Mitt Romney Anything but Multiple Choice on Iraq War Service 
When then political novice Romney, son of former Michigan Governor George Romney, ran against dynastic Senator Ted Kennedy in 1994 his opponent, attacking what he perceived to be a flip-flop pattern on the issue of a woman's right to choose, referred to his position as "multiple choice."
Romney protested but the name stuck and is being cited with increasing frequency. While Romney lost in his first try for office in the Bay State to the venerable Ted Kennedy, his second effort resulted in being elected governor.
In all of Romney's Massachusetts efforts he did his utmost to sell voters on the idea that his brand of Republicanism blended with the progressive tradition of the state, which in the past elected Eastern Establishment names such as Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr, Leverett Saltonstall and Edward Brooke to the senate and more recently William Weld as governor.
He is now locked in a contest with former New York Mayor Rudolph Guiliani in the hypocrisy sweepstakes as each prospective Republican presidential nominee seeks to wipe his previous slate of beliefs clean, seeking to convince voters that such reversals stem from mature and seasoned reflection on the issues.
The current ideological tap dances being carried out by Romney and Guiliani are reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's run for the presidency.
After having signed the most liberal abortion rights bill in the country as California's governor to please a solidly pro-choice electorate Reagan experienced a "Paul on the road to Damascus" conversion on abortion as he took a position commensurate with the religious right in the days before it was called by that name.
It was nothing short of hilarious when Reagan, appealing to the broader Republican national constituency, was praised for an act of courage by many in his party along with certain media figures for his newly acquired anti-abortion stance.
While Romney continues his ideological tap dance en route to what he hopes will be the 2008 Republican nomination, there is one area where he stands unquestionably with the broad base of the Republican Party, that of Iraq War service.
When Mike Wallace interviewed Romney a few weeks ago on "60 Minutes," in one scene the candidate was photographed with his family during a holiday gathering. Romney, a successful venture capitalist who it is said might be a billionaire or at the very least a multimillionaire, along with his family members represented the ultimate in affluence.
When his broad-shouldered, healthy, prosperous looking sons were introduced it was mentioned that each had fulfilled a requirement of the Mormon religion to which they belonged by engaging in a foreign mission activity designed to bring fresh members to that community.
At that point Wallace asked the very question that Mitt Romney certainly had hoped to avoid. He asked about Iraq War service. None of the Romney sons had served there. One conceded that the issue plagued him, but there was no mention made of performing service in that war torn Middle East nation.
So Mitt Romney has therefore maintained consistency with the traditional Republican Party trait of calling for military service in war torn nations ... for others.
The same Mitt Romney who, when pressured, conjures up the same tributes to George W. Bush for courage and insight and cautions against "cutting and running" is content to have others serve while his sons sit out the action in the manner of Bush himself and Dick Cheney in Vietnam.
I thought about the Romney interview the other day as I sat on a bus and heard a 55-year-old African American man talk about his current experiences. He spoke about returning from Iraq as he sat in a wheelchair. The man explained that he had volunteered for Vietnam duty at 16. So he was sent back into action in Iraq in his fifties.
As David Halberstam so aptly put it during the Vietnam War era, "The sons of Harvard and Yale sent the sons of Watts and East Los Angeles to fight and die in Vietnam."
Cheney, who hypocritically screams about "cutting and running" from Iraq blithely his own flight from Vietnam involvement despite his strongly expressed opposition to Communism by stating that he had "other priorities."
Other priorities? In fact, once he ran out of college deferments after receiving a total of 10, in the course of which he flunked out of Yale not once but twice, he impregnated his wife, which exempted him so that he would never have to risk his own life in a conflict he strongly supported.
These are the Chicken Hawks, these are the hypocrites, and these are the tough talking exponents of militarism from a distance who seek to put others in harm's way while they and their family members remain safe at home.
There are two traits that neocon Republicans all possess, rank hypocrisy and operating totally devoid of shame.
KEYWORDS: Mitt Romney, Iraq War, Chicken Hawks, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush
Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!
| < Who's Afraid of Big Bad Wolfowitz? | TB Virus Traveler Andrew Speaker Could be Sued! > |
