yeah, but Mittens is still a hypocrite and has been one ever since his college days. He is not the man--or leader--that his father was. If he was contemptuous and disgusted by the party that he witnessed the Republicans devolving into... He could--at any time--have stepped away or declared himself to be an Independent.
Agreed. Why didn't Mitt volunteer to testify for the Jan 6th House Committee? There are enough breadcrumbs to follow that suggest there was inside help. Why didn't he make headlines with his revelations about Senator King's warnings in January of 2021? Why wait until your book comes out? Really?
The story of the rot inside the House and Senate has only had a prologue, a forward, so to speak. The attempted coup (which continues to this day) will eventually show complicity by more than a few Proud Boys and a sitting president.
I have to believe that as prosecutions continue, there will be more and more "flippers" who will provide clues as to how all this came to pass. Why? Because despite my anger and frustration, I am an optimist. And that optimism is fueled by the fact that when a person is facing hard time in a jumpsuit, they usually do whatever they can to minimize or escape that fate.
That is becoming a common maneuver, consistent with the "Chicago School" notion that personal profit trumps the National Interest. It's a vile, sociopathic concept.
Rot is everywhere and has a function, but a healthy organism or society resists rot, and arrests it's spread into living tissue. America was gaining health (and in some ways, still is), despite serious bouts of illness, prior to the plutocratic capture of the public narrative that Reagan was the face of. Nixon spread rot, but was repelled by our societal "immune system" until Ford abused the power of pardon to hold him above the law. Not that that's a new idea. but I think that perhaps that pardon signaled a turning point in our current rash we are seeing the law used to sabotage the intended functions of the law, perhaps comparable to how a virus commandeers our own genetic processes to increase it's spread.
Trump made many Orwellian appointment designed to sabotage the very functions the appointees were pledged to fulfill, but perhaps the apex of this perversion was the plan to twist the mechanics of the Electoral College in order to negate the empirical, real world election result. That is really a crime worth a chapter in any reasonable history book; and with the RNC resolution, branding the rioters "ordinary citizens engaged in in legitimate political discourse", and condemning all efforts to hold them accountable, the whole "Republican" Party signaled it's ownership of the crime. We have let them get away with far too much "rot" already, and cannot afford to lose the "patient"; which is us, and even our posterity.
By "history," I mean "historians," who, as a group, do a pretty good job of research and of self-correcting. HCR is a wonderful example, but far from the only one.
I see real recording of history as a science, just as cosmology, archeology, and evolution can be considered a fastidious recording and reconstruction of history. Human history is has a disadvantage in that in the entropic one-way flow of broad and interactive snapshots of time makes results in some ways not testable by exact repetition, and yet, as in physics, certain recurring principles emerge. That and the fact that material part of history (like people) often decays without much of a trace, and we are forced to educate our guesses with hear-say. That said (as in a forensic analysis) a convergence of evidence can justify our (degree of) confidence in historical narratives that we trust. What emerges from careful research is often different from what people have been widely taught, one way or another. I have become aware of some of my own follies, and am surely ignorant of others.
It seemed to me that Mitt tries to have it both ways. He published an "Open Letter" to President Obama in USA Today, urging Obama to copy the heath plan he supervised, and Obama basically did so; but then as a presidential candidate, Mitt had to distance himself from all that and claim that while the plan was right for his state, it was wrong for America. That was very "Republican" of him.
Well he does have a book coming out,after all. I give him very little credit for FINALY growing a pair,sorry. I do give him credit for voting to impeach T***P, but then he didn't push hard enough!!!
Notice how many politicians spill the beans after they've decided to leave politics. While in office, they keep their mouths shut out of self preservation.
Mitt Romney waffled and knuckled under rather more than I like, but I see a trace of old school Republican in him.
yeah, but Mittens is still a hypocrite and has been one ever since his college days. He is not the man--or leader--that his father was. If he was contemptuous and disgusted by the party that he witnessed the Republicans devolving into... He could--at any time--have stepped away or declared himself to be an Independent.
Agreed. Why didn't Mitt volunteer to testify for the Jan 6th House Committee? There are enough breadcrumbs to follow that suggest there was inside help. Why didn't he make headlines with his revelations about Senator King's warnings in January of 2021? Why wait until your book comes out? Really?
The story of the rot inside the House and Senate has only had a prologue, a forward, so to speak. The attempted coup (which continues to this day) will eventually show complicity by more than a few Proud Boys and a sitting president.
I have to believe that as prosecutions continue, there will be more and more "flippers" who will provide clues as to how all this came to pass. Why? Because despite my anger and frustration, I am an optimist. And that optimism is fueled by the fact that when a person is facing hard time in a jumpsuit, they usually do whatever they can to minimize or escape that fate.
"Why wait until your book comes out? Really? "
That is becoming a common maneuver, consistent with the "Chicago School" notion that personal profit trumps the National Interest. It's a vile, sociopathic concept.
Rot is everywhere and has a function, but a healthy organism or society resists rot, and arrests it's spread into living tissue. America was gaining health (and in some ways, still is), despite serious bouts of illness, prior to the plutocratic capture of the public narrative that Reagan was the face of. Nixon spread rot, but was repelled by our societal "immune system" until Ford abused the power of pardon to hold him above the law. Not that that's a new idea. but I think that perhaps that pardon signaled a turning point in our current rash we are seeing the law used to sabotage the intended functions of the law, perhaps comparable to how a virus commandeers our own genetic processes to increase it's spread.
Trump made many Orwellian appointment designed to sabotage the very functions the appointees were pledged to fulfill, but perhaps the apex of this perversion was the plan to twist the mechanics of the Electoral College in order to negate the empirical, real world election result. That is really a crime worth a chapter in any reasonable history book; and with the RNC resolution, branding the rioters "ordinary citizens engaged in in legitimate political discourse", and condemning all efforts to hold them accountable, the whole "Republican" Party signaled it's ownership of the crime. We have let them get away with far too much "rot" already, and cannot afford to lose the "patient"; which is us, and even our posterity.
Yeah, history will judge him unkindly.
If recorded history triumphs over propaganda.
Was "history" appointed by a Republican or a Dem? You be the judge...
By "history," I mean "historians," who, as a group, do a pretty good job of research and of self-correcting. HCR is a wonderful example, but far from the only one.
I see real recording of history as a science, just as cosmology, archeology, and evolution can be considered a fastidious recording and reconstruction of history. Human history is has a disadvantage in that in the entropic one-way flow of broad and interactive snapshots of time makes results in some ways not testable by exact repetition, and yet, as in physics, certain recurring principles emerge. That and the fact that material part of history (like people) often decays without much of a trace, and we are forced to educate our guesses with hear-say. That said (as in a forensic analysis) a convergence of evidence can justify our (degree of) confidence in historical narratives that we trust. What emerges from careful research is often different from what people have been widely taught, one way or another. I have become aware of some of my own follies, and am surely ignorant of others.
Maybe there would have been another, and another, and another. But no, he folds
It seemed to me that Mitt tries to have it both ways. He published an "Open Letter" to President Obama in USA Today, urging Obama to copy the heath plan he supervised, and Obama basically did so; but then as a presidential candidate, Mitt had to distance himself from all that and claim that while the plan was right for his state, it was wrong for America. That was very "Republican" of him.
Always talks out of both sides of his mouth. Like ALL repubs
It's the "GOP" "Heads We Win, Tails You Lose" Doctrine.
And so many act like that is the way it should be. Interviews with MAGAts confirm that the cult is just that - irrational devotion to bull Schitt
Well he does have a book coming out,after all. I give him very little credit for FINALY growing a pair,sorry. I do give him credit for voting to impeach T***P, but then he didn't push hard enough!!!
Notice how many politicians spill the beans after they've decided to leave politics. While in office, they keep their mouths shut out of self preservation.