the right are upset with President Trump's character, however, this isn't a one issue world. By not voting for him, they allow someone they consider even worse, although perhaps not for the same reasons, into the Whitehouse. This was my dilemma. I couldn't stand either one, so I simply didn't vote.
Nor do I think most Trump supporters find racism acceptable. That is an attempt by some on the left to attempt to shame some on the right who aren't very astute (in my opinion) into doing what they want in order to avoid the charge. Rather than talk about real issues, just claim their all racists, thereby tying them up in defending themselves. Pretty much like the right's claiming that everyone on the left is a soviet style socialist or the next thing to it.
Personally, I can't decide if President Trump is racist or not. Laugh if you wish. In my mind I think he's too narcissistic to actually care about anyone, regardless of color. I certainly don't see him as a champion of white people. No matter the demographic, he will only use them for his own personal glory. In other words I think he is an equal opportunity opportunist. As long as someone gives him the accolades he believes he deserves, they are good people. The moment they don't, they're scum, regardless of race. It's about what people can do for him. I'm not sure he really cares about race.
I don't hate President Trump. I wasn't saying that in condemnation. It's merely my observation of the man, told dispassionately. I don't hate Hillary Clinton, either, but my analysis of her wouldn't be any better.
They seem to be the exact same kind of people who voted for David Duke. At the very least those voters think a rather vile racist is suitable for public office.
If so, would not Duke have been voted in as President? Surely there would have been as many racists back then as now? Certainly he would have had more success than he did if that were true, don't you think?
Possibly. I don't claim to know what all those who voted for him think. However, it seems to me that for many of them it was the lesser of two evils and for others, some of the policies he promised to go after. Things like bringing jobs back, draining the swamp and border security. Personally, I doubt there were all that many who voted because they thought he was going to put colored people back on the plantation or something.
Several post-election studies have shown that the # ! reason for a Trump vote was that the voter shared Trump's racist and xenophobic views. More generally it's been described as "white racial anxiety".
But there's no doubt that even those Trump voters who supported him for other reasons had no real problem voting for a rather vile racist. Apparently having a white supremacist in charge of the country isn't a problem for the GOP.
I'm sure they do. Sorry, but I don't put much stock into that sort of thing these days, right after I learned about Microagression. For all I know, those studies came from the same people who came up with that nonsense. I prefer to make my own decisions.
Yeah. I've heard the term. Not really sure how much stock to put in that, either. I admit that hearing all the time that I'm making the world worse because I am a white male makes me a bit anxious. Sometimes, in an effort to understand it better, I go to a street corner somewhere and just stand there and see if I can notice the world getting worse in that area just by my standing there. So far I haven't noticed much.
Well, like I said just a bit earlier, I don't know that he's a racist, so there is apparently some doubt. To be honest, though, such accusations seem a bit overblown to me. Take this whole Omarosa being called a dog thing. Apparently Trump has called other people, people who are white, dogs, too. To me, logically, it would be racism if he only called black people dogs but didn't call white people dogs. Yet that isn't what is happening.
Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL) was interviewed on CNN. She had this to say about it.
What I don't understand is what either of them being black has anything to do with it if he also calls other people, who are not black, dogs. He shouldn't call anyone a dog. Saying he shouldn't do it because they are black is implying there's something special about them that makes it extra wrong or something to call them dogs. Yet everyone is making it out to be a racist statement. If he called her a dog because she's black, what was the reason he called Arianna Huffington a dog? She's not black. This may be sexism but it isn't racist. I think people are just trying to make it about race when it isn't.
Not saying that everything is like that. I'm saying that it seems to me there is enough of it to make me wonder. If the accusers can't be honest about something so easily seen through as this, how am I to trust the rest of what they claim about Trump? People on both sides have been taking kernels of truth and making something else out of it for so long that I am tired of trying to sort it out. There isn't a single news outlet I trust anymore. Rather than simply report news, they all seem to just feed the passions of thoughtless lemmings on either side. They take the news and turn it into some sort of processed spam designed to feed the prejudice of their audiences.
Where the hell have all the reasonable people gone???
The seed is based on a Romney quote:
Whet here or not Trump is himself racist is, as you say, unknowable, buried under his general narcissism. It doesn't matter. He clearly plays to racism, whether by belief or by opportunism.
I don't care what he believes; I care what he does.
Perhaps we are using the word "acceptable" differently. If you mean that some people may dislike Trump's racism, but find other aspects of him so desirable that they let the racism slide... then all I can answer is that their criteria are... immoral.
Not do I. I don't care at all about the man. I despise his behavior I am disgusted by what he incites in his Unthinking Faithful TM.
That's interesting.
Why do you dislike Clinton? What significant concrete fact(s) about her bring you to this position? (Like Trump's appeal to racism, and his betrayal of the working classes in favor of the rentier class, bring me to despise him.)
Despite all the vitriol that has been poured over Clinton, I have noticed that there are very few facts, and no significant ones at all. She has been investigated by law enforcement and the media for forty years, with no skeletons found.
I don't think her "accomplishments" are significant, either... but that would be a reason "not to vote for her" and certainly not a reason "to vote against her, even if it means voting for a racist egomaniac".
Yeah, it must be real tough to figure out whether the King of the Birthers is a racist, much less whether a guy with a history of refusing to rent to black folks is a racist.
Depends on how one defines "right".
The "center right"? The "Reagan/Clinton right". Yes. Obviously.
The "Alex Jones" right who are now slinking out of their holes...I'm not sure. It doesn't look good.
But one could just as easily ask "is there a political space on the left in America today for someone who firmly denounces socialism?" In the center left...the Barack Obama/Lloyd Bentsen/Tip Oneill left? You would imagine so. But in the "Bernie Sanders/OWS/BLM/go out into the street and scream" left? It doesn't look good there, either.
That might be an interesting topic...
Why don't you seed something?
oh, wait.......
With this most recent statement Romney left no doubt of his stance on racism...Although I was never a Romney fan I'm most appreciate his willingness to speak to the core problem.
Thanks Mitt, we need more to join you in totally denouncing racism and the alt right.
Exactly.
I've never associated Romney with "courage"... he has waffled on too many topics. But this takes balls.
I would never..........ever....vote for Mittens, but credit where it is due. He spoke volumes, well done.
Of course Romney screwed the pooch on this part
We have seen too many shocking things under Trump and this round of GOP destruction part 2, but when Trump just asked our Veterans to give up a pay cut, even that atrocity has no push back from Republicans. Support our Troops? Not. The GOP just let Trump ask the unthinkable without a peep.
The GOP has totally abandoned morals for racism and a platform of hatred. They stand for hating people of color, for hating immigrants, for hating anyone who doesn't agree with their policies, for hating the constitutional right to a free press, hating being called out for their blatant corruption and hypocrisy.
There is no "kinder gentler" Republican party, they gave that up. Trump is their golden idol.