Why I detest Mitt Romney
February 9, 2008 1:47 pm
An Article by:
Russell Cole
After listening to Mitt Romney’s speech, where he explained his reasons for withdrawing from the Republican Primary as well as his concerns over the struggles America will face in the Twenty-first Century, I was reminded why I have suffered from an antagonism toward this outwardly seeming gentile man to such a poignant degree. Indeed, after listening to Romney speak on most any occasion, I would become temporarily consumed – and, thus, debilitated – with my anger and outrage; unpleasant emotions whose inculcation were directed upon this excessively pandering, 1950s adaptation of the popular Mattel Toy Company’s Ken Doll. Despite my unwavering animosity toward Romney – feelings that would spike from observing him on television; no matter in what capacity he was portrayed during these painful episodes – his concessionary remarks on the 7th of February incited anger and disgust whose severity reached levels previously unattained during past instances when I was struck by the symptoms associated with my underlying disorder; an ailment that I suppose can be referred to as Romneopathy.
The severity of the attack I suffered was not brought about so much from listening to him declare that a Democratic President would unvaryingly surrender to terror.
I am not even sure what he means by this. I fail to understand to whom – or to what agent – one would surrender, because surely one cannot militarily capitulate to an emotion; and, (assuming Romney was invoking the other possible meaning of “terror,” in this context,) one, additionally, cannot surrender to an abstract political tactic.
It was not the slander Romney committed against liberal politicians who happen not to be entirely consumed with obsessive war-mongering. Rather, the acute surfacing of the symptoms concomitant with Romneopathy was incurred by his remarks in which he stated that Europe was facing a demographic crises due to the Europeans failing to believe in their Lord, or Creator.
I suspect that Romney was indicating that the rapid decline in religiosity among Europeans has created social situation where people are less inclined to have children.
According to Romney’s explanation for staling population growth, it is as though one needs to be presented with an incentive, such as the expectation, in the Afterlife, that one will receive his own celestial body, which he would, then, populate and reign over as a patriarch, in order for one to elect to have the divinely mandated children and family.
Well, then, if it requires subscribing to some belief-system, such as Romney’s Mormonism, for one to be motivated to have children, I think that society is ultimately better off if such people did not elect to have children. The offspring could possibly inherit the same utterly baffling – and properly mocked – insanity leading to such religious beliefs.
Russell Cole
