Romney, a “bad politician”!

I’ve reached the conclusion that Romney is a bad politician!

And, before all my liberal / pro-Obama friends jump up and down with joy, let me tell you why. You may not like what I say.

I don’t think that he’s a bad politician because of his positions re economy, budget, defense budget, cuts in social services or anything else, because I’m not even sure if he means it.

Let’s face it – most of the time, good politicians preach to the choir to secure their ‘base’; then they hope to solicit some converts, i.e. the independents. After all, he’s a Mormon, and they are supposed to proselytize. (Oh, just stop it! I’m just having a little fun, here.)

A good politician tells you what you want to hear, even when they are lying through their teeth – and if you don’t believe that, then you’re very young, naive and/or you need to read more.

Prior to going on his latest trip to England, Romney did a good job of pandering to the Tea Party (Do they really deserve Capital letters?); and the rest of the Republicans, who at this point have to like him because there’s no one else, and after all, they would rather be in a gay marriage with a communist, before they’d vote for Obama. Of course, Romney was also looking pretty good in his bid to attract some Independents.

But I guess something happened to him when he stopped breathing the smog laden air of the U.S.

Lo and Behold, he visits England and Israel; and he utters some very politically incorrect statements. In other words, some of his opinions or concerns made him unpopular, or less electable.

He was wondering about the security in London … Out loud!

In Yiddish you would say “What a shanda” i.e. what shame! How dare he wonder out loud about a possible breach in London’s security? It doesn’t matter that the same sentiment was expressed just a couple of days earlier by other naysayers; but he shouldn’t have said it, because he’s running for election.

When you run for elections you shouldn’t annoy anyone, except the opposing party! So the fact that he was in charge of the Olympics in Salt Lake City, and may have some experience in the matter, doesn’t count, because – if he wants to be a good politician he should know the drill: You’re in England. Say something pithy about the weather. Drink your tea and eat some scones. It really is just that simple.

And then he goes to Israel….

Again, not breathing U.S. air, he makes very strategic mistake. Bad politician!

He offends the Palestinians, which was really stupid. Never mind that what he said is an opinion held by some political scientists and economists. But, it is bad – very, very, very bad politics. Clearly, this isn’t the way to score points with the Middle East, where men sit in the shade smoking hookahs in their shirt-sleeves, while women work in the heat covered from head to toe. He may have misquoted from the book “Guns, Germs and Steel”, but between us, he should have read instead “How to Win Friends & Influence People”.

How to Win Friends & Influence People


The irony for me is that we want our politicians to lie when they’re in foreign countries, but tell us the truth when they are here at home. Well, I have news for you, they lie all the time, and Romney is a bad politician by the very fact that – while out of the country, he had a “slip of a tongue.” Uh yup, the poor sap actually expressed himself, honestly!

A good politician wouldn’t state his opinion. Instead, he would be “politically correct”. That’s why we have the expression “politically correct” – it allows us to say things we don’t necessarily mean while scoring points at the same time.

Take Gun Control:

Consider that Romney used to endorse gun control, a position he relinquished once he got started in the primary process.

Obama, on the other hand – that poster child of all that’s good and liberal, has done nothing, and I repeat NOTHING, to ban any weapon. C’mon, his record is worse than Bush’s, but not many liberals want to look at that. Nope, that’s when the left becomes an ostriche.

And why doesn’t Obama do – or say anything about gun control?

Because, he’s a good politician.

About rachel bar

Psychotherapist and supervisor.
This entry was posted in Gun control, Politically correct, politics, Romney, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Romney, a “bad politician”!

  1. Bob Bonsall says:

    You make a very good point here, and I think it’s the problem with American (and most democracies’ politics) in general. The incentives for politicians before getting elected are such that they do what it takes to get elected. Afterward, they… do what it takes to get re-elected. On the margin they may, on occasion, attempt to accomplish something they actually believe in, but that’s few and far between.

    • rachel bar says:

      Thanks, Bob. I sometimes feel bad about being such a cynic. Old age, maybe? I do hope that Obama is more sincere than Romney, as I’m going to vote for him. Regardless, I believe there are so many covert deals and agreements we know nothing about.

      • Bob Bonsall says:

        I think there’s a fine line between cynicism and realism, particularly in politics. Obama has had the advantage of having a more united party (the “We Hate George W. Bush Party, founded Nov. 4, 2000”) backing him, so he’s been able to be more focused in his message and stay more true to his ideals, but there’s also been a major disconnect brewing within the Republican Party ever since Ronald Reagan pulled together “Big Tent Conservatism” back in the 80’s. Those chickens are coming home to roost, and Romney is having to swing back and forth harder than most to try to cover all the ground between the various factions.

        As for covert deals in politics, that’s about as likely as eggs in a hen house.

  2. Margot says:

    I think that liberals realize that Obama has been terrible on sensible gun legislation … he authorized guns in national parks for Gods sake!!! But that’s only one issue and liberals, for the most part, don’t vote single issue. Re lying when visiting other countries (and Romney telling the truth) — it’s called statesmanship and seeing the total picture. It doesn’t help Israel or Israel’s position when Romney insults the Palestinians and says a stereotypical racist remark about Jews — culturally we know how to make money!!! What was he thinking? Oh yeah, he wasn’t. No impulse control and clearly not a statesman. And you can’t really think out loud when you are the leader of a country. Little kids do that. But an adult in a leadership position needs to have a filter. I’m not arguing with you here. I agree that he is a terrible politician. Lucky for him he has the money and friends to buy the nomination but hopefully for us, not the election.

    • rachel bar says:

      Actually Margot, you are one of the few who truly knows Obama’s position on gun control (or lack of), and that is mostly because of how informed you are and because of your work, of course.
      Writing about Romney was my excuse for sounding cynical about politicians in general, and Romney in particular. I’m also very cynical about Obama, but I’m going to vote for him, for lack of a better candidate.

  3. Truett Wright says:

    I am aware that I need to be a good Politician in my response to your blogging or I might offend you to the point that we end up avoiding each other when we pass in the hallway. lol

    Honesty is one thing, timing is another. In our friendship I could tolerate your sitting me down and having a very honest, even if painful, conversation. However, if you were publicly honest with me, to the point of hurting my feelings or embarrassing me, I would question your intentions, your intellect, and my reasons for having a relationship with you. Although Romney may be a great businessman who can accomplish great things, I now question his ability to create, nurture and understand the importance of international relationships.

    I’m just saying…………………..

    • rachel bar says:

      Being the great statewoman that I am, I will only criticize you behind closed doors, darling.

      Actually, the reason Romney did not shut his trap had to do with wanting money from one of the richest Jewish donors, and he probably figured that he needs money now, and if he’s elected president he’d give money to all the countries he managed to offend…

    • Peter G says:

      “Honesty is one thing, timing is another.” Very quotable; and I agree

  4. Jim Palmer says:

    Rachel ..
    Your sense of humor is improving, love the line that “conservatives would rather enter into a gay marriage with a communist” than vote for Obama……Not only funny but very true…) Margot upsets me though…..I watched a program on the science channel that stated that Caucasians and Asians had an average IQ of 100…Jews had an average of 115…..After reading Margot’s comments about gun control and her support of Obama, I wonder just how accurate the study was.

    • Margot says:

      Jim, I’m above average.

    • rachel bar says:

      Jim, so glad that you are approving of my sense of humor. I’m also glad to know (via the science channel) that my IQ is higher than yours! Yeah!

      • Jim Palmer says:

        Those number’s were “on average”…. You shouldn’t assume that you have a higher IQ than mine…..In fact, there is evidence to the contrary. You and Margo both have shown a lack of understanding of the political realities into todays world….I should remind you that the USSR didn’t work, and that Obamas USSA (United Socialist States of America) will not work either .The Jewish vote is down to 65% now for Obama, I am still amazed why you would vote for a pro-Palestinian Marxist that disses Israel every chance he gets…. another thing that amazes me is that Israeli’s love Romney and American Jews worship Obama…… As I have said to you before… Wouldn’t it be ironic if American Jews turn out to be Israel’s worse enemy.Obama will do nothing to stop Iran from getting the bomb, which could be The end of Israel

      • rachel bar says:

        Let’s stick to your own logic, Jim. You state the Science Channel as a resource and you make a statement based on its findings, and then you refute it?

        Kidding aside, but your reactions to Obama are so extreme, that I cannot take them seriously. You sound like a conspiracy theorist, and even though I know you are very intelligent, I cannot have a civil dialogue with you!

  5. Barbara Cooper says:

    Yes, politicians lie. Or maybe, they are naive, and think once they get the job they will actually be able to accomplish something. But our government was set up in a form of checks and balances so that we could never become a dictatorship. Unfortunately, it has backfired because all anyone cares about is his/her party and getting power, and screw the needs of the people. It’s become a bad system, or maybe it is a good system being badly misused and mishandled. Voting has become picking the lesser of two evils because we are only given the choice of two and ‘the party’ picks who they want, not the people. (Primarys notwithstanding) I think (and pray) that our politicians have good intentions in the beginning of their careers. Then they learn about the real world, about paying back the favors of those that got them elected. And the good intentions become obsolete because of “politics”. Politics is the real evil here. That and “you can’t please all the people all the time”, no matter what you do.
    For me, I like Obama, and I’m a die hard Democrat. Republicans want women to be second class citizens. They want to control our bodies, and tell us what we can and can’t do. They want this to be a “Christian” country with all the beliefs that go along with being Christian. Sure, we have freedom of religion, as long as in public we pray in the name of “Jesus”. Republicans scare me especially when they start thumping their Bible- picking only what suits their purposes to quote from that book. What happened to separation of church and state?
    I did not like President Bush as a president. He seemed like a nice guy but I never believed he was very intelligent. He became president because he came from money and a family of great influence, and that money bought him many things, including his college degree and ultimately, the highest office in the land. What’s he doing now? Nothing. Every past president has continued to do good works, but “W” stays home contributing nothing to the country that elected him- twice. Maybe he stays home because the world hated him and by default, hated all Americans. At least when Obama became president, the world started looking at us differently and we were liked again. Romney? If he becomes president, (God forbid) based on his current example of “Statesmanship”, the world will hate us again. This is not who I want representing this country in its highest office.

  6. Carol Bronow says:

    Rachel, Have you been reading my mind?? Everything you’ve written is exactly what I thought each time “he” puts his foot in his mouth. I just hope Americans are listening and reading about his “stupid” flubs, so they can see him for what he really is before it’s too late. In my humble opinion, Obama needs another four years, he’s just getting warmed up. Maybe there’s hope for some type of gun control yet, although it’s doubtful. But controlling how to purchase those semiautomatic guns and riffles, etc. has to be a top priority. There is no reason for people to be able to purchase them so easily without some type of background check or reason for their purchase. I don’t have the answer, but it needs to be researched and accomplished before more people lose their lives. It’s becoming so scary – can’t even attend high school or enjoy a movie these days without fearing for your life. Are we becoming conditioned to such violence? I hope not. Many of us older adults probably played “cops and robbers” when we were younger, but it was pure fantasy and we knew it.

  7. rachel bar says:

    Unfortunately, Carol, the hate towards Obama is so overwhelming, that I don’t believe Republicans will vote for him. Maybe some independents. As far as Romney’s flubs, Bush made more of those and he managed to get reelected…

  8. Denise says:

    Could it be that Romney’s American perception of what looks like and creates security does not match the English? Who could imagine being safe when the police are (or were?) unarmed.

  9. Politics is the art of the possible. I excuse Obama for not pushing for some control over the sale and proliferation of guns because it isn’t politically possible at present. He has both the Congress and the Supreme Court against him on gun control. It may not be possible until we get a more liberal Supreme Court, some 20 years from now perhaps, or until we repeal the Second Amendment. “Obama-care” is another case of doing the possible rather than the ideal. You are correct to say that Obama is a good politician.

    Concerning the lack of choice – we must choose between two rather incompetent boobs most of the time – that is a feature built into our electoral system. Israel, for example, has a parliament (knesset) of 120 members and probably twenty different political parties. The Prime Minister must put together a coalition of several parties to govern. Similar situations exist in Germany, France, Italy, etc., but not in Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and other countries that imitate the British system of single-member districts. The Greens or the Peace&Freedoms will never get anywhere in this country because they can not elect a single candidate in any district in the country. Well, maybe one or two, perhaps in Vermont. In Israel, Germany, France, etc., it is possible for candidates with the support of only 10 percent of the voters to be elected to parliament because they have multimember districts or elect all candidates at large from the whole nation. Proportional representation would enable the Greens, etc., to elect a few candidates to the State Legislature.

  10. Peter G says:

    In my opinion, where Romney-the-Candidate really went off the rails was by being un-presidential while he was on the road. I expect a high-profile citizen to represent US policy while abroad, not to undercut it; and certainly not to manipulate foreign relationships for domestic political gain. [Alternatively, he could have just kept his mouth shut!]

    As to irony, he shows disrespect for the very office he hopes to occupy; which is very bad politics, and bodes ill for a Romney presidency.

  11. Martha Carr says:

    I think it’s ironic that when McCain was running, Romney was held out as the more “conservative” choice! Now, he’s too “liberal”. I never know who the heck we are electing anymore and all because of political spin. I think you should send this column to the LA times! I wish he were worse politician (what I liked about Ron Paul even if I didn’t agree with his views).

  12. rachel bar says:

    Yes, Martha, it would be nice to have a feeling that the person who’s going to be your president has principles!

  13. Actually, at the heart of it all, there is only so much a president can do and he must pick his battles carefully.

    Further, the vast majority of gun owners never present a problem. In all the years I owned firearms I stored them safely and used them appropriately. I don’t own firearms now because I no longer go hunting.

    In Boston there is really only one use for a handgun. In rural Idaho there are many. The firearm of choice (IMO) for home defense is a double barreled shotgun, not a handgun.

    Although there are gun accidents and there are mass or serial killings by insane people who misuse guns, the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, reliable citizens.

    I do believe that assault rifles should not be sold to the public without some special need – one I can’t even think of.

    The Supreme Court seems to come down on the side of 2nd Amendment Rights as being more than arming the “militia” (army) or police force. This is a constitutional issue. Even if legislation were passed there is no way to predict if it would hold up.

    • rachel bar says:

      Agree with you about the president’s ability to affect change. It’s interesting to have a different perspective about gun ownership. Most of the people I know are extremely anti guns, so I always appreciate another opinion! Thanks for stopping by.

      • You’re welcome. Sometimes it is nice to look at facts, rather than opinions. There are something like 200 million working firearms in private possession. Most of those are long guns rather than hand guns (about 60 million are hand guns). If gun owners were all crazy people intent on killing others, the streets would literally be running with blood. In my family most people hunt and fish, consequently, we are raised with firearms and go to firearm safety classes. Owning a firearm is an expensive proposition, ammunition is expensive, finding a place to practice may involve cost (firing range), etc.

        As an attorney I recognize that there ARE second amendment rights. No one in my family has ever shot anyone except in a time of war when they were soldiers. We have fed our families with venison and fish from the wild. We don’t walk around armed all the time. We do know how to clean, store, and use firearms safely.

        From my perspective, the mass murders or highly publicized murders we hear about involve people with mental illness or people who have no common sense (Zimmerman) at all. There are groups of individuals who should be ineligible from purchasing firearms and we’re falling down on that end.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s