Romney Terrorized Gay Student, Held Him Down, and Forcibly Cut His Hair

[Melody]

Ha, his family says the article has some facts wrong and that he'd be furious to be used for political purposes.

GASP!!! You impugn the integrity and impartiality of the Washington Post? You must be one of them racist teabaggers. /snork

[djhutch]

When I talk about how worldview colors everything we do, this is what I mean.

Mitt Romney returned from a three-week spring break in 1965 to resume his studies as a high school senior at the prestigious Cranbrook School. Back on the handsome campus, studded with Tudor brick buildings and manicured fields, he spotted something he thought did not belong at a school where the boys wore ties and carried briefcases. John Lauber, a soft-spoken new student one year behind Romney, was perpetually teased for his nonconformity and presumed homosexuality. Now he was walking around the all-boys school with bleached-blond hair that draped over one eye, and Romney wasn’t having it.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

As crappy as this hazing was, it was 45 years ago. I don't know how much it reflects on his character now.

[Oblong]

Really? Did you hold someone down and cut their hair, permanently altering their appearance? Or was it just teasing.

Are you aware that hair grows back?

[zimm]

wait, a morman named "Mitt" got to be the bully? how the hell did that happen?

[ROMAD1]

this was pretty helpful of the WAPO to publish this on the heels of the President's monumental announcement.

to put this in a certain context. Some people ignored Clinton being accused of rape.

[Corky]

Are you aware that hair grows back?

[MrDeeds]

This Washington Post story is disgusting. They are already in panic mode regarding Obama's re-election. Journalism...haha

Sister of Alleged Romney Target Has ‘No Knowledge’ of Any Bullying Incident - ABC News

They ps'ed on the poor man's grave. Despicable.

[Antrat]

Are you aware that hair grows back?

"I thought this was a given!"

[Yoda]

This is what bothers me so much about politics. Nobody gives a **** about what some jackass did 50 years ago. But if it can be used to serve his own personal agenda, "woo hoo, big news boys!!!!"

Pretty disgusting, really.

[ROMAD1]

Washington Post vs. Mitt Romney, teen— Editorial - NYPOST.com

[Melody]

Washington Post vs. Mitt Romney, teen— Editorial - NYPOST.com

This part is worth repeating:

A few things are becoming clear:
For one, by laboring so mightily to construct a huge mountain from such a tiny molehill, The Washington Post reveals itself as complicit in Team Obama’s ceaseless effort to distract voters from real issues — particularly, the economy.

And this story points up why many potentially top-notch candidates decline to seek the presidency — or even to enter public life in the first place.


Read more: Washington Post vs. Mitt Romney, teen— Editorial - NYPOST.com

[Oblong]

wait, a morman named "Mitt" got to be the bully? how the hell did that happen?

Better yet... Willard.

[ROMAD1]

I just had the 5500 word article in front of me in the paper. Shock and awe. Because it was followed up by another editorial about the need to confront bullying like that believed to have been done by a major political figure.

WAPO, serves its masters.

[Oblong]

Here's a scenario that's entirely believable:

Next week we'll find out Obama did something similar as a kid and when people on the right try to make an issue of equivocation, the media and democrats will simply say "MEh..... this is old news now. Why are we talking about this? Let's move on...."

[smr-nj]

I guess what surprises me about the story is that I didn't get that vibe in character from Mitt.

So, while I find what he did pretty nasty, I'll hope that the man we see now grew out of that "pack" behavior (because that is more what I see in this incident), and matured into a more reasonable person.

However, I will say that I wish he hadn't said he "didn't remember this".
THAT I found unbelievable. Better that he should have owned up. Saying he didn't remember it just , to ME, is weasley.

Bottom line.... I wasn't leaning toward voting for him, so this doesn't change my vote. I'm not sure that will be true for everybody.

NEXT!

[pyrotigers]

Here's a scenario that's entirely believable:

Next week we'll find out Obama did something similar as a kid and when people on the right try to make an issue of equivocation, the media and democrats will simply say "MEh..... this is old news now. Why are we talking about this? Let's move on...."

Some right wing blogs were already bringing up that Obama's own book has a passage where he yelled at and shoved a girl when he was in school, I didn't mention it because I really hate being linked with right wing blogs almost as much as I would the washington post or new york times.

[Sparks4Ever]

The WaPo pretending that Lauber had "long been bothered" by this incident when he just heard about it is troubling. It kinda blows the credibility of the entire story. What else did the Post lie about, or what other bits of truth did they stretch? Did they leave out important details that would have been favorable towards Romney?

[sinister porpoise]

Outlets like Fox News and World Net Daily will basically never run stories critical of the GOP. And most every other media source is dismissed as "liberal," leading to:

Frum, Cocktail Parties, and the Threat of Doubt

One of the more striking features of the contemporary conservative movement is the extent to which it has been moving toward epistemic closure. Reality is defined by a multimedia array of interconnected and cross promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News.

Whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from the liberal media, and is therefore ipso facto not to be trusted. (How do you know they’re liberal? Well, they disagree with the conservative media!)

This epistemic closure can be a source of solidarity and energy, but it also renders the conservative media ecosystem fragile. Think of the complete panic China’s rulers feel about any breaks in their Internet firewall: The more successfully external sources of information have been excluded to date, the more unpredictable the effects of a breach become.

Internal criticism is then especially problematic, because it threatens the hermetic seal. It’s not just that any particular criticism might have to be taken seriously coming from a fellow conservative. Rather, it’s that anything that breaks down the tacit equivalence between “critic of conservatives and “wicked liberal smear artist” undermines the effectiveness of the entire information filter.

If disagreement is not in itself evidence of malign intent or moral degeneracy, people start feeling an obligation to engage it sincerely—maybe even when it comes from the New York Times. And there is nothing more potentially fatal to the momentum of an insurgency fueled by anger than a conversation. A more intellectually secure conservatism would welcome this, because it wouldn’t need to define itself primarily in terms of its rejection of an alien enemy.

The WaPo has four of Mitt's classmates publicly on record confirming the story. The only reason they are receiving criticism from conservatives is because this story criticizes a prominent Republican. There is otherwise no discernible principle that would lead to such rank whining in reaction to a story with four on-the-record confirming witnesses.

[ballmich]

Great, I guess this make Romney pro-haircut. I hope this means he will hold Bernanke down and give him a shave.

[Oblong]

Outlets like Fox News and World Net Daily will basically never run stories critical of the GOP. And most every other media source is dismissed as "liberal," leading to:

Frum, Cocktail Parties, and the Threat of Doubt


The WaPo has four of Mitt's classmates publicly on record confirming the story. The only reason they are receiving criticism from conservatives is because this story criticizes a prominent Republican. There is otherwise no discernible principle that would lead to such rank whining in reaction to a story with four on-the-record confirming witnesses.

You don't the timing is relevant in any way with regard to the President's declaration on gay marriage?

[ROMAD1]

I will remember this line from Slate today...and all will see it again: "Voters care about the way candidates behaved as teens"



I will remember that one.

[MrDeeds]

I will remember this line from Slate today...and all will see it again: "Voters care about the way candidates behaved as teens"



I will remember that one.

It's bizzaro world.

[ROMAD1]

“The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family,” she said.

Sister of Alleged Romney Target Has ‘No Knowledge’ of Any Bullying Incident - ABC News

This is insane

meanwhile...a certain sitting US President

[screwball]

You don't the timing is relevant in any way with regard to the President's declaration on gay marriage?

You should have read the article, dated March 26, 2010.

[sinister porpoise]

You don't the timing is relevant in any way with regard to the President's declaration on gay marriage?

I think it is coincidence. There are so many media outlets putting out so much daily content, it is inevitable there will be coincidences of timing. It would be strange if the Washington Post engaged in a conspiracy to publish this expose of Mitt Romney as a teenage bully contrasted with Obama's tepid support of gay marriage, when the WaPo has not been similarly supportive of Obama elsewhere.

[TheCouga]

The WaPo pretending that Lauber had "long been bothered" by this incident when he just heard about it is troubling. It kinda blows the credibility of the entire story. What else did the Post lie about, or what other bits of truth did they stretch? Did they leave out important details that would have been favorable towards Romney?

The Post had five independent sources they went to on the article.

I know it's normal conservative operations to attack the media if they print something they don't like, but having five independent sources is a lot more than most media outlets have before they report a story.

[sinister porpoise]

Sister of Alleged Romney Target Has ‘No Knowledge’ of Any Bullying Incident - ABC News

This is insane

meanwhile...a certain sitting US President

What is insane? Several classmates confirm the story. His sisters did not attend the school and don't deny it happened.

[TheCouga]

You don't the timing is relevant in any way with regard to the President's declaration on gay marriage?

Maybe it's the other way around. For all we know, Obama planned on making the announcement later in the campaign. But then they got wind of the WaPo story being published, and decided to move that timeline up. Stories like this take months of reporting and editing. It's impossible to time them to a specific week.

[TheCouga]

GASP!!! You impugn the integrity and impartiality of the Washington Post? You must be one of them racist teabaggers. /snork

The Post was basically a propaganda outlet for the Neocons during the Bush Administration.

[ROMAD1]

What is insane? Several classmates confirm the story. His sisters did not attend the school and don't deny it happened.

Tell someone that this is a major issue and try to keep a straight face.

[TheCouga]

Tell someone that this is a major issue and try to keep a straight face.

I don't really think it's a major issue. I think it's a minor issue that, by itself, says something, but not much about Romney's character today.

My main concern is that it fits into a theme of behavior that Romney still exhibits today: lack of empathy.

The other interesting thing is how Romney said he "doesn't remember" except for the part where he "remembers that it wasn't because he though the guy was gay." Leave it to Romney to take both sides of the issue on an apology.

[ROMAD1]

I don't really think it's a major issue. I think it's a minor issue that, by itself, says something, but not much about Romney's character today.

My main concern is that it fits into a theme of behavior that Romney still exhibits today: lack of empathy.

The other interesting thing is how Romney said he "doesn't remember" except for the part where he "remembers that it wasn't because he though the guy was gay." Leave it to Romney to take both sides of the issue on an apology.

5500 words, accompanying editorial on bullying. This is more important to the Washington post than anything else today.

[sinister porpoise]

Mitt Romney is one of two candidates for the most powerful elected office on this planet of approximately 7,000,000,000 people. Its okay for the media to delve into his past.

[Lousluggage]

As crappy as this hazing was, it was 45 years ago. I don't know how much it reflects on his character now.

That's what I was thinking too. People can change a lot over the years, and while I don't know how people across the country felt, I was told growing up that getting through bullying as a child was 'character building.' As far as I can remember bullying has only been viewed as something that needs to be combatted in recent years.

If I read about Romney doing something like this in the present, then I'd be worried.

[pyrotigers]

Outlets like Fox News and World Net Daily will basically never run stories critical of the GOP. And most every other media source is dismissed as "liberal," leading to:

Frum, Cocktail Parties, and the Threat of Doubt


The WaPo has four of Mitt's classmates publicly on record confirming the story. The only reason they are receiving criticism from conservatives is because this story criticizes a prominent Republican. There is otherwise no discernible principle that would lead to such rank whining in reaction to a story with four on-the-record confirming witnesses.

They're receiving criticism because they failed to mention some of the most important sources, and completely made up aspects of another to make it look worse.

Of course FOX is terrible, so what? MSNBC, WAPO, and the NYT are the same but with less ridiculous bombast. I'm not even going to get into any blog or website on either side, becuase of course they're ridiculous.

I mean, it was ABC News that bothered to interview people from the wapo story and point out the inaccuracies in it, are they a horrible right wing media organization? I suspect you believe John McCain really had a horrible affair and that it was much easier and more important to cover than John Edwards' affair.

Or perhaps it's all just a coincidence rather than any sort of bias

[Lousluggage]

So... is it still okay to not vote for somebody simply because you disagree with him on most of the issues?

[Oblong]

Pretty sure what you meant to say was:

Mitt Romney is the Republican candidate for the most powerful elected office on this planet of approximately 7,000,000,000 people. Its imperative for the media to delve into his past.

Did you know in Kindegarten he took someone's juice box from them and knocked over someone's blocks?

[smr-nj]

So... is it still okay to not vote for somebody simply because you disagree with him on most of the issues?

Excellent question!
...... but it seems to show a liberal bias.
Therefore, we can't entertain this question.


NEXT!

[TheCouga]

So... is it still okay to not vote for somebody simply because you disagree with him on most of the issues?

To play devil's advocate...

If you don't believe the candidates' stances on the issues (and in Romney's case, there's ample reason not to believe him because all his conflicting positions can't possible be true all at once), than the only other major thing you have to go on is character.

It could be argued that character is a better predictor of how a person is going to govern than his issue stances as part of a political campaign.