Back in denial

David Brooks writes [links added by ed.]:

The miasma theory of cholera, later 19th century. From A Short History of the National Institutes of Health via Wikipedia.

A sour miasma, compound of sweat, hair gel, Fisherman's Friend, and contempt, settled over the Republican Party through the spring and summer—sure, when it's always the Party, it's always the morning after as well, but this was worse, the fug of failure, after a riot of cartoon politicians had shrieked through the apartment, drinking all the liquor and setting things on fire, and our future Harrisons, McKinleys, and Coolidges declined to come in (no thanks, Mom says I have to wash the cars). It was hard to remember even what we'd been talking about, which was the 2012 presidential elections.

The GOP seemed to be making itself ugly on purpose, like an adolescent refusing to comb his hair or tuck his shirt in or say please and thank you just because he's convinced he'll always be unattractive, fat, sleeveless, tattooed, and snarling. It was as if they thought it would be immoral to offer the voters anything, even a polite word, let alone health insurance: a fox hunt was turning into a motorcycle gang before our eyes.

And the Obama campaign was taking advantage of it, with a pretty ingenious strategy: they treated everything Romney said as if that was what he meant. If Romney said he favored a Human Life Amendment, Democrats would be out on the streets in minutes claiming that Romney supported making abortion a federal crime in all cases; if Romney spooked the capitalists by threatening a trade war with China, Democrats would accuse him of wanting to start a trade war with China; and so on. If Romney presented himself as a soulless ideologue, Obama would call him one.

And then in Wednesday's debate, when you least expected it, that miasma started to dissipate, a light flickered on, and there was another Romney, fresh-faced, light-footed, and ready for anything, shedding that ugly old-style conservatism like a worn-out snakeskin and emerging in his true identity. Boy, was the Obama camp surprised!

Far from being a class warrior for entrenched wealth, he announced that he would not support any tax cuts at all for the wealthiest Americans—that is, he would indeed cut their income taxes by 20% with one hand, but then he'd take it all back with the other by getting rid of the child deduction and the mortgage interest deduction and the charity deduction and what not, or by capping all the deductions at $17,000, or some other interesting, scientific-looking number. Of course income taxes are on sweat money; he still plans to eliminate taxes on your money directly created by the Invisible Hand, such as long-term capital gains, dividends, interest, and inheritances, but saw no need to talk about that during the debate; it's not something a gentleman would discuss. For that matter, Obama didn't want to talk about it either.

Far from treating compassion as if it were some kind of disease, he showed himself as a person who feels deep compassion for those who suffer from the caprices of the economy, like those desperate women who keep approaching him and Mrs. Romney at rallies all over the country, begging for help, not that he gives them anything, which would only encourage their dependency, but he always has a kind and understanding word, because that's just the kind of country we are, and always have been, taking care of our elderly and disabled, if we're sure we can afford to, which we unfortunately no longer can, at least not in the style they've become accustomed to, and some of that doesn't have to apply to people who are elderly and disabled at the moment, but to people that are putatively going to become elderly or disabled after he's eligible for reelection in 2016, and why shouldn't they bite the bullet like everybody else? Think they're special or something?

Far from fulminating against government programs, and threatening to shut down whole agencies, he actually singled out an area for not cutting, education, adding that he wanted to make it more effective and efficient, which would really be the equivalent to giving it a raise. He also likes the defense department.

Far from regarding Washington the way the barbarians saw Rome, as a sink of human depravity that could only be improved by burning it down, he talked about working with people there, and building the kind of relationships old Ronald Reagan used to have with Tip O'Neill, except presumably without the cocktails (another cup of the chrysanthemum, Ms. Pelosi?).

Far from wanting to whack down regulations with a machete, he showed a sense that some regulations are better than others. For instance, he would oppose regulations that forced consumers to use dirty coal: "I'm going to make sure we can continue to burn clean coal," he said. Likewise, he didn't complain about the Dodd-Frank legislation having too many regulations; he complained that they weren't clear enough. Like Obamacare, he wants to repeal it, but he also wants to replace it, just with some Republican names on it. Finally, he didn't see anything wrong with regulating health insurance, he only objected to all the people—women are constantly approaching him and Mrs. Romney on that subject too—who are going to lose their health insurance under President Obama's plan to make health insurance universal. And the death panel.

No doubt the arithmetic is pretty screwy, at least that's what numbers maven colleagues here at the Times tell me. And he didn't articulate a new and comprehensive post–Tea Party philosophy of government. He did something bigger, refusing to commit to anything so grandiose. As the poet says, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Romney showed us that in that sense at least he is one of the best.

And conservatives loved it! Because, frankly, conservatives love a winner as much as the next guy, and Romney looked like a winner at that podium, grinning and shouting down bullies like Jim Lehrer and Big Bird, while Obama smiled feebly, appalled. Romney proved that he has what it takes, the heedless bluster and the total lack of scruple, to gather up a coalition of neurasthenic white women and swaggering Hispanic men to join up his base of regular guys and Chamber of Commerce stalwarts and to be who he really is. Whatever that might be.