Mitt Romney’s campaign calls gay teen bullying report ‘exaggerated’

[L_piperatus]

It speaks to his character as a person who grew up wealthy and separate from “regular” society, and was already becoming a person very intolerant of anyone that thought, or acted, in any way that didn’t conform to what Mitt saw as the correct way.

I wonder, though, of President Obama - Larry Sinclair claims that Mr. Obama used crack cocaine and had gay sex with Mr. Sinclair. Now, that’s pretty separate from “regular” society. Does it explain why President Obama will now support gay marriage?

President Obama has already established himself as very intolerant of anyone who thought or acted differently to his “values” - see his recent attempt to force Catholic universities and hospitals to provide abortifacient and birth control pills to their employees. What’s next? Persecution of those who disagree with his agenda on gay marriage?

 

[irishpatrick]

So, the left’s big news about Romney is that it appears he did a bad thing 47 years ago. Okay.

 

[Havard]

What context makes it permissible to assault someone? Mitt, as a senior in high school, participated in grabbing this unpopular kid and shaving his head against his will.

Now by context I assume you are referring to the underlying facts of the controversy. In that case I agree with you, this could all have been a lie by these former students. What gives them some credence in my mind is that ROmney has apologized for any past pranks.

blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/05/10/romney-apologizes-for-his-high-school-pranks/

Assuming it was an assault. Listen, I’m not calling anyone liars here, but he’s running for President, so there are going to be people from his past looking to boost him, and there are going to be people looking to bring him down. In addition to hyperbole, it could very well be that they are mistaken about how things went down, as well as the nature of Lauber and Romney’s relationship. Again, this was over 40 years ago.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Washington Post Disgraces Itself By Targeting Romney’s ‘Anti-Gay’ High School Pranks

…

They dug up some of his old classmates, who “mostly lean Democratic,” to tell tales of his “vicious” assault on a student, John Lauber, who had been mocked for his “presumed homosexuality.”

…

Now, there’s not much to this story. It sounds more like Romney didn’t like Lauber’s hair than that he wanted to bug Lauber for supposedly being gay. In fact, that’s a conclusion drawn by the Post without asking Romney what was going through his head. Why the Post considers certain types of hairstyles evidence of homosexuality is left unsaid.

Beyond that, the timing of the story is obviously designed to protect President Barack Obama, who just yesterday said that he would embrace same-sex marriage. The narrative from the media therefore became: Obama is fine with gays, Romney hates them. Since they had zero evidence that Romney has any antipathy toward homosexuals, they had to dig up an incident nearly 50 years ago, invest it with anti-gay rage, and print it as fact.

This is character assassination of the worst kind. It doesn’t go to Romney’s deeply-held beliefs and positions. It doesn’t show how he was defined as a young man. It’s just an old prank brought up and infused with nastiness, sans evidence, in order to turn Romney into a jerk in the public eye.

The assistant headmaster denied that Romney was a behavioral problem:

Ben Snyder, who as an assistant headmaster later spearheaded the school’s effort to recruit inner-city students, said Cranbrook in Romney’s time “had its standards and applied them briskly when needed.” As chairman of a group of faculty members and students who were in charge of discipline, he described a strict school in which offenders could be “dismissed, period.” Snyder could not recall dealing with any transgressions involving Romney. “I wouldn’t expect to see him,” Snyder said of the disciplinary tribunals. “The family was so straight, they don’t do those types of things.”

Lauber, by contrast, was expelled from the school, supposedly for smoking.

Romney was a prankster in high school. But he’s admitted as much. The Post story is so egregiously biased that it turns what were clearly innocent high school pranks into evidence that Romney is a bad fellow. Take this example:
As an underclassman, Romney accompanied Wonnberger and Pierce Getsinger, another student, from the second floor of the main academic building to the library to retrieve a book the two boys needed. According to Getsinger, Romney opened a first set of doors for Wonnberger, but then at the next set, with other students around, he swept his hand forward, bidding the teacher into a closed door. Wonnberger walked right into it and Getsinger said Romney giggled hysterically as the teacher shrugged it off as another of life’s indignities.

“I always enjoyed his pranks,” said Stu White, a popular friend of Romney’s who went on to a career as a public school teacher and has long been bothered by the Lauber incident. “But I was not the brunt of any of his pranks.”

That Romney. You never know whose life he was going to ruin (subtext: it could be yours!).

Romney, the Post

claims, was mean enough that he once dumped a girl:

“The person who wrote the most consistently was Mitt,” said Lyn Moon Shields, who dated Romney in the fall semester of 1964. Gentlemanly and fun, Romney was her best date in her six years at school. He called every evening and picked her up in his powder blue Rambler and drove her up and down Woodward Avenue on weekends, and to school dances where she wore blue-green formal dresses and he a dark suit and tie. “Things were so innocent,” she said. “We kissed each other, I think Mitt would admit to that.” One day, she said, Romney just stopped calling. He had taken an interest in a Kingswood sophomore.

Wow. Back in high school, Romney had the gall to break up with someone. No word from the Post on why a young Barack Obama was sleeping with a girl, refusing to tell her he loved her, then dumping her for racial incompatibility.

The Post is clearly doing rearguard action for Obama on his same-sex marriage blow-up. But they’ve done so by destroying their journalistic credibility

breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/05/10/Washington-Post-Disgraces-Self-With-Romney-High-School-Story

 

[Jerry_Miah]

You need to get your facts straight - Mitt Romney did not fire Richard Grenell, he was never on the campaign payroll, he resigned, the exact reason I am not sure. Some conservatives were concerned that he was gay or perhaps pro gay 'marriage.

Self described ‘right wing’ Pat Archbold has said a person’s sexuality should be the deciding factor on there capability to do a job, and conservative Kevin Williamson mocked concerns about Grenell’s sexuality.

Romney says he wanted gay spokesman to stay on job

newsrescue.com/2012/05/romney-says-he-wanted-gay-spokesman-to-stay-on-job/#ixzz1uUGoDl9p

Please, let’s be real about this. We all know in this situation there is no line between resigned, allowed to resign, made to feel that you should resign, made to understand that you are now unwanted, and fired. If you prefer to phrase it that Romney’s gay top-level advisor was “made to understand he should resign due to pressure from far-right anti-gay religious forces”, that’s fine.

The damage-control links you provide don’t change the fact that Romney caved on this, that he threw his advisor under the bus for being gay. And it makes Romney leading a gang to assault and humiliate a gay youth look that much worse.

 

[stevegravy]

Let me understand something, the Obamaites are vetting Romney’s pranks from high school.

Yet Obama who claims to be a legal scholar never released his college certifications or has shown an authentic birth certificate come to think of it.

This is the worse the one they call etch-a-sketch has done.

Your kidding right?

I am leaning on sitting out the POTUS vote but this keeps up I may vote Romney out of sympathy or anger at juvenile claptrap passing as serious political discourse.

 

[Birdpreacher]

I repeat
A. He is still a kid immature and developing his frontal cortex just like we all did at that time of our lives.

That is a fair point. however, even at 17 one should know that its not ok to treat people like that. He was at the very least 17. A 17 year old is not 13 year old. They may still be growing into themselves as individuals but that does not excuse them from the consequences of their actions. Besides 17 year olds today can do quite a bit (as oopposed to the 1960s when thay could do even more)

When you are 17 you are allowed to:

Drive most vehicles and pilot a helicopter or plane
No longer be subject to a care order
Become a blood donor
Be interviewed by the Police without an adult present.

**
When you are 18 you are allowed to:**

Vote
Sue or be sued
Open a bank account in your own name
Perform professionally abroad
Serve on a jury
Get a tattoo
Buy cigarettes and tobacco
Buy and drink alcohol in a bar
See an 18 certificate film at the cinema
Buy fireworks
Leave home
Marry or register a civil partnership
Make a Will
Leave your body for medical study if you die
Carry an organ donor card
You cannot be made a ward of the court
Own land, buy a house or flat & apply for a mortgage
If you are adopted, you can apply to see a copy of your original birth certificate
Ride a motorbike above 125cc with a licence
Drive lorries between 3500kg and 7500kg with a trailer up to 750kg (with the appropriate licence)

B. It was better than beating the snot out of him like what happened to people at my school. I have no recollection about any of those things either I am just saying they happened.

I agree it could have been worse, but that does not trivialize what happened here.

C. What business is it of anybody else except the victim who should have pressed charges if he thought he was abused.

D. If the kid didn’t go and snitch he ought to have gotten even or he was a wuss.

Some folks need to get a life.

I am confused here, so as long as the victim of an assault dosnt complain after the fact, then its not an assault? Are we to presume that the contact was consensual since the victim never spoke up? I don’t think that is how life works.

If Romney bullied a kid (especially if that kid was bullied for merely being perceived as a homosexual) it is certainly relevant to the election. Now people will disagree about how relevant it is and that is fair. Many people have advocated on this thread that since this event happened YEARS ago that it is irrelevant to Romney’s character. That is a valid point. However, human beings hve and will always judge people bsed on their pasts. Its a perfectly natural thing to do. For example, would you have reservations about allowing a person with a childhood history of torturing small animals to watch your kid? Probably not.

Also since the kid did not “get even” why does that make him a wuss? I think a group attack on a younger kid is a much more wuss move.

 

[estesbob]

Oh, I don’t think so. Childhood is a time for growth and learning. How many of us have done some really stupid stuff as kids?

Or as George Bush always said " when I was young and stupid I was young and stupid"

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I think he saws them now. And I’m sure he’s exceptionally well paid for it!

Yeah, he found his future career path early.



(bzzzzzzzz - noise of high-powered bone saw - bzzzzzzz)

 

[iamrefreshed]

Well since we’ve kept POTUS’s in office who had interns performing sexual acts under the Oval Office desk, I doubt anyone will get bent out of shape over some cut hair.

Is May the official beat a canidate over GBLT issues month?

 

[_Abyssinia]

Please, let’s be real about this. We all know in this situation there is no line between resigned, allowed to resign, made to feel that you should resign, made to understand that you are now unwanted, and fired. If you prefer to phrase it that Romney’s gay top-level advisor was “made to understand he should resign due to pressure from far-right anti-gay religious forces”, that’s fine.

The damage-control links you provide don’t change the fact that Romney caved on this, that he threw his advisor under the bus for being gay. And it makes Romney leading a gang to assault and humiliate a gay youth look that much worse.

You are speculating about Grennell’s resignation that neither he himself has said or the Romney campaign has said.

Romney has said and so have his spokespeople that he wanted Grennell to stay and even critiqued some of the language ‘poison’ that had been spoken by others.

Not even the Washington Post said it was an assault, but a prank. Where is the evidence that it was because of John Lauber’s ‘presumed homosexuality?’

 

[TheRealJuliane]

B. It was better than beating the snot out of him like what happened to people at my school. I have no recollection about any of those things either I am just saying they happened.

In middle school, guys used to pick a victim, 2 or 3 would get his arms and hold them, 2 would grab his legs and force them apart.

Then they would run him into the basketball or football goal post.

This was called “racking.”

Also, guys would regularly pick another guy up, hold him, and stick his head into a toilet and flush it.

Not saying it was right to do this, but it was considered “normal” for guys back in the day. Oh, and it was not an inner-city school, but a relatively tame suburban junior high in a small Midwestern town.

Shaving someone’s head would have been considered hairstyling, not assault.

 

[stevegravy]

In middle school, guys used to pick a victim, 2 or 3 would get his arms and hold them, 2 would grab his legs and force them apart.

Then they would run him into the basketball or football goal post.

This was called “racking.”

Also, guys would regularly pick another guy up, hold him, and stick his head into a toilet and flush it. (We called it a swirly.)

Not saying it was right to do this, but it was considered “normal” for guys back in the day.

Shaving someone’s head would be considered hairstyling, not assault.

 

[Jerry_Miah]

So Romney conveniently has no recollection of leading a gang to assault and humiliate a gay student, or of bullying another gay student (yelling “atta girl” at him when he tried to speak in class). When will Romney make a statement about this? Isn’t it time he apologize?

 

[Havard]

In middle school, guys used to pick a victim, 2 or 3 would get his arms and hold them, 2 would grab his legs and force them apart.

Then they would run him into the basketball or football goal post.

This was called “racking.”

Also, guys would regularly pick another guy up, hold him, and stick his head into a toilet and flush it.

Not saying it was right to do this, but it was considered “normal” for guys back in the day.

Shaving someone’s head would be considered hairstyling, not assault.

Hey, I was the only sophomore on the varsity football team, so I got hazed all over the place.

They forced me to take the jersey number 69, and then they shaved a big 69 in the back of my head!

They also got me drunk, tried to trick me to drink out of a bottle that had actually been used as a tobacco spittoon, and other crazy things.

My reaction? None of it was malicious, and I actually thought most of it was funny myself. Well… it was embarrassing going to Church with a 69 shaved in my head, but I even laughed about that when I wasn’t in Church.

 

[ellipsis2]

True. I would be embarrassed as well for some of those things I did as a young man. Participated in worse. Witnessed MUCH worse. Heard others tell about MUCH, MUCH worse.

But it’s true people can change. I remember one of the guys in my college class, a day student of Italian extraction, who was well understood to be the toughest guy in the whole school. One of his favorite things to do was to go into a local park that was infested by hoodlums at night, swinging a chain, challenging whomever wanted to take him on. And he did get takers from time to time. Such was his prowess that he left many a person severely bloodied and beaten.

Many years later, I saw his name on the letterhead of one of the leading Orthopaedic Surgery clinics in a city in my state. I was just thunderstruck. I was nearby and thought I would just drop in and say hello. It was him, but what a change! Mild-mannered, kindly, a man at the top of his profession.

Who knows. Maybe that’s where he got the idea of fixing broken bones.

 

[oldcelt]

Or as George Bush always said " when I was young and stupid I was young and stupid"

I wasn’t aware that he said that, but I plan on stealing it for my Presidential run.

John

 

[Suudy]

So Romney conveniently has no recollection of leading a gang to assault and humiliate a gay student, or of bullying another gay student (yelling “atta girl” at him when he tried to speak in class). When will Romney make a statement about this? Isn’t it time he apologize?

For which? For the former, he said he didn’t recall the incident, but he did apologize for the pranks.

washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romney-apologizes-for-high-school-pranks-that-might-have-gone-too-far/2012/05/10/gIQAC3JhFU_story.html?hpid=z2

For the latter, there is no evidence other than an uncorroborated statement by a “closeted gay student”. So, Mr. Romney should apologize for something that he may not have done?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Boy if that’s the best they can come up with for dirt on Romney, they are going to have a hard time of it!

 

[meltzerboy]

Or as George Bush always said " when I was young and stupid I was young and stupid"

I imagine Romney may have been a prankster similar to George Bush. It’s not unusual behavior for prep school students. However, I hope the former is a little smarter, just in case he becomes our next President.