"That was the furthest thing from our minds back in the 1960s."
I laughed at this so hard. Yeah, sure, Mitt. And cutting someones hair because you don't like it is not a prank, it's bullying, if he wants to say sorry then he should admit to being a bully and not a prankster in the first place. Bullying is done for the simple sake of cruel pleasure in another's suffering, if Romney can't admit to that then he is still the same jerk.
Everything he and his staff have said about this incident points to the fact that they are still stuck in the "boys will be boys" frame of mind. If Mitt had just owned it from the beginning, it would still look bad for him, but people might believe he has moved on.
As it is, he pretends not to remember, or he really does not remember because it was just another day in the life of entitled Mitt who does whatever he wants to do and then moves on. Sad, really.
Because homophobia was only invented in the 21st century, right Mitt? What a self-serving BS artist he is. It annoyed me that Clinton said he never inhaled, but that only involved him. This is different. How can he reconcile it that way back in the day that what he participated in was bullying someone he presumed to be gay, and wanting to lead a nation where gay civil rights are the crux of a new civil rights movement?
Cutting someone's hair forcibly isn't a case of 'boys being boys'. It's violating someone, i.e. assault and there is no way Romney can either excuse or explain his actions.
In that same article it talks about Romney teasing another boy by saying "Atta girl" whenever the guy would talk in class. Isn't that homophobic? Doesn't that imply that he enjoyed pointing out whenever another boy was effeminate or different in some way? Isn't that why John Lauber's long bleached hair bothered him so much?
But sadly I don't think Mitt has enough introspection to realize what his younger self was thinking or why he had such attitudes. And I bet if people did a little investigation work, he would find that Mitt's sons were probably just as bad at their wealthy prep schools.
I find it absolutely fascinating that the movie of To Kill a Mockingbird came out almost the same year that the Romney incident with John Lauber happened. The fictional and mentally ill Boo Radley attacked his father with scissors and was thrown literally under the jail until he almost died. A rich elite Prep-Boy whose father is governor attacks another student with scissors and . . . nothing happens.
I'm kind of sitting back and mulling the idea that awareness of homosexuality, especially among teenaged boys, was non-existent until some time post late-1960s. I am amazed--stunned--impressed--to learn that no male EVER judged another as "queer" prior to 1965. Wow, the things one learns.
Huh. *pokes keyboard* That darn sarcasmlock is stuck again.
Does Romney need a handbook or something? The logical response to this would be--in my humble, inferior womanly thinking--"Oh, my: this was a very long time ago. If I acted that way, I am so very sorry for my actions. You know, kids--even though I don't remember this at all, my position today is that aggressive behavior toward other people is very wrong...." And blah blah blah.
Instead, he comes across as such a Sirius/Lupin--don't remember it, I was a kid, not my problem, whatever....Move on.
It's like many of Romney's positions. He said he doesn't worry about the poor because there is a safety net, even if he was the one who created more poor people through Bain Capital's scorched earth business practices. No harm, no foul - he was always just using "good business practices." With the boy in the story, he didn't worry about cutting his hair or even when he got thrown out of school because clearly the kid wasn't Cranbrook material to begin with. It was just a prank, a hijink, or a funny joke. And it was all about school pride, with a place for everyone, and everyone in their place. Why worry? It's the natural order of things as long as a Rommney is at the top.
Comments 6
I laughed at this so hard. Yeah, sure, Mitt.
And cutting someones hair because you don't like it is not a prank, it's bullying, if he wants to say sorry then he should admit to being a bully and not a prankster in the first place. Bullying is done for the simple sake of cruel pleasure in another's suffering, if Romney can't admit to that then he is still the same jerk.
Reply
As it is, he pretends not to remember, or he really does not remember because it was just another day in the life of entitled Mitt who does whatever he wants to do and then moves on. Sad, really.
Reply
Cutting someone's hair forcibly isn't a case of 'boys being boys'. It's violating someone, i.e. assault and there is no way Romney can either excuse or explain his actions.
Reply
But sadly I don't think Mitt has enough introspection to realize what his younger self was thinking or why he had such attitudes. And I bet if people did a little investigation work, he would find that Mitt's sons were probably just as bad at their wealthy prep schools.
I find it absolutely fascinating that the movie of To Kill a Mockingbird came out almost the same year that the Romney incident with John Lauber happened. The fictional and mentally ill Boo Radley attacked his father with scissors and was thrown literally under the jail until he almost died. A rich elite Prep-Boy whose father is governor attacks another student with scissors and . . . nothing happens.
Reply
Huh. *pokes keyboard* That darn sarcasmlock is stuck again.
Does Romney need a handbook or something? The logical response to this would be--in my humble, inferior womanly thinking--"Oh, my: this was a very long time ago. If I acted that way, I am so very sorry for my actions. You know, kids--even though I don't remember this at all, my position today is that aggressive behavior toward other people is very wrong...." And blah blah blah.
Instead, he comes across as such a Sirius/Lupin--don't remember it, I was a kid, not my problem, whatever....Move on.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment