Current Events Watch

It’s all about endorsements. In every presidential election, candidates clamor to obtain the backing of this union, that ethnic community, a fellow politician, or the editorial staff of some influential newspaper. Personally, I don’t care who is giving props to whom. I’ll make up my own mind, thank you very much, regardless of whether or not my favorite newspaper opts to champion my guy or gal.

Still, an endorsement gives a campaigning candidate additional political clout, something to proudly crow about while poopooing hats thrown into an opponent’s ring.

Not often, though, does one happen across an anti-endorsement. Publicly declaring “we really don’t care who you vote for, as long as it’s not…” is seldom done.

But that’s exactly what the editors of New Hampshire’s The Concord Monitor did this past weekend, just days before the New Hampshire primaries, informing readers why they should not vote for Republican candidate Mitt Romney. Period.

No published favorited pick as of yet for either party, simply a rather scathing laundry list of reasons why rooting for Romney is really, really wrong.

In the Monitor’s article published a few days ago, they referred to Romney as a “disquieting figure” and that although he looks and acts like a presidential contender, he “surely must be stopped.”

Of course, Republican cheerleading is inherently way off beam in my opinion (with the exception of my admitted and rather inexplicable political crush on Ron Paul), so I think they should all be stopped.

Notwithstanding, the editors at large do raise some good points about Romney worth considering by those who may tend to lean right, as wrong as they might be.

Looking at the facts, it seems that he has gone beyond simply assuming a Reagan-esque coiffure in pandering to the right-wing religious conservative gang, by taking flip-flopping to a whole new über level.

An occasional flip here and a random flop there are, of course, par for the course amongst all members of the homo politicus species, but some of Mitt’s mindshifts are pretty radical indeed, particularly regarding issues that any self-respecting Republican would deem vital. As the Monitor put it:

“If you followed only his tenure as governor of Massachusetts, you might imagine Romney as a pragmatic moderate with liberal positions on numerous social issues and an ability to work well with Democrats.

“If you followed only his campaign for president, you’d swear he was a red-meat conservative, pandering to the religious right, whatever the cost.

“Pay attention to both, and you’re left to wonder if there’s anything at all at his core.”

A few key Jekyll and Hyde cases in point:

Then: As senatorial candidate in 1994, running against Ted Kennedy, he claimed that he would be the stronger advocate for gay rights of the two.

Now: These days, well, not so much. Now he makes it a point to declare his opposition to gay marriage and adoption. That whole gay rights thing doesn’t sit so well with his new audience.

Then: Back in the day, pre-Commander-in-Chief-wannabe Romney assured voters that he was pro-choice and said that, “You will not see me wavering on that.” No way, no how. He even referred to the tragedy of a family member’s botched illegal abortion to justify keeping abortions safe and legal.

Now: He has apparently switched teams, now identifying with and playing for the pro-lifers. It’s a baby, not a choice. Without a doubt, some major right-wing brownie points scored here.

Then: The old Romney supported stem-cell research, once more with personal flair. Citing his own wife’s multiple sclerosis, he said that such research could help families like his.

Now: The new Romney largely opposes it. Again, the baby thing. Another secured thumbs-up from the peanut gallery.

Like I said, pick a candidate, any candidate from any party, and you’d be hard-pressed to find one who hasn’t dodged, waffled or completely flip-flopped at some point. I don’t believe there’s anything intrinsically wrong with that. Politicians are human, too (I think), and humans change their minds over time, sometimes even making the complete 180.

But, really, give me a break. The Monitor is spot-on. No way can Romney provide any reasonable explanation for this particular set of turnarounds in any way that could possibly be convincing to potential voters, other than that they are based on nothing more than his own ambition.

mitt romney, presidential campaign, presidential endorsements, 2008 election, presidential election, politics, presidential candidates