Part 3—Trivia and gutless small weasels: Has Mitt Romney been beating his wife?
Well, not exactly beating his wife. Has Romney been insulting his wife about her silly stupid hobby, involving that stupid horse?
By last Thursday, the claim had spread to the Maddow show, where the liberal world’s biggest con person pretended to be upset by Romney’s extremely bad conduct. But even the sensible Kevin Drum had adopted this posture when the fury began.
Drum quoted (part of) something Romney said to NBC star Brian Williams. He said that Romney’s vile remarks had been “painful to hear:”
DRUM (7/27/12): This was painful to hear. I mean, what would any normal husband do if his wife were involved in an Olympic competition, even one he personally found boring? He'd attend! He'd cheer! That's what married people do. But Romney has been taking some flak for being a rich dude lately, and he's obviously calculated that being associated with a multimillion-dollar sport—and an obscure, sort of prissy one at that—wouldn't do his campaign any good. So he threw his own wife under the bus. Mitt Romney is willing to be whatever the electorate wants him to be, and apparently he crunched the numbers in his head and decided that America's heartland voters didn't want him to be associated with his wife's sport.Romney was a gutless weasel. He had thrown his wife under the bus, where he had proceeded to beat her, displaying “really contemptible behavior” in the process.
It's a trivial thing, but still, in its own trivial way it's really contemptible behavior, even for a guy who long ago decided he'd do anything to become president. The first time I read that quote I recoiled, and I still do a day later even after I've seen it a dozen times. What a gutless little weasel.
Please note: This was the sensible Kevin Drum throwing these thunderbolts down from the skies. One week later, the less reliable Maddow was showing tape of three separate incidents when Romney had beaten his wife.
Well—he hadn’t exactly beaten his wife. That said, his conduct was “low even for him,” the furious Digby declared.
In fairness to Drum, let’s note the ways he was probably right:
In fact, this was “a trivial thing.” This made it all the more striking when liberals bellowed about it for the next week—when Drum declared that this trivial thing made Romney a gutless weasel.
Also this: Presumably, Romney doesn’t want to associate himself with dressage, “a multimillion-dollar sport—and an obscure, sort of prissy one at that.” One reason for that would be perfectly obvious—the children of the press corps “elite” have been clowning around with this topic, moving from Romney’s suffering dog to his over-indulged dancing horse.
Plus, his hair isn't right!
In the modern political world, every candidate will have a topic or two he may want to avoid. Everyone understands this fact—but we liberals now yearn to be Sean.
Result? Even the sensible Drum carried on, noting that any normal husband would attend an Olympic event in which his wife was (somewhat tangentially) involved. Just as a guess, we’ll assume that most of those husbands won’t be running for president when these Olympic events occur. But as we learn to be more like Sean, such minor points fall to the floor.
Did Romney “throw his wife under the bus” before proceeding to beat her? This would suggest that his wife wanted him to attend the event, despite the political ramifications. Why would anyone but a Hannity wannabe make an assumption like that?
(For the record, we’re fans of Drum around here. This wasn’t his typical work.)
Drum at least managed to avoid flat-out misquotation. Before he unloosed his bolts from the sky, he quoted Romney saying this to Williams:
“I have to tell you, this is Ann’s sport. I’m not even sure which day the sport goes on. She will get the chance to see it, I will not be watching the event. I hope her horse does well.”
It may seem strange to read those words, then ponder the fury they provoked. But that’s what happens when tribal players learn the joy of hating The Other.
In Drum’s defense, Romney did utter those 26 words, in the same order Drum reported. Within the 26 words he quoted, Drum didn’t disguise a large deletion, as ABC’s Amber Porter did, in the imitation “news report” which seemed to initiate this fury.
Beyond that, Drum didn’t insert a mark of deletion where no words had been deleted. Porter managed to do that too, in the latest parody of journalism produced by the mainstream “press corps.” (See THE DAILY HOWLER, 8/8/12.)
On the other hand, Drum didn’t include Romney’s full remarks to Williams—and note how tame these comments were, the ones which were most offensive. When liberals begin to rant and rail about mild remarks which matter so little, we are becoming a great deal like Sean—and we are agreeing to make our floundering nation even dumber.
Needless to say, it fell to Maddow to treat us liberals like absolute fools on this score. Tomorrow, let’s look at Romney’s full remarks to Williams, the famous NBC star. And let’s examine the other vile things the vile Maddow said he had said.
Tomorrow: It’s impossible, Hayes said