Here’s Mitt Romney saying he “just read” the same two books in two separate interviews separated by six months:
(The books he names, for those of you without video, are Steve Martini’s The Rule of Nine and George W.Bush’s Decision Points, which I reviewed right here.)
Apologists might say that running for president is a tiring job, and that nobody has time to read when they’re campaigning. That’s bullshit; Barack Obama read books all through his campaign. So much of campaigning is sitting in planes and buses and waiting for your moment to go onstage. Even with smartphones and cable television, there’s a whole lot of dead time mixed in with the schedule of appearances. This is calculation, pure and simple: Romney name-checking Bush’s book is a sly way of alerting the 20% of all Americans who still think Bush did a good job as president that he’s keeping Bush in mind. And if any more moderate voters protest the book, Romney can claim that he reads a lot of books and they shouldn’t see his reading of that book as an endorsement.
I always have at least five books on my Kindle that I am reading simultaneously.
The Rule of Nine sounds like schlock, with dogwhistles in it.
Rule of Nine? is he trying to cozy up to Herman Cain or something?
Man, the fun just keeps on rolling with these Repugs…
Once upon a time, there was a real Republican Party, but somewhere along the line, the heart and brains were cut right out… and so now we’ve got this shuffling zombie-husk of a party, with these multi-millionaire yahoos just continuing to throw noodles against the wall, hoping against hope that one of them will stick…
And it must be KILLING them that their greatest noodle this time around is Mormon, and so potentially ‘unelectable’, because of course, they’re only taking cues from their lunatic base and their lunatic base don’t cotton to no danged ol’ Moronic Angel-type folks…
God, it would be funny if it weren’t so tragic…
Please return to pontificating on the serious stuff.
Considering his sworn allegiance to the American dominion of Mormonism, it’s not surprising to see he reads only fiction. If Mitt Romney were a song from the Beatle’s White album, which? (Clue: Herman Cain would be “Why Don’t We Do It In The Road?”)
Sudoku, Constant. The man is a whiz.
It’s a lead-in to a bit, like a comedian has, or a celebrity doing panel on Late Night. He may have read that book, or maybe just read about that book and worked it into his talking point—for all intents and purposes, (like the “guy you ran into on the way to the club”) there is no book.
What we won’t ever get on the campaign trail is sincerity, or even—if campaign managers can help it—spontaneity. It’s all a put-on until then, and we hope we saw through just enough bullshit to have chosen wisely.
I’m pretty sure he read or at least listened to the Twilight saga.
Because he’s Mormon.
No women authors.
Now now, I read five books a month and when one sticks hard and I want to tell peeps about it, I’ll say I “just read” it even if it was a year ago.
@10
excellent point! i didn’t notice the lack of women authors. thanks!!
Romney can go to hell!
One cannot fail to love Paul Constant, even if you embarrass him (and yourself) by saying so. Whether you care about politics or not. Who keeps track of things like this? The readings of books by politicians, and their acknowledgements of what they have read, and when? Who cares? We do.
well, that’s two more than me
you girls got way less than nuthin…..
No Bible, no Book of Mormon? Does the man have no concern for his immortal soul. Proper underwear alone does not suffice to gain one entrance into the kingdom of heaven or to secure on one’s own planet.
I’d think the outrage should be that half of them are about Bush.
Yeah….
I personally read what used to be described as voraciously. Can’t get to sleep without reading, and I go nowhere without a book or 3 in the truck or carry on bag. But I know smart people who don’t read much or at all for pleasure, and intentionally ignorant people, like yourself Mr. Constant, who seem to enjoy reading recreationally.
How about dealing with actual issues that matter for once in your ‘journalistic’ career? I know, facts are the bane of liberals, but embrace them and you might just mature into a conservative. Or at least be a liberal whose opinions matter…
@18: I’ll just leave these here:
Anthropogenic climate change, evolution by natural selection, Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction in 2003, biological causes of homosexuality, Framers’ support for separation of church and state, powers of the Federal government under the Constitution, etc. etc.
What do these concepts all have in common?
@18
“used to be described voraciously.”
How is it described now?
How unfortunate that you’re unable to enjoy a book recreationally or for pleasure, whatever the subject. I guess if it were an insufferable chore it would put me to sleep as well. Have you tried it while driving?
Do you really think Obama reads as much as he claims? That indie book day list he gathered up this weekend was just a flavor-of-the-month list of bien pensant bullshit. Read some Dostoevsky and I might start to care.
@21: Dostoevsky? Please, the man has a job to do!
#18 – Absolutely no one cares about you, your life, or your reading habits.
Is Mitt the Git too embarrassed to admit what he reads (steampunk? Robert Jordan? New Age? diet books?) or does he just play Angry Birds obsessively in the downtime? Wait, he is too boring for Angry Birds. He probably just plays lots of solitaire on his iPad.
Seriously, I doubt he reads, because, he’s running for President, for christsakes. But can’t say that, it’ll get him in trouble.
I’d never knowingly defend Romney, so don’t take this as a defence, but at least he didn’t malign the whole concept of reading in order to appeal to anti-intellectual elements of the GOP. I seem to recall a certain someone coining the phrase “I’m a leader not a reader” not so long ago.
@20 and 23
Given your poor reading comprehension, I could extend the same sympathy or in the case of the oddly named Catsetc pure undiluted vitriol, to you. Only in my case I’d have some reason to do so. @20 missed the entire point of what I wrote as well as misunderstanding the general statement of my personal reading habits. Catsetc is just an angry hostile person who lashes out without any other reason than her/his/its hostility.
Here’s a helpful hint in the spirit of Christmas. You don’t have to defend everything anyone says with whom you agree on general principles. Everyone says or writes stupid things sometimes. Granted, liberals do it as a sort of hobby, but that’s beside the point. Mr. Constant wrote something dumb, that we should evaluate a potential president on his reading habits. You can disagree with that asanine point of view without disagreeing with Constants overall asanine worldview.