« Is Mike Huckabee Right On Abortion? | Main | CNN YouTube Republican Debate - November 28, 2007 »
A Muslim in Mitt Romney’s Cabinet?
By Bill | November 28, 2007 | Email This Post
Mansoor Ijaz, an American who is also a Muslim (and here I reject use of the usual hyphenate) has written in the Christian Science Monitor of an exchange he had with Mitt Romney on the possibility of appointing someone of the Muslim faith to a Cabinet-level position in a future Romney administration. Romney answers: “…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration.”
One can scarcely imagine a worse answer on the subject coming from a major candidate (Although it’s fun to try; picture Romney in Groucho Marx glasses, bouncing a cigar and saying “Well, it certainly won’t be Homeland Security! And how about their record on Transportation!? Yowza, yowza, yowza!”) But by answering as he did, Mitt managed to both lend credence to Ijaz’ questionable implication that a President ought to make special efforts to place a Muslim at the highest levels of government, as well as insult all Americans (not just Muslims) by suggesting that Muslims are only suited for low level jobs. Replace “Muslim” with some group with which you are associated and you’ll begin to see the picture.
It is worth mentioning that the point underlying Ijaz’ question, which is that Muslims might have some insight into the attitudes of their coreligionists around the world, is not without merit. However, the suggestion that there ought to be some requisite number of Muslim appointments will only serve to polarize public opinion instead of showcasing any assistance that the American Muslim community could offer the next administration.
Overnight, Romney’s advisers must have gotten to him, because today he’s (correctly) offering the viewpoint that “I fill responsibilities based upon people’s merit and their skill. And, sometimes, it includes many ethnic minorities. And other times, it includes different minorities. But I’m very pleased with my record.” Unfortunately, he still feels the need to add that “I’m very pleased that, among my Cabinet members [as Massachusetts governor], for instance, I had several African-American individuals. I had people of different backgrounds.”
How about just sticking to “being pleased” that, for every position, there was no better appointee, regardless of race, sex, religion, orientation, or any other criteria unrelated to job performance? The temptation to pander to groups by promising them a percentage of government jobs is endemic in politicians - Joe Biden, for example, has said that his first Supreme Court nominee will be a woman, rather than just saying he will find the best legal mind in the country, chromosomes be damned - and I understand the temptation. But following that line of thinking leads to the conclusion that we can only care about ourselves - that it takes a woman to uphold Roe v. Wade, or a black person to speak out against the recent resurgence in hangman’s nooses - and that’s a callous, narcissistic view that makes all of us less honorable and downright meaner as a society. Everyone has a right to speak from their own viewpoint, but we ought to look out for our fellow citizens at the same time. And our leaders have a responsibility to reflect those concerns in public policy… regardless of whether they (or their lobbyists) are directly affected.
Topics: Mitt Romney |