I know we're not supposed to use the word "hate" when talking about politicians. We're supposed to say we "dislike" their policies or even their tactics. We "disagree" with their positions and find their strategy "troublesome" and a "cause for concern."
The problem is I hate Mitt Romney. I don't just dislike him as a politician. I dislike him as a person.
Now you see, I'm not supposed to say that. That makes me sound angry and it's not allowed in the mainstream. On the other hand, of course, Mitt Romney can say anything he likes about us.
For example, today at CPAC, Romney said that if the Democrats won the election we would "surrender" to the terrorists. That's apparently perfectly acceptable thing to say. But I can't tell you what I really think of Mitt Romney.
First of all, I'd like to point out that his revered president never caught Osama bin Laden and said he was "not that concerned about him" (an idea Romney echoed at one point in the campaign). Can we call that surrendering? If Bush has given up trying, is there another word for it?
Of course, President Bush on Friday will say nearly the same thing at CPAC. He will say that our "prosperity and peace" will be jeopardized if we elect a Democrat. But we're supposed to respect this guy?
Remember this is a guy who got hundreds of thousands of people killed because he thought he was a messianic cowboy. His craven indifference to the lives of others cannot be mentioned in polite company. The fact that he is clearly a very, very stupid man is not a nice thing to say (watch Fred Kaplan of Slate and I debate this point here). And we are certainly not allowed to say that we hate him for getting all these people killed, for muddying the name of America, for authorizing torture and taking away our fundamental freedoms. No, that would be impolite and we can't have it.
Is what he did polite? Is his implication that Democrats are weak and would give in to the terrorists polite? Why are they allowed to be complete and utter assholes, but we're not allowed to call them out on it?
In the same CPAC speech, Romney implied that he was only in the race because America needed him. Please!!! Who doesn't hate this guy?
Remember this golden oldie below? Watch Mitt Romney pandering to the voters of Massachusetts when he was trying to prove he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy. As you watch him talk about abortion, remember that he switched positions and is now for imposing his personal beliefs on others.
And think about the relative he refers to here and how he used her death from an illegal abortion as a cheap political trick and then dumped her memory the minute he wanted to pander to pro-life conservatives and she was no longer useful:
This is a bad guy. A guy who would say anything to get elected because he has no inner core. No morality and apparently no conscience whatsoever. But we're the bad guys if we point out how absolutely craven he is?
These are the type of people who rip the country apart for their own personal gain. Thank God Romney is out of this race. But the robo-candidate will be back. He is promising to run again in 2012, no matter who the president is, who the other candidates are, what the issues are and what the state of the country is. Because he doesn't give a shit about the state of the country. He just wants to be president sooooo bad.
Remember, America needs him. What would we do without him?
Follow Cenk Uygur on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CenkUygur