A Romney win would legitimize intolerance and racism
The end of the 2012 campaign is rapidly approaching, and a nail-biting result is expected.
Many Americans are genuinely appalled at how close the race is between what they see as a candidate who wants to take the country forward into a global 21st century and one who wants to take the country back to the 1950s and the social acceptance of racism and bigotry.
The days when signs in public places said things like, “No blacks allowed” and women were expected to stay home barefoot and pregnant while homophobia was considered commonplace should not be anything a great nation would ever aspire to regain, but that is where Romney and his fanatical supporters would take it.
A Romney-Ryan administration and their Tea Party-sanctioned policies would not be worth the cost of having hard-won health care reform, decades of hard-fought women’s reproductive rights and civil rights for minorities and gays wiped out with a scribble of Romney’s presidential pen or a hand-picked Supreme Court justice.
An ever-mercurial Mitt Romney was silent or did little to distance himself from episodes of blatant racism, intolerance and abject lies floated by surrogates and radicals during his campaign.
Romney was silent when John Sununu, his neoconservative warmongering advisor and the epitome of a brazen racist called President Obama “lazy” and “not too bright."
Additionally, Sununu, Bush’s former chief of staff, belittled Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama as merely “supporting the same race” (paraphrasing).
Romney offered no comment
During Donald Trump’s numerous attempts to paint Obama with a broad “birther” brush, Romney would only say that he didn’t always agree with his supporters, while he had no problems accepting millions of dollars in campaign funds from them, as he did from Trump.
If a person propagates a lie with their silence, does that make them complicit in spreading ignorance that results from that lie? Many people believe it does.
To the contrary, John McCain showed a great deal of integrity when he defended Obama in 2008 by telling a female town hall attendee that she was wrong to call him “an Arab.”
The Republican Party has unabashedly, without a hint of shame, openly disrespected Obama from the day he was sworn in. No other president in history has been called a “liar," the way Joe Wilson did during an Obama speech in 2009.
GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell, only months into Obama’s presidency, announcement the No. 1 priority of the Republican Party was to make him a “one-term president.”
Why would elected members of Congress, who are supposed to be responsible, professional and mature individuals, signal to the American people that nothing would get done on their behalf if it would illuminate the president in any positive way?
One major and disturbing explanation is the Tea Party, with its small government platform and members who embrace racism and extremist views. The mere mention of the term “Tea Party” conjures up images of posters smeared with hate and pictures of Obama dressed as a witch doctor.
Obama’s mother and grandparents were white, and he was a constitutional professor at Harvard who won the Nobel Peace prize in his first presidential year, but radical conservatives in this country are too close-minded to consider any components of Obama’s life that don’t fit their narrow view.
These people are known as the Republican base
In addition, Romney and the GOP are beholden to big oil and deep-pocketed corporations.
Forward thinking Americans, who want their lives to be elevated, free of war and empowered by civil liberties, have a lot to fear from a regressive Romney-Ryan administration.
If you like writing about US politics and Campaign 2012, enter "The American Pundit" competition. Allvoices is awarding four $250 prizes each month between now and November. These monthly winners earn eligibility for the $5,000 grand prize, to be awarded after the November election.