Gay-Bashing Bully for Prez 2012!

[infinite monkey]

I know, I was teasing you.

I have the same issues on my phone. It's hard to get really 'into' it.

[Ibby]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...ders-speak-out

According to Ann Romney, Mitt is still the "crazy" guy from high school who loves "playing jokes" on people. And according to his high school friend Gregg Dearth, Romney probably was merely acting "jokingly" when he bullied John Lauber. Dearth, who didn't witness the attack, imagined it was probably a barrel of laughs, the kind of thing that might "traumatize" or "scare" somebody, but "no harm, no foul."
So there you have it, folks. Mitt Romney was a crazy jokester who liked to traumatize and scare people unfortunate enough to be his lesser, but there's nothing wrong with that. And he's still the same guy today that he was back then. No harm, no foul.

With defenders like that, who needs critics?

[infinite monkey]

With friends like that, who needs enemas, even?

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

Sheesh. But yeah, you keep saying why it isn't relevant.

Once again, you really need to stop assuming my thoughts on this.

First of all, I in no way endorse what Romney did. It wasn't a prank. It wasn't just childish fun. It was an attack on someone who acted and looked differently than Romney considered acceptable.

But yet, this is something that happened 47 years ago. It is entirely possible that this action shows an underlying mindset that has been maintained for his entire life. Or, it is also possible that he grew up and a few years later and would never even think about doing something similar to another person. Right now, my guess is on the second. He is still an asshole but I doubt those actions reflect the person he is now.


Although, I don't feel sorry for him at all. As glatt mentioned, he opened up his childhood to try to improve his appearance but it ended up hurting him. I just doubt that action is reflective of him now.

[infinite monkey]

It's my contention that many, nay, MOST of our childhood inclinations and tendencies, like loving to read, or being athletic, liking broccoli, exhibiting abusive behavior, do not just disappear. You do not just grow out of it.

Again (and quit saying I'm assuming stuff, you're hell bent on finding some sort of relief for him in this situation and I'm hell bent on trying to make you see your folly) we wouldn't be having this discussion if he had abused a woman.

Sissy gay boy should have been able to fight, right?

Really. It's not justifiable. There's no reason to assume that amid all the things he is and all the things he purports to stand for (and just as important, things he chooses NOT to stand for) this one itty bitty incident is probably just a one time thing and is no indication of any sort of REAL abusive gay-hating tendency.

How can you logically make such a self-contained leap? He's an asshole and blah blah blah, but this was probably OK? I don't get that. yeah, it was just the one time.

No.

[glatt]

Nobody in this thread has said it's OK. Go back and quote anyone who did.

[Stormieweather]

I don't think that today, Romney is any more accepting of people who don't fit into his idea of right, good, and God-fearing than he was 47 years ago. I've seen nothing to pursuade me otherwise.

[infinite monkey]

It's OK enough that we are supposed to overlook it and dismiss it.

Don't play classic semantics games, k? What the fuck dude. I'll go cherry pick some words just as we're supposed to cherry pick Romney's character.

I really like how people who are typically heroes of the people turn on a subject depending on what side I'm on.

IF HE HAD ABUSED A GIRL...

Think about it. That argument was completely used against me recently. Yet here, me saying it? Fuck you monkey, you're stupid.

Here we go again.

[DanaC]

Once a bully always a bully?

I dont believe that. Lots of kids and even teenagers act out a bunch of stuff around their own sense of personal status and power that would appall their adult selves.

[infinite monkey]

I don't agree.

You know how they tell women that if a man (or in this case a teenage boy) hits you once he will hit you again?

Yeah. Like that.

This boys will be boys crap is ridiculous.

[Ibby]

Let me put it this way. I've probably done a lot of mean shit in my time. I remember once, a kid I thought i was good friends with one day flew off the handle and beat the tar outta me. I asked him what the fuck was up and he said he was sick of me picking on him. I had no idea that I had been, cause I'm a snide sarcastic prick who doesn't always realize when I hurt people. I'm bad at reading people and their social interactions - my landlord here is convinced, lacking any diagnostic qualification, that i have aspergers - and don't always realize when I'm hurting people.

But every time I'm confronted with having done so, i do NOT laugh at it. I do NOT call it a harmless prank. I've been bullied enough in my time that I would NOT laugh that kind of thing off. I try to make it right. One of my best friends in high school, i spent the first year or so i knew him poking what i thought was chummy fun, and what he thought was bullying. But when he confronted me with that, i changed everything about how we interacted, and we got very close. I tried to make up for what I did by reaching out and fixing it, not blaming the victim for blowing it out of proportion.
This VERY, VERY much speaks to Romney's character. Not because he's still necessarily exactly the same person. He could have changed. It speaks to his character because of how he has handled it NOW, as it's come to light, and as part of a pattern of things he has done NOW rather than in the distant past.

[DanaC]

Totally agree Ibs. How he's responding now speaks volumes for how he sees the incident.

[Rhianne]

The thread made me think of Lou Reed's album 'New York' from sometime in the late 80s or thereabouts. I quote from the song 'Good Evening Mr. Waldheim' (a man with a bit of history himself) where Reed is talking about Jesse Jackson...


'If I ran for President
and once was a member of the Klan
wouldn't you call me on it
the way I call you on Farrakhan'

[DanaC]

Don't know where you get the 'boys will be boys' from. Nobody has said that here.

If bullies are destined to always be bullies, that suggests people don't learn, and don't grow up. Lots of kids bully. Lots of kids who bully have themselves previously been bullied. Lots of bullies go onto be bullied. Lots of kids go through that stage and come out of it as normal, ordinary people, just like you and I.

It is not the same as 'once a man has hit you he'll do it again.' That's to do with a) adult relationships, by which time most people generally have become the person they'll be, and b) permissions and boundaries within that relationship.

People can and do change. Not all of them. Not always. But many. Even people who have done heinous things can change and become better people. Sometimes it takes intervention (for example, there are counselling and anger management courses for men who've been convicted of domestic violence) and sometimes it just takes the passage of time, a few important lessons and a couple of influential adults.

I in no way suggest that this is the case with Rommers, mind.

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

I don't agree.

You know how they tell women that if a man (or in this case a teenage boy) hits you once he will hit you again?

Yeah. Like that.

This boys will be boys crap is ridiculous.

[infinite monkey]

No, boys in their teenage years abuse their girlfriends. These boys grow into men who abuse their wives.