Libertarian, history lover who thinks shepherd dogs are super cool. Has a computer science and business background. Working on new messages about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
As Ron Paul supporters all over the country ponder how to keep alive the momentum of pursuing a precious ideal, suddenly the situation changed. On Thursday, it was reported that Mitt Romney, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, while in high school, led a crowd of fellow students to forcefully cut the hair of a classmate who was thought to be gay.
This behavior is inexcusable, even for a high school boy. Obviously, the first question was: Did Romney do it? His response was that he doesn’t remember this incident—rather than he didn’t do it. In the court of public opinion, different from the court of law, one uses their judgment when there is a lack of hard evidence. Although high school was 48 years ago for Romney, it is hardly likely that Thursday was the first time he thought about some of the worst pranks he played in high school. Throughout the 48 years he has been out of high school, he might very well have thought about them when his five sons were in high school during up to five different periods, perhaps along the lines of whether they played pranks that went too far or whether they were at the receiving end of it. He might also have thought about his pranks when he read or heard about school incidents in which students were hurt when he was a citizen or governor. During the radio interview the other day, moreover, Romney fondly remembered his good friends at high school; so it is safe to say that, along with the people with whom he hung out in high school, he has from time to time thought about his experience, what he learned, and, yes, some of the worst pranks he played in high school. Therefore, it is naive to think that it is extremely hard to recall something after 48 years while Romney's high school pranks have passed through his brain much more recently than 48 years ago. He would deny it if he hadn’t done it; “I don’t remember” sounds like politicians’ evasion of questions.
Even if Romney truly fails to remember his pranks, that does not mean he and his cohorts didn’t pin that student down and cut his hair. Four other fellow students have independently stated on the record that they witnessed that incident involving Romney, with the fifth man unwilling to reveal his identity. Granted they are all Democrats who might want to help Obama. However, if we want to get into the motivation to lie, we will see that Romney has a stronger motivation than those Democrats because he is trying to help himself, not someone else.
In addition, when asked whether he teased another student in high school because he was gay, Romney’s response was so lame that it sounds insulting to voters’ intelligence. Romney said whether someone was homosexual was the furthest thing on his mind and that the person whom he teased was closeted and so he didn’t know if he was gay. Seriously, who doesn’t know that for a bully to pick on someone for being gay, they don’t have to know that person is gay; they only need to assume.
Based on my understanding of human behavior, I think Romney did what he claims he does not remember, and he did it because he had a suspicion that boy was gay. Only someone who is mean-spirited to the core can treat a fellow student like that. Furthermore, contrary to what Romney stresses, it would take a miracle to fix something like that even with the help of time, his religion, or his wife.
Disgusted by hypocrisy and sick and tired of hearing politicians say “I don’t remember,” I wonder who in their right mind wants to vote for a candidate who can be "bully in chief" and "gay basher in chief?" Imagine the interference in foreign countries in which a bully president would engage and the sacrifices soldiers would have to make.
We need to show Romney and the world how democracy works when a candidate insults voters' intelligence by nominating Paul instead, or we simply have no intelligence. Anyway, Romney is damaged goods in this election; he even makes someone like me want to vote for Obama--that's how bad his bully-gay bashing past is to voters.
Fortunately, GOP can still nominate Paul! Having to face Paul is Obama's worst nightmare, as demonstrated by the fact that the Democrats let the bully-gay bashing incident out in the media after Romney has been the presumptive nominee of GOP, not before. The Democrats’ calculation was to first let Romney, a weak challenger, become the nominee, then destroy GOP's chance by revealing Romney’s past. I hope our democratic process works better than that.
Cathy, Good points. You may be right. But it also could be that the alleged victim's family didn't want to be used in a political campaign and so denied the incident. To be sure, the alleged witnesses could have lied, too. We don't have hard evidence who is telling the true. I can only use my judgment. In my judgment, Romney's claim that he doesn't remember if he cut someone's hair by force is not convincing for reasons stated in my article. Moreover, bullying someone is still inexecusable and shows the bully's character even if he acted for a reason other than the victim's sexual orientation.
As a mother I can assure you that I would remember if one of my children had come home from school with their hair chopped up and the parents do not remember - in fact no one in the family remembers this incident - I think that is very odd - Romney said he did not remember but apologized anyway - I think this is a democratic ploy and not worth discussing. 2nd - I am from the same time period and there is no way they did it (if it really occurred) because he was "gay", they would have done it because he was not following the unwritten rules of behavior, etc. but no one really thought about anyone being gay at that time period and again his family does not believe that he acted that way so again I have to question why this is an issue. And if Romney was really like this don't you think we could find another instance in his life but all we find are stories of savings lives and helping people - don't know what to make of that.
I was wondering what would have happened if Mitt Romney would have been the victim in this case. Finally I found the answer. I can picture a battery of the best lawyers in the country asking for the capital punishment while "papa" Romney "licking his chops" suing the school. Just a thougth
Gatman 7, This is not just an accusation by an Obama operative, and you know it. Read the reports on the Washington post and the Wall Street Journal. Use your judgment. This is the court of public opinion, not a court of law; no hard evidence is needed. How many historical events are backed up by hard evidence? What do you do with them--you use your judgment.
What is the evidence that Romney actually did this? An accusation by an Obama operative? Doesn't pass the smell test.
Eric, "Diste en el blanco". You hit the nail right on the head
Benjamin, "I don't remember" is a handy hedge for politicians. If undeniable proof surfaces down the road, they can always say, "I didn't lie. I just didn't remember."
Iam not a psychologist. I do not even have a college degree. I do not even vote for the President of the United States any more now that iam a resident of my native Puerto Rico the last twenty years. But frankly, I get upset when people do not remember facts in whlch they were physically involved. I read somewhere that human beings manipulate their brain in order to suppress negative situations from the past and deal only with the positive ones. They do such a good job that eventually they believe it never happened. Such is the case with Romney, a guy with supposely above average intelligence over most of us, a guy holding a B.S. from some university. If I had a fight in high school and I beat the other guys butt, or the other way around, Iam sure to remember that. Mitt Romney should give an answer other than "I don't remember". Either it happened or it did not. If he is trying to deceive his fellow citizens, he is doing a poor job.
I read the update that one of the 5 named witnesses actually weren't there. That's why I reduced the number of named witnesses to 4 in the article. The sisters of the victim denied the account in the report, but perhaps they didn't want their deceased brother to be used for political purposes. I'm sure the sisters were not at the scene of the abuse. I agree with your statement: "It’s always helpful to get the facts before printing falsehoods. It is expected of the lame stream media, but not patriots."
Seems you didn't read the facts & updates about the Washington Post article? You know the part where the parents of the person said their facts are all false? Or, how the person supplying the information for the article was on the Obama Campaign in 2008? It's always helpful to get the facts before printing falsehoods. It is expected of the lame stream media, but not patriots.