The Möbius Strip, pictured above, was discovered by the German mathematician August Möbius in 1858. Though it appears to have two sides, it is unique because it has only one. Wikipedia provides an apt example to help understand the features of the strip:
A Möbius strip made with a piece of paper and tape. If an ant were to crawl along the length of this strip, it would return to its starting point having traversed the entire length of the strip (on both sides of the original paper) without ever crossing an edge.
Leonard Shlain, in Art & Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time, and Light, wrote that “both sides [of the Möbius Strip] meet in one seamless, endless, recursive continuum.”
Therein lies the trick Mitt Romney has tried to play on American voters – and it has nothing to do with his repetitiveness. Regardless of the issue, the man attempts to argue both sides of a Möbius Strip.
Every attack Mitt has leveled against Obama reveals his own blatant hypocrisy. This is different, and in my opinion, much worse than his well-known penchant for flip-flopping.
Let’s delve into Romney’s damning double standard.
During his speech in Tampa, Mitt declared that Obama’s “promises gave way to disappointment and division.” The characterization of the President as a Divider-in-Chief has been a go-to line for Romney during a televised appearances, while on the stump and when speaking to donors.
Speaking of…speaking to donors–
In the very same Mother Jones video where Mitt Romney derides 47% of Americans as ne’er do well dependents, he later states that “The thing that which I [he] find[s] most disappointing in this President is his attack of one American against another American.”
Mitt portrayed 47% of Americans as leeches on ‘productive society,’ with the implication that the government’s help for these individuals is as misguided as the practice of bloodletting (which also happened to involve leeches).
As I’ve mentioned before, this type of talk from Mitt sounds an awful lot like is class warfare in action, pitting the 53% against the 47% while trying to get money from the 1%.
Oh, the irony.
Let’s start with the obvious.
The signature achievement of Governor Mitt Romney was the enactment of an individual mandate which required all residents of Massachusetts to buy health insurance and provided the state’s uninsured with health care in the process. Yet, he lambastes Obamacare ad nauseam as a government take-over of health care and has vowed to repeal it if elected.
This promise to repeal leaves Mitt vulnerable to even more hypocrisies. Romney has castigated Obama for allegedly ‘raiding’ Medicare to the tune of $716 billion to pay for Obamacare. This attack has no merit – the $716 billion represents savings from eliminating needless, costly procedures. Benefits are not affected. Ezra Klein notes one effect of repeal:
Repealing the health law also would have an impact on Medicare’s “doughnut hole,” the gap between Medicare’s regular and catastrophic drug coverage, in which seniors are responsible for footing the bill. The average senior who falls into this space spends $604 on prescription drugs.
The health-care law changes that: It gradually eliminates the doughnut hole over the course of a decade. This saved seniors who fell in the doughnut hole an average of $643, according to a Health and Human Services analysis.
Romney wouldn’t push your granny off a cliff. But he would toss her into the doughnut hole.
Mitt has also sworn to preserve and strengthen Medicare for future generations, protect current seniors’ benefits and spend the $716 billion that Obama was able to save – all the while claiming that the program is going bankrupt.
In statistics, these would be referred to as “mutually exclusive events.”
Or, for those that prefer colloquialisms: Something’s gotta give.
Before his selection of Paul Ryan brought the reactionary GOP agenda to the forefront, Romney planned for this election to be a referendum on Barack Obama’s poor handling of the economy. His attacks on the President’s jobs record and persistent unemployment were, and continue to be, unrelenting.
Yet, for all the talk about Obama’s record, Mitt assiduously avoids discussing his own. He has paid lip service to his term as Governor of Massachusetts and denounces the revelations of his role as CEOutsourcer at Bain as attacks on free enterprise.
He can’t run on his record – so he’ll run from it, taking parting shots as he goes.
No Apology. That’s the title of Mitt’s 2010 book and his unofficial campaign slogan. In the book and on the trail, Romney alleges that Obama began his presidency with an apology tour, a claim that Politifact has rated as “Pants on Fire.”
In an attempt to force the apology theme into his narrative (as one might force a dog into an overhead carrier), Romney delivered a statement, saying, “It’ s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”
This was his reaction in regards to a statement released by the embassy in Cairo before any of the attacks occurred. The ‘apology’ the embassy issued was in response to the disgusting anti-Islamic film, Innocence of Muslims.
Without apologizing, Romney eventually condemned the film – just like Barack Obama.
What was the last act for which Mitt Romney apologized?
For going “too far” when he and his cronies physically restrained and cut the hair of a closeted gay classmate back in his high school days.
If I had a nickel for every time I’ve (sincerely) apologized in my four years since high school, I’d have enough to start looking for a Swiss bank account. Throw in the fake apologies and I’d start to stash my loot in the Cayman Islands.
However, the illusion of success, exceptionalism and pseudo-perfection has been a central pillar of Romney’s campaign – one he cannot abandon despite all evidence to the contrary.
Mitt Romney may not say ‘sorry’ as often as he should – but that word perfectly describes the state of his campaign.
For Your Consideration
Without the mathematical jargon, what is a Möbius Strip?
It’s a twisted piece of paper.
And without the presentable façade, what is Mitt Romney?
A hypocritical, twisted excuse for a President.