Lying Is Hard

I watch Chris Matthews most days if I'm home at 5PM.  I used to flip between him and Fox News, but since Fox let Glenn Beck go, their 5PM show is still just as stupid (thanks in large part to Eric Bolling, who is an absolute clown), but about 1000% less funny (Eric's more of a sad clown).  Matthews, on the other hand, remains as loud and entertaining as always.

Recently, one of the best parts of Chris' show is his almost constant befuddlement at the hands of Mitt Romney.  Every time Romney says something that doesn't make sense, or just doesn't sound exactly right, Matthews reacts as if Romney just ate an entire wheel of cheese and pooped in the refrigerator.  He's totally baffled by it.

This shouldn't be surprising.  Matthews has spent his whole life in politics.  He knows what a polished politician is supposed to sound like and he knows how polished a major party Presidential candidate should be.  Romney's inability to consistently, well, sound like a person, is an enigma for Chris, but not for me.

I was in a couple of plays in high school, and when I got a little experience with it, I realized that just memorizing your lines is stupid.  Lines are important, but it seemed like it was more important to actually understand what the character is trying to say.  That way, if you forget your line, you still sort of know what's supposed to be said, and you can get through it.  If you just memorize lines and then forget them, you're totally lost.

One of the simplest things about life is this, lying is hard.  At least harder than telling the truth.  The consequences of the truth might be less desirable, but telling the truth is always easier than lying, if for no other reason than the truth is easier to remember.

When Mitt Romney opens his mouth and something incomprehensible comes out, it's because he's out there playing Generic Ultra-Conservative Presidential Candidate Man, and sometimes he forgets his lines.  So, when Brian Williams asks him if London looks ready for the Olympics, he doesn't just say what he thinks.  He thinks, "what would Generic Ultra-Conservative Presidential Candidate Man have to say about that?", and then he tries to say something that sort of sounds supportive but also reminds the world that America is the best and fuck you. 

But Mitt isn't always playing Generic Ultra-Conservative Presidential Candidate Man.  Sometimes he's playing Guy Who Can Relate To Regular People.  Guy Who Can Relate To Regular People might show up in Michigan babbling about how the trees are the right height, because Mitt can't exactly remember Guy Who Can Relate To Regular People's lines, but he knows that regular people care very deeply about tree height.

But then sometimes Mitt has to play Bat-Shit Crazy Foreign Policy Lunatic.  Bat-Shit Crazy Foreign Policy Lunatic says things about how we'll always support Israel no matter what they decide to do, and how Israel has a better economy than the Palestinians because the Israeli culture is inherently superior.  He's just trying to say things that sound strong and tough and supportive of Israel while also appeasing the base of his party by sounding vaguely anti-muslim, and in this case it's less about him forgetting his lines and more about the people writing his lines being dumb.  Either way, it's a mess.

And listen, my problem with Mitt Romney isn't that he made the Palestinians angry.  My problem is that this man who wants to be in charge of our foreign policy thinks it's OK to add another ring to the million ring circus that is the middle east in an effort to do some least common denominator pandering for votes at home.  Mitt Romney should have to wear a sign whenever he leaves the country that clearly states he doesn't speak for the rest of us.  In fact, a lot of people should.  Can I be the one who decides who gets a sign?  I'd be really good at that.

Anyway, I can only conclude that Mitt Romney's actual self is too unlikeable for him to be honest with us and still win.  I suspect that I would probably like actual Mitt Romney.  He's probably one of those guys who makes mean jokes and everyone laughs while he's in the room and then when he leaves everyone talks about what a jerk he is.  I usually like those people, but other people usually think they're mean and probably wouldn't vote for them.

I work with college students, and when I give them interview advice one thing I always say is be yourself, because if you get the job people are going to expect to work with the person they interviewed, and if you don't get the job, at least you gave it your best shot.  You don't want to go on an interview, be fake, and then not get the job and be left wondering what would have happened if they had met the real you.

So I'm wondering if we're going to look back on this election and wonder what would have happened if we had met the real Mitt Romney.  And I'm wondering if there even is a real Mitt Romney.  And if there isn't a real Mitt Romney, that really worries me.  There are times when a caretaker President who doesn't have much in the way of his own opinions/values/personality will do just fine.  This doesn't really seem like one of those times.