I guess I'm not a Republican then. 
You shouldn't interpret his statement as a condition for membership. And I don't think he's claiming that this is the chief defining mark of a Republican. Remember, the defining characteristic of the GOP is and always has been, since its first national convention in Pittsburgh in 1856, nationalism. Wrapping oneself up in the flag. With a hefty dose of deference to the Creator thrown in for good measure.
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord:
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:
His truth is marching on.
Republicans have always wrapped themselves up in the flag, or, more recently, pinned the flags on their lapels as tiny symbols of their nationalism. Remember when there was a rash of articles in travel magazines about five years ago written by Americans overseas about how to pass for Canadian when you're travelling in South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa? How did those strike you? Be honest. There were generally two types reactions. Those who'd immediately write in and say, "oh, give me more information about that. I hate being constantly question about my country's foreign policy." And those who'd say, "you twit, you're an embarassment to me and to every gringo out there. why don't you pack your sh**t and move to Canada, or Brussels, or, better yet, Pyongyang, if you hate your country so much." I have to say that my own regard is more closely described by the latter of the two reactions. I actually spent most of the fall semester of 2003 working in Amsterdam, so I may have been more sensitive to such stories than the average yankee, but I'm sure you remember them. In fact, the story of that businessman who lived in Paris during the time just preceeding the US invasion of Iraq, who smoked profusely, and who therefore fit in very well in Parisian restaurants and coffeeshops. Till someone asked for a light, that is. "Pardonnez-moi, Monsieur, avez-vous une allumeur?" "But of course, madamme, here you go." And he'd break out his Zippo encrusted with an American flag on one side and a bald eagle on the other, strike it and hold it up so that the fire-beggar would be sure to see his proud american Zippo. Usually they'd take the light and say "merci beaucoup," I gather, but occassionally some would be so offended that they'd refuse the light. No kidding. This was an interesting story. The story never said what US political party that businessman in Paris belonged to. They didn't have to.
Still, there's something else besides nationalism. And that something else has always been there as well. Ever since Pittsburgh 1856. And I never quite knew a good, one-line soundbite way to spell it out. Romney provided that. I think it was an apt description.
I think Reagan understood this. I think Lincoln did. I think they all did. I think if you don't understand this you'll never be nominated by the party. You may still be able to support republicans if you don't understand that. You may go through life as a lifelong republican without ever quite being able to put your finger on it. But to win that party's nomination you have to be able to exploit that sentiment. The well-known republicans that the republicans always hold up as examples did this the best. I think Romney is positioning himself for next time, and I think he's doing a pretty good job. Of course he has to get past some built-in bigotry to get himself nominated, and that'll be no mean feat, but wrapping himself up in God and The Flag is a good start. I think that his pointing out the abject Zoroastrian influence in the underlying value system of the party is testament to his keen understanding of body politic.
