Romnophobia

Mitt Romney may be more of a job destroyer than a job creator, but he has an indisputable knack for stimulating op-ed column writers.

Gail Collins' turn in the Times rotation came yesterday, and she did the best she could. The essence she distills from l'affaire premature ejaculation (Merriam-Webster's Coll. Dict., 10th Ed.: "a sudden, vehement emotional utterance") is that the quality of stability that Romney seems to want to project in his demeanor (presumably he's not actually going for boring, sterile, rod-stiff rigidity) belies his core of hair-trigger flightiness. 

On the outside he is the stoic, square-jawed Prince Valiant.  Immediately beneath the facade resides the second coming of George Costanza, the guy who panics under fire and elbows old women and children out of the way in a rush to the exit. 

So much is being reported on television and written online (e.g., Frank Rich) on this ignoble incident in the major media.  Initially there was a broad media backlash against the Romney remarks.  Even neutrals such as Chuck Todd expressed shock and disgust at Romney's attack on the President while terrorists' RPG's were still cutting through the air in Benghazi.  Most politicians and media people on the right also reacted negatively on day one.  

Then on day two the right-wing pols and talkers returned to their hyper-partisan senses to line up dutifully behind Willard.  The frantic Fox-driven right decided to risk being tarred by the public's repugnance at Romney rather than lose an opportunity to barbeque the prez and fire up the base.  

And now from the commentariat, from Collins and Rich and others, we're getting the second wave of more considered reflections on Romney's revealed recklessness.  

The only thing I have not seen in the conversation is to take the reflections back to the Repubblefun primary circus.   Recall how clownish they all looked in their rush to cram themselves into the micro-sized Tea-Pee tent on every issue. Huntsman notwithstanding -- he refused to bend over for the banjo-pickin' rednecks -- Mitt was dubbed by the media to be the least ridiculous of the clowns. He parlayed that image of putative sense-making with overwhelming tens of millions of plutocrat dollars to leave the pack behind.

That he had to struggle to separate himself from anti-contraception crusader Rick Santorum and moon-loony Newt Gingrich might have raised a caution.  Actually, it did raise plenty of doubt, but Chris Christie and Jeb Bush had decided not to risk it against a well-liked incumbent, so Ann Coulter et al decided they had to swallow hard and rally for Romney. 

But the point of this reminiscence to the primaries is to recall that Mitt was -- and still is -- an unserious man.  A serious man, to borrow Lillian Hellman's great metaphor, cannot and will not cut his conscience to fit this year's fashion -- or kowtow to the current Tea Party madness. 

As Romney stood at the podium rebuking Obama for apologizing to terrorists, I envisioned how natural he would look with a big red Patch Adams rubber nose.  He truly is a clown, a guy who will say and do anything for a vote.  And for the first time, I understand why some people are afraid of clowns. 

The people who write the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual may have to coin a new diagnostic category in the next edition: Romnophobia.  I hope that on November 7th we will all be able to look back in relief on these days of shuddering at the prospect of President Romney.