|
If Romney is dishonest, is this the proof of it?
Romney has said that he “saw” his father march with Martin Luther King and he is getting hell for it, not because his father didn’t march with King (though there is some dispute over that), but because the then 16-year-old Romney didn’t physically see the march with his own eyes. Many L-dotters are calling Romney a liar over this. Yet according to this article there is convincing evidence that the elder Romney did indeed march with King, and certainly that’s what the Romney family believed to be the case. So I think Romney is getting a raw deal. Ronald Reagan said in his speech to the 1992 Republican National Convention, “I have seen the birth of communism and the death of communism” Well, Reagan was a child at the time of the Bolshevik revolution, so it’s not likely he would have been conscious of this event, and he certainly didn’t “see” it with his physical eyes. Yet he lived through it all, the Soviet Communist regime came into existence in 1917 when he was six years old and went out of existence in 1991 when he was 80 years old. So saying that he “saw” the birth and death of Communism was a true and permissible way of putting it. If Romney’s remark that he “saw” his father march with King is what the L-dotters are talking about when they call Romney a liar, I think they are being unfair and are weakening their own credibility. The more serious weakness of Romney seems to be his inability to put the issue to bed. Apparently he replies to every press challenge and keeps digging himself deeper. Which raises the question, does this man have the toughness and decisiveness to be president, or, as an L-dotter put it, does he have too great a need to be perfect?
Yet even if he has such flaws, how much do they matter, considering his likely Democratic opponents? Email entry |