SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Un-Believer

POLITICS OCTOBER 13, 2011

The Un-Believer

You often hear it said that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney doesn’t have any principles. But is there anyone who walks this Earth unencumbered by any principles—none, kaput, zero? I thought it would be an interesting challenge to try to identify at least one conviction that Romney has maintained, unaltered and uncorrupted, through the years.

My first stop was a May 2007 Time magazine piece headlined, “WHAT ROMNEY BELIEVES.” Hallelujah, I thought. But the piece never actually said what Romney believes. It just detailed his various flip-flops on gun control, gay rights, etc. Romney’s contortions on abortion over the years have been so elaborate that to document them properly would require the services of a theologian, a political scientist, a physician, and five or six lawyers. Romney, it turns out, even flip-flopped on his name. Born Willard Mitt Romney (after family friend J. Willard Marriott, founder of the restaurant and hotel chain), he went by Billy for a few years, then decided he preferred to be called Mitt.

My next stop was Romney’s 2010 book, No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. I got it as an e-book so I could search it. Here are some phrases you won’t find in the book: “core belief,” “bedrock principle,” “fundamental conviction,” and “I have always believed.” Romney caught some bad press when it was discovered that, in the paperback version, he eliminated from his discussion of the Massachusetts health care law the assertion, “We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country,” presumably because that made him sound like he supported Obamacare. Obamacare was modeled fairly closely on the Massachusetts law, and Romney has taken some heat about that from conservatives. In response, Romney argues that Romneycare’s “individual mandate” requiring everyone to buy health insurance, though wise policy in Massachusetts, would be intolerable at the federal level.

I left messages for half a dozen people who have worked closely with Romney over the years in business and politics. If anybody knew what Romney believed in, I figured it would be them. And surely they’d be anxious to dispel the common impression that Romney’s convictions were as changeable as a summer breeze. But none of them phoned back.

I finally managed to reach someone who worked closely with Romney in the Massachusetts state house, but she would speak only on background. She spent most of her time marveling at what a phony he’s been on the campaign trail. “He’s a better person than he is as a Republican candidate,” she said. “I think he has very strong values, very strong principles.” Example? “He has very strong values about education.”

Education is one of the issues on which Romney has been accused (by rival candidate Rick Perry) of flip-flopping, because, after praising Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s Race to the Top initiative, he denied that he supported it at a GOP debate. But that accusation was unfair, various news organizations pointed out, because Romney had gone on to say that he thought the proper place for such initiatives was at the state level, not the federal level. That’s true. But it’s also true that Romney’s statements about the federal role in education are often irreconcilable. In his 1994 Senate race against Ted Kennedy, Romney favored abolishing the Education Department. Then, during the 2008 primary campaign, Romney supported President Bush’s No Child Left Behind law. Now, he is once again saying things like, “We need to get the federal government out of education.”

Search No Apology for the phrase “I believe” and you will find that Romney believes exactly 26 things. After filtering out airy generalities (e.g., “I believe lack of vision played every bit as big a role”) and “I believe”s that Romney attributed to others (President Obama; his father, onetime Michigan Governor George Romney) I counted seven tangible beliefs: (1) “I believe some people in my party are overly fond of bashing regulation as the constant enemy of growth and competition.” (2) The federal government should create savings accounts to supplement rather than replace Social Security that would be voluntary but require “an annual ‘opt-out’ by both the individual and his or her spouse to be inoperative.” (3) A single-payer health care system would put government “in control of nearly one-fifth of the economy” and make the federal government too big and powerful. (4) Teachers’ unions are bad for our children. (5) Out-of-wedlock births lower student-achievement test scores. (6) “I believe that climate change is occurring. ... I also believe that human activity is a contributing factor.” (7) “I believe that my party long ago caught up on civil rights.”

Some of these beliefs are vivid enough to invite objection from the GOP’s Tea Party wing. It’s somewhat risqué to defend regulation even in the abstract or to acknowledge human agency in creating climate change (though in the latter instance Romney quickly followed up by writing, “I do not support radical feel-good policies like a unilateral U.S. cap-and-trade mandate”). Such assertions lend credence to the theory that Romney is a crypto-moderate who would govern the United States in much the same way he governed Massachusetts.

But “moderate” is a label that describes temperament at least as much as ideology. One lesson of the George W. Bush years was that accommodating instincts could easily lead to a very conservative presidency, since those demanding accommodation within the GOP are often extremely right-wing. And the Republican spectrum has only shifted even further rightward since Bush left the White House.

At the end of my exercise, I prepared to conclude that, though Romney possessed identifiable beliefs, I still couldn’t find any North Star that guided him over the course of his entire life—or that would predict how he would behave as president. But, just as I was about to lose hope, I read in a Boston Globe profile from June 2007 that Romney in his early teens fixated on something about Edwin Jones, his father’s top aide as Detroit stake president of the Mormon Church. “He sat up front, to the side at a desk, keeping records,” Romney recalled. “I remember that he had very dark hair, that it was quite shiny, and that you could see it in distinct comb lines from front to back. Have you looked at my hair? Yep, it’s just like his was some 40 years ago.” Eureka.

Timothy Noah is a senior editor at The New Republic. This article appeared in the November 3, 2011, issue of the magazine. 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 16 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

16 comments

If I am following your argument correctly, Romney believes in greasy hair. I suppose we all have to believe in something. You are sure he has never flip flopped on this issue? I am going to go Google "Mitt Romney" and "Yul Brynner" and I'll get back to you.

- Vekert

October 13, 2011 at 12:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Another gem of a TRB.

- chaitless

October 13, 2011 at 12:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He believes that Mitt Romney should be president.

- NateG

October 13, 2011 at 5:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"One lesson of the George W. Bush years was that accommodating instincts could easily lead to a very conservative presidency, since those demanding accommodation within the GOP are often extremely right-wing." Sure, everybody is aware of Cheney's outsized influence with GWB, but I had never thought of it in such broad terms. [And it can work both ways: an accommodating Democratic president and over-bearing left-wing advisors (I know, there is no such thing as a left-wing presidential advisor).] With GWB, I had the impression that he was anxious to end the meeting so he could go on his bike ride, but maybe that wasn't it. Instead, he simply had accommodating instincts that strong-willed advisors exploited. The irony is that GWB sold himself as a man of principle, whom Americans knew where he stood on the issues; but principled or not, because of his accommodating instincts he was vulnerable to over-bearing, extremist advisors. TN is a fountain of practical political wisdom.

- rayward

October 13, 2011 at 8:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What Nate said

- Tristan

October 13, 2011 at 8:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

while he certainly has many chameleon properties I am sure he would govern on the right. Lets not forget, he is courting a vicious, monstrous hag that is the present day Republican base, he had better dare never cross them. He has to know Democrats will never warm to him and will have to prove his love for the hag over and over again. I guess he is hoping that with the drawdown in Iraq and Afghanistan and the unwinding of the housing crisis the economy will recover and he can throw the right wing every bone that comes our way. Of course, I could be wrong and if he is elected and with the first debt ceiling hike Republicans in Congress rubberstamp the increase, blaming it all on Obama, then we will know the party is really just a large scale version of Mitt, absolutely phoney and motivated by pure self interest.

- blackton

October 13, 2011 at 10:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

agree with Tristan, what NateG said: Romney's sole core belief is that he should be president of these United States of America, and maybe Romney really wants to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve AND Secretary of the Treasury AND President, because he just can not see anyone as qualified as he for any of those three uber-jobs. Which is why I continue to believe there is no way Romney gets the GOP nomination. What I find hard to believe is that there are THIRTEEN more scheduled GOP debates, although I am not sure Anderson Cooper moderating the Oct. 18, 2011 Las Vegas event will qualify as a debate. Might as well turn it into a paintball contest. umm, blackton, Romney wants a trade war with China, which has him sounding just like Chuck Schumer. OTOH, neocon-on-steroids Romney wants to expand DoD budget; yet Romney refuses to say if he thinks Gilo is a "settlement" or a SW neighborhood of Jerusalem; I just find it amazing how the entire right-leaning media continues to praise Romney, even while admitting he has been in training for six years. and still can not get more than 25% of the GOP. well, that is more than enough doomsday for me.

- K2K

October 13, 2011 at 10:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I looked into the "Mitt" part of Romney's name for my Chicagomag.com blog b/c of the Chicago connection--a cousin was a start QB for both the Univ of Chicago and the Chicago Bears. A cousin of Romney father, GEroge, Milton “Mitt” Romney, was a quarterback for the Chicago Bears from 1925 to 1929. I'm told that when the current Mitt Romney was at Harvard Law School in the early '70s he was known as Bill. Here's the full post: http://bit.ly/pB2all Carol Felsenthal

- NR144137

October 13, 2011 at 11:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tim - you biting partisan you - keep it coming!

- WandreyCer

October 13, 2011 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm originally from Michigan, and I remember Mitt's father, George, being our Governor. He's the guy who asked LBJ to send in the National Guard during the Detroit riots in 1967. No flip-flopping there. He had the same hair helmet as Mitt, only his was a rather distinguished silver-grey. As a teen Mitt attended Cranbrook Institute, an exclusive prep school for rich kids north of Detroit. I visited the place several times. Perhaps I passed History's Greatest Flip-Flopper on campus somewhere. I did notice a boy doing backward somersaults there once. Maybe that was him. He was, indeed, a cheerleader at Cranbrook. Wouldn't it be delicious if the Democrats take a page from the 2004 Republican campaign and present Romney, if he gets the nomination, as the ultimate, flip-flopping cheerleader? A flip-flopping Republican president would be eaten alive by the Tea Party. Beware, Independent voters. Do your homework. America's economic survival is at stake.

- magboy47.

October 13, 2011 at 12:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Great article. I have a center left friend who believes that Romney will govern from the center ... Blackton, I am going to use your "hag" analogy in my next argument with him.

- NR409654

October 13, 2011 at 1:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I used to think Romney was a hypocrite. Now, I just think he has a bad memory. :)

- CABChi

October 13, 2011 at 1:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have had experiences and conflicts over the years with scammers and cult leaders. (I am not saying MR is or is not such.) The most successful ones I encountered had the chameleon-like ability to pick up what their victims wanted to hear and believe and feed it back to them, yet staying within a zone closest to their own core instincts and desires (besides, “I want you to obey me; I want you to follow me”). Assuming we have a Republican candidate who fits this profile, and assuming he or she gets elected, the strain of trying to minister to such a contradictory, incoherent, and divided “base” (not to mention, nation) would probably drive a President into a full-fledged psychotic fugue breakdown before the end of the first term.

- skahn

October 13, 2011 at 2:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ROMNEY, in his speech of October 8, buttoned up his previous policy shifts with firm declarations. And with point after point, he renounced every shred of logic, honesty and honor he may have previously possessed. Now a war monger calling for an increase in the “defense” budget, he advocates a permanent state of readiness for war that will continuously elevate US military budgets--which already are 43% of the world’s total military expenditures, more than that of the next leading 15 nations combined. Obviously he wants to guarantee a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions and enormous profits for a few mega-rich taxed at only 15%. At the same time Romney scorned equal partnership with other nations (but maintains loyalty to Israel). And he reintroduced the goal of world dictatorial leadership by America espoused by the last decade’s PNAC--Project for a New American Century—an organization led by Iraqi War criminals Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and a host of other neoconservatives rewarded in 2000 with high positions in the Bush administration. Like them, Romney’s foreign policy is that God loves all other nations much less than the US and wants the US to force all countries to follow in its footsteps. Romney pledged his support of “Free Trade,” a confusing term veiled by philosophical illusions that encompasses theories of Milton Friedman, a leader of “the Chicago school of economics.” The designation describes freedom of trade between nations without governmental regulation or interference, a controversial but logically arguable theory. But legerdemain claims and unsubstantiated speculation of proponents stretch far beyond, including the “trickle-down” supply side economic theory. Today, fulfillment of what conservatives call “Free Trade” will be based on: Immediate tax cuts for the richest Americans, Repeal of Obamacare, Medicare and Medicaid laws… privatization of Social Security resulting in tragic pre-retirement savings loss of seniors in the casino stock market…privatization of national park and wild life properties for oil drilling… repeal of government regulation of corporations…rapid increase of gated communities due to budget-slashed police and fire departments … high-profit privatized public schools with study programs and student acceptance decided by the rich. As a bonus, these actions plus repealing minimum wage laws and privatizing the military with mercenaries would increase job openings. Oh, by the way, Romney wants to get tough with China… “OF ALL ENEMIES TO PUBLIC LIBERTY, WAR IS THE MOST TO BE DREADED BECAUSE IT COMPRISES AND DEVELOPS THE GERM OF EVERY OTHER. WAR IS THE PARENT OF ARMIES, FROM THESE PROCEED DEBTS AND TAXES… KNOWN INSTRUMENTS FOR BRINGING DOWN THE MANY UNDER THE DOMINATION OF THE FEW. NO NATION COULD PRESERVE ITS FREEDOM IN THE MIDST OF CONTINUAL WARFARE.” –James Madison, 1795

- Weston

October 13, 2011 at 3:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well done. Creative, clever, thorough. It reminds me of Michael Moore's search for the president of General Motors in "Roger and Me." Call this: "Romney and Me."

- Nusholtz

October 13, 2011 at 10:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When Romney is your next president you'll find out soon enough what he believes as he restores the economy. C'mon: he's a centre pragmatist who leans right. The difference bwtween him and Obama as a matter of practical politics won't be worth a tinker's damn.

- basman

October 13, 2011 at 10:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close