Why Did the Atlantic Enable Mitt Romney’s Dangerous Both-Sidesism?

By David Corn  July 9, 2022

Sen. Mitt Romney at the US Capitol on May 25, 2022. Francis Chung/AP

I am a fan of the Atlantic magazine. Its work on the Covid pandemic was stellar, and its coverage of the ongoing war on democracy waged by Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and the conservative cosmos has been impressive and important. In September 2020, the magazine posted an extensive and prescient article by veteran journalist Barton Gellman detailing how Trump could throw the election into chaos and subvert the result. (In June of that year, I had reported on how democracy experts feared just such an outcome.) In December 2021, a Gellman cover story noted that a Trump-dominated GOP was preparing to torpedo the next election by “building an apparatus of election theft.” It was part of a special issue devoted to the democracy crisis. In conjunction with that issue, the magazine held a live virtual conversation about the threats to American democracy, demonstrating its commitment to this crucial issue.

That’s why I am puzzled that the Atlantic this week provided a platform for Mitt Romney to engage in an act of fatuous both-sidesism that undermines the fight against the GOP’s assault on democracy. In an article headlined “America Is In Denial” (illustrated by a drawing of a blindfolded bald eagle), the Republican senator from Utah and former presidential candidate points out that the nation faces several crises: climate change, inflation and the national debt, illegal immigration, a water shortage, and a “war for our democracy.” Yet, Romney laments, Americans refuse to see the dangers at hand:

What accounts for the blithe dismissal of potentially cataclysmic threats? The left thinks the right is at fault for ignoring climate change and the attacks on our political system. The right thinks the left is the problem for ignoring illegal immigration and the national debt. But wishful thinking happens across the political spectrum. More and more, we are a nation in denial.

Please insert here the scratch-shriek sound of a record-player needle being yanked off a track. Just a minute, senator, the left thinks the right ignores climate change and the attack on the political system. Which party has denied the existence and consequences of climate change and consistently blocked action to respond to this danger? Yours, sir. And which party has falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen, promoted bonkers conspiracy theories about it, plotted to overturn the results, and tried to delegitimize the winner? Yours, sir. Which party has stood by a president who incited a violent terrorist attack on the US Capitol that forced you to flee an insurrectionist mob? Once more, yours, sir.

Romney knows this. He voted to convict Trump in his second impeachment trial. (And he voted to convict Trump in his first impeachment trial.) As for which party is currently scheming to gain partisan control of vote counting and results certification to obtain the power to overturn elections? I presume Romney also knows the answer to this question.

The problem exacerbating the democracy crisis is not, as Romney argues, that libs and conservatives are stuck with their own beliefs and equally blinded by ideological proclivities—and, thus, the nation is imperiled. The threat to the republic comes from one side, led by a demagogic liar and scoundrel, which has waged a monumental disinformation crusade and convinced tens of millions of citizens that its lies are true, and which is now, in authoritarian fashion, endeavoring to defy democracy and rig the electoral system in its favor.

Romney is certainly free to contend the left is wrong on immigration and fiscal policy. (But remember, it was Trump who added $7.8 trillion to the national debt—the third largest increase, relative to the size of the economy, in US history. Only George W. Bush and Abraham Lincoln saw bigger additions to the debt in relative terms.) A policy dispute over the budget or immigration, though, is hardly comparable to a relentless propaganda campaign that results in a seditious raid on Congress and a continuing effort to undermine democracy. To equate the Democrats' stance on immigration with Republican complicity in a “war” on democracy is dangerous false equivalency and an absurd exercise in whataboutism.

As the Atlantic has so ably affirmed, the democracy crisis is the greatest existential threat to the American experiment since the Civil War. If Trump’s GOP-enabled plot to delegitimize the election system and skew it in Republicans’ favor succeeds, the nation will not be better equipped to deal with the multiple crises that haunt Romney. Casting the Trumpian war on democracy as just another front in the never-ending squabble between the left and the right assists the forces of authoritarianism. It presents this fight in partisan terms and encourages Republicans to side with Trump’s project to decimate democracy. This battle needs to be defined as a clash between small-d democrats and the tide of autocracy—which is a confrontation of a different nature than the typical dustup between Ds and Rs, one that rises above the usual political mud wrestling.

Yet Romney lumps it in with the rest of the political crap and refuses to explicitly identify the cause of this crisis, which is his own party. He grumbles that President Joe Biden, “a genuinely good man,” has “yet been unable to break through our national malady of denial, deceit, and distrust.” (If Biden cannot vanquish Trump’s denialism, deceptions, and dishonesty, whose fault is that?) Romney warns that a return of Trump “would feed the sickness, probably rendering it incurable,” and harrumphs that “Congress is particularly disappointing.” His solution? Well, he doesn’t have one. He yearns for “a president who can rise above the din to unite us behind the truth” and claims several “contenders with experience and smarts stand in the wings,” without naming one. Oh, what gallant knight will come galloping in to rescue the country?

Deploying a meaningless bromide, Romney urges “us all to rise above ourselves.” He is refusing to place blame where it belongs. American democracy is not threatened by the mutual denialism on both sides. One political party—more like a cult of personality—has embraced Trump’s lies, has downplayed or dismissed his efforts to overturn an election and his incitement of political violence, and has joined the former president’s mission to pervert the political system to enhance its own power and bolster minority rule.

If Romney deeply cares about the war on democracy, perhaps he should reject the political party waging it. Or, at least, hold it accountable. In his article, the senator observes, “Too often, Washington demonstrates the maxim that for evil to thrive only requires good men to do nothing.” (This adage has long been attributed to Edmund Burke—probably errantly.) I imagine Romney, who did exhibit political bravery in Trump’s two impeachment trials, believes that with this piece he is courageously decrying the misguided views and destructive stubbornness of both sides. But it is a not-much-more-than-nothing thing to write a column of this sort. The problem here is not Washington. It’s the Republican Party and those who deny the threat and those who won’t address it clearly.

Got anything to say about this item—or anything else? Email me at ourland@motherjones.com.

Dumbass Comment of the Week

Should we just give up and call this feature “What Marjorie Taylor Greene Said This Week (and Lauren Boebert, Too)”? It really seems that Greene cannot make it through a seven-day period without uttering a remark of stunning idiocy. Nonetheless, she remains a right-wing fave, and her policy pronouncements—such as her recent declaration that the United States should pull out of NATO—receive media coverage. After the horrific shootings at the Fourth of July parade in Highland Park—the accused killer attended a Trump rally in 2020—Greene, a conspiracy theory nutter, couldn’t help but be herself. She suggested this tragedy was a false flag—that is, an act orchestrated by the government or other actors to increase support for gun safety measures.

Here’s the full quote:

Two shootings on July Fourth. One in a rich white neighborhood and the other at a fireworks display. Almost sounds like it’s designed to persuade Republicans to go along with more gun control. I mean, after all, remember, we didn’t see that happen at all the Pride parades in the month of June. But as soon as we hit MAGA month, as soon as we hit the month that we’re all celebrating, loving our country, we have shootings on July Fourth. I mean, that’s, oh, you know, that would sound like a conspiracy theory, right? Of course. But what’s the definition of a right-wing conspiracy theory? Well, by the way, it’s the news that’s just six months early.

This is typical fare for conspiracy loons. Alex Jones, the leader of such lunatics, claimed the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012 was a false flag operation. (Jones lost a defamation lawsuit in that case.) And he quickly reacted to the Highland Park shooting by saying the alleged assailant had “FBI handlers.” Greene has more than earned her membership in this crazy squad. In 2018, two years before she was elected to the House, she endorsed the conspiracy theory that the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, had been staged. (Remember the video of her harassing David Hogg, the Parkland survivor and gun safety activist?) She also had championed the bonkers QAnon and Pizzagate conspiracy theories and asserted there was no evidence an airliner hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Her ignorance and lunacy outpace just about every other weekly contender for this prize. No wonder that when Greene appeared on Jones’ talk show this week, he urged her to run for president. She replied, with a coy use of double negatives, that a presidential bid was “not something I don’t consider.”

There were competitive runners-up this week. Fox host Tucker Carlson blamed women and weed for the Highland Park tragedy, claiming that young men in American are being encouraged to smoke marijuana and being overprescribed antidepressants. And it gets worse: “The authorities in their lives, mostly women, never stop lecturing them about their so-called privilege. You’re male, you’re privileged.” All this is why, Carlson asserted, “a lot of young men in America are going nuts.”

I'm old enough to remember when conservatives preached individual responsibility and abhorred blaming society for the acts of criminals. Yet when a deranged young white dude who demonstrated a fancy for Trump is accused of mass murder, it’s the fault of feminists, school counselors, doctors, and the liberal establishment.

And there’s another knucklehead who deserves recognition this week: Donald Trump Jr. After Brian Deese, a White House economic adviser, noted that Biden’s opposition to Vladimir Putin’s illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine was necessary for “the future of the liberal world order,” an overly excited Boy Trump cited this remark as evidence that right-wing conspiracy theory advocates who warn of a diabolical globalist plot to impose a one-government “new world order” were correct.

For color commentary, let’s turn to Inigo Montoya of The Princess Bride:

Trump the Lesser apparently does not know that the term “liberal world order” is not code for a left-wing one-world government scheme. It refers to the system of rules that industrialized democracies have developed to govern global affairs. (One rule: Don’t invade a neighbor and commit war crimes.) Deese was not revealing any sinister secret. He was employing standard foreign-policy parlance. Other ignoramuses on the right also seized on his comment and claimed this was an aha moment. They’d all win a trophy this week...if it weren’t for Greene.

The Mailbag

A little less mail this week than usual. I hope that means readers were enjoying the Fourth of July, despite the massacre in Highland Park. It was hard to celebrate the freedoms we still have here—and the ones we still must fight for—after hearing the news. Responding to my recent piece about how the religious right, after losing the fight to curtail reproductive rights, worked tirelessly for 50 years to overturn Roe v. Wade, Claire Jeannette emailed:

How can something be so depressing and so hopeful at the same time? I’m 77 years old, and when Reagan was elected, I said my job was to make sure the pendulum that goes back-and-forth between conservative and liberal didn’t go too far to the right before we pushed it more to the left. I have forgotten that for a while. What I’m really sad about is that I’m not going to be around when it swings back the other way. I’ll leave some money to the cause, though. I am a regular old middle-class lesbian (white) born poor who was able to take advantage of President Johnson’s war on poverty and got a halfway decent education. I am now a semi-retired psychotherapist who spends a chunk of change every month contributing to causes and politicians of color. (Timothy Snyder in On Tyranny told me to do that.) Thanks for your contribution. Thanks Mother Jones, the first one and your magazine.

Thanks, Claire. I do feel for the older folks among us who are seeing hard-won gains eviscerated. I also feel for the younger folks who see a future where they have to fight to regain these rights and prevent assorted calamities. As I previously noted, I don’t care much for the pendulum metaphor. I see it as a long-running war, with battles won and lost.

Margaret Kibbee wrote:

As the court has already demonstrated with their re-write of the Voting Rights Act, codifying something isn't the solution. Funny (not funny) that the religious right champions a non-religious thrice-married adulterer, but it's not about religion. We have to do a better job of getting the truth out there. You are doing your part. The press needs to be called out when they don't publish the truth about gas prices, inflation, and Biden, like Eric Boehlert did before he died with his Press Run.

Eric’s death in April was a great loss. Pressure always needs to be applied to the media. But maybe because I’m in the media, I believe that better media coverage, while important, is not the main solution. It boils down to political organizing—obtaining and using power. If enough intelligent, decent, and caring citizens do that, the system will produce better outcomes.

Rusty Curling, referring to Republicans (I presume), wrote:

They have lost the culture wars, those who represent this view of morality are not a majority.

Unfortunately, they have found a way to rule as a minority. The rest of us have been outflanked.

See my response to Margaret. There are certainly institutional advantages that the right has been exploiting to move toward minority rule. (See the US Senate.) But a majority could outflank the outflankers.

Bill Falcone struck a downbeat tone:

My concerns for this country are at an all-time high, while my hope is at an all-time low. It seems to me, and other progressive laypeople like me, that it's all over but the shoutin'. It seems the current system in place, with an extremist right wing Supreme Court and a majority of states with Republican majorities, will continue with this ongoing coup. The next "biggie" is that upcoming Supreme Court case which could empower the states to send the electors of their choosing. Makes this 63-year-old retiree want to go live out my life in a cabin in Maine! Thanks for the great writing and explanations.

Well, then you will have to contend with Susan Collins! Seriously, can I come visit? More seriously, I understand the despair, and I’m hardly a rah-rah type of fellow. I just know that the enemies of democracy and freedom—the haters, the fundamentalists, the racists—want us to feel dispirited. That’s enough for me to say hell no to that.

In response to my piece about Mark Meadows’ disingenuous (to be polite) account of January 6 in his memoir, Liz Gibbons wrote:

I just read Stephanie Grisham's book. It's pretty bad, and by the end of Trump's term she'd been sent packing to Melania-land to watch her incessantly have pictures taken of herself and place them in scrapbooks. But of all the rotten people she meets she hates Meadows above even Javanka. She reminds us of his beginning in public life, falling to his knees and apolo-lying to Boehner. With Trump he meets his ideal, where his natural state as a lying sniveling toady propels him to the White House. He is equal parts stupid and manipulative, perfect for his time. He should go back to building new Earth creationist theme parks. 

I had forgotten Meadows’ pathetic apology to then–House Speaker John Boehner after he tried to oust him and his connection to a dinosaur dig conducted by creationists trying to prove the Earth was created in six days a few thousand years ago. He sold the creationists the land and didn’t declare the transaction on his congressional financial disclosure form. But after all his lies about the Big Lie, Meadows is not back to working with creationists; he’s building a vast, right-wing, dark-money operation to influence elections and policy fights.

Allen Cohen also emailed about Meadows’ book:

Are there any standards for classifying a book as either a novel or non-fiction? The lies in Meadows' book, which could be documented, and the conversations ignored (but which have been attested to) would certainly disqualify it as not a book of fact. It would be a real comment on Trump & Co. if booksellers and libraries had to remove The Chief's Chief from their non-fiction shelves and place it on their fiction shelves. Or if courts would allow purchasers to get refunds because of all the misleading information populating its pages.

Interesting idea, Allen. Not sure we want a High Commissioner to decide what books are true or not. But my hunch is that Meadows’ book is not on too many bookstore shelves these days. So, there’s not much to remove.

Sheila Mattingly shared a frustration:

I love your articles but am very disappointed I can’t share them on Facebook so more people get the benefit of your wisdom. Is there a reason you don’t make them available to shared media outlets? I have family and friends who also live in Arizona (a very Red state) who might not know about your articles.

Thank you, Sheila. I am once again flattered by this request. But as with many newsletters, one of our goals is to try to raise revenue. That is why we charge a modest fee for the full version of Our Land and why we do not post it all online. If we did, there would be less incentive for readers to subscribe. As I’ve previously suggested, you are free to forward the newsletter to friends and comrades, and I hope you will suggest they subscribe at www.davidcorn.com. Of course, you can cut and paste portions of the newsletter into Facebook posts. I realize that’s cumbersome. But for now, this is our model. Please feel free to suggest others. And please do help me by spreading the word about the newsletter. We can always use more Our Land subscribers and more contributors to the Mailbag.

Elizabeth Richards addressed a highly important matter:

Just read your latest mailing and am very disappointed not to see the lovely Moxie gracing your e-pages. Please be sure to include at least two pictures with your next work.

Elizabeth, I tend to feature MoxieCam™ about once a week—so not in every issue. Of course, she has lobbied for more than that. Which is curious because sometimes it’s not easy to get her to pose. Often, she seems to have more important matters to tend to.

MoxieCam™

“Moxie, give me back my phone.”

“I have to take a photo of this!”

“Who’s that?”

“Joy the Therapy Poodle.”

“What’s she doing in our Fourth of July parade, Moxie?”

“I dunno. Just promise me you’ll never—”

“Hmmm, that’s one way to monetize...”

“Don’t even think about it.”

And here’s heroic Moxie looking toward the future and contemplating her destiny:

Read Recent Issues of Our Land

July 2, 2022: Mark Meadows: one helluva liar; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Ali Alexander); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

June 28, 2022: The lessons from the right’s 50-year-long crusade to limit the freedom of women; the end of Ozark; and more.

June 25, 2022: Hooray for the Trump Republicans who saved the nation—or not?; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Clarence Thomas); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

June 21, 2022: Is Trump’s GOP getting even crazier?; George Carlin and the American Dream; Alexei Navalny’s nightmare; and more.

June 18, 2022: Is Elon Musk more dangerous than Peter Thiel?; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Lauren Boebert, again); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

June 14, 2022: From Watergate to Trump: Does the system really work?; a thrilling performance by Paul McCartney; how The Staircase apprehends its viewers; and more.

June 11, 2022: In the room where it happened: covering the January 6 committee’s hearing; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Jesse Watters and others); my proudest moment in journalism; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

June 7, 2022: Barack Obama was right about the gun clingers; Special Emergency Dumbass Comment of the Week (Louie Gohmert); Our Land in Photos; the perfection of Better Call Saul; the sublime new album from Wilco; and more.

June 4, 2022: Are Democats pathetic?; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Ken Buck); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

Got suggestions, comments, complaints, tips related to any of the above, or anything else? Email me at ourland@motherjones.com.