The Mittchurian Candidate

“Promise her anything … but give her Arpege.” It appears this is Willard "Mitt" Romney’s motto, borrowed from a perfume ad which articulates the base premise of this year’s Republican Party: promise anything, but – wink, wink – give the public something else.

It’s said that a good salesman can sell ice to Eskimos, that is, sell something that the buyer does not need through use of techniques alone. At its core this is a basic statement that the mendacious salesman will prevail in the sale of the unneeded item because whatever you give after the deal is sealed will be good enough or believed long enough that it will get the results the salesman wants: a transfer of wealth or power, or both.

As a student of political life, we are each called upon in elections to make judgments about people and situations in order to protect ourselves against the ills to which democracies are vulnerable: overreaching candidates who gain power through deception and then take the nation in a new and dangerous direction.

In democratic political life, when selecting a leader, the most fundamental question which we all need to ask is: “Are you with me or ‘agin me?” Then it is left to our senses and intelligence to decide if suspending disbelief is worth the risk.

What’s remarkable about Romney’s performance during the recent presidential debate are the breathtaking changes from previously expressed positions. Without detailing them, this characteristic raises a much more startling question. Is Mitt Romney actually the Mittchurian Candidate, someone who has told the Republican Party everything it wants to hear – in spades – in order to gain its support, endorsement and eventual party nomination, in order to gain the presidency of the United States, only to be an entirely different person altogether?

While the Democratic Party has been riled up by the untruths uttered by Mr. Romney, in reality it should be the Republicans who are asking deeper questions about what core concepts will control both the desire and the ability of Romney to make decisions. When someone can and has changed their positions numerous times, what will guide them during the many difficult choices which cross a president’s desk?

Grover Norquist has suggested that Republicans merely need someone to sign whatever comes across the president’s desk. Does Mr. Romney fulfill this vision of a remote control president run by shadowy figures?

Is Zelig, a Woody Allen figure, the perfect anticipation of Romney, AKA “Mitt Romney,” formerly known as a conservative, now a liberal, or a moderate, or generous, or stingy, or ruthless, or compassionate, or happy or sad, but who invariably adopts and entirely morphs into the crowd in which he finds himself at the moment? Need a “strong” leader? I can do that!

Probably the most jarring news is that no identity theft took place. Is that possible?

In many ways, it appears it is the Republican faithful who are being sold a bill of goods, because they too have utterly no idea who their candidate is in actuality. The Mittchurian Candidate is what should most concern the Republican rank and file. They’re like an enamored woman presented with a 3-carat diamond engagement ring. Should she be fearful to take it to the jeweler, suspecting it is a cubic zirconia or other substitute, or should she play along in the off chance it’s real? After all, it’s the thought that counts, right?

I have never been a fan of people who will say anything to get their own way, but it is a core human frailty that we each want to be flattered by the words of those who seem to agree with us. That the speaker is merely telling you what you want to hear for the moment is a key part of gullibility. The best con artists know to engage the “confidence” of the mark, that is, their confidence in their own decision-making and judgment.

Likewise, successful businessmen are accustomed to the idea that fine print will exist in every deal or contract, but with political life, you learn that a person who lies at the outset will lie when in office. There is no protective fine print. What an elected official does when given extraordinary power is entirely up to them.

If Mr. Romney were president, what core principle will be called upon to finally decide between difficult choices? Is it the “ruthless businessman” capable of shutting down factories, firing workers, or taking Big Bird away from poor children? Is it the committed Mormon hewing closely to the principles required of the faithful? Is it a petty personal desire for power, accolades, adulation, popularity, or greater vanity?

How will decisions about the fate of the nation and world be made? Does Mitt Romney know?

Coffey is an attorney based in San Diego. He can be reached at daniel.coffey@sddt.com. Comments may be published as Letters to the Editor.