Over this past week it was revealed that presumed republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney committed at least one well-documented act of bullying in 1965 when he was a senior at Cranbrook School, a prestigious and expensive prep school. According to multiple witnesses, Romney did not like the hair style or hair color of another student suspected of being gay. As a result, Romney organized a “posse”, found the other student and forcibly held that student down while he cut off the student’s hair.
When Romney was confronted by the media regarding this event, he said that he couldn’t remember it. However, he did NOT deny it and for good reason, considering the number of witnesses there are. After all, Romney is running for president of the USA. If he can’t remember an incident wherein he chased, caught, pinned, immobilized and traumatized a weaker student, then perhaps Mitt has serious memory issues that would negatively impact a commander-in-chief. That’s a fact the American voters deserves to know before the election.
However, if, on the other hand, Romney actually remembers the incident and is lying about his recollections, that, too, is something the voters have a right to know: Mitt will lie through his teeth when he deems it convenient.
Either way, the most heinous fact is that Romney committed an act of bullying against someone who he saw as different simply because of a hair style and hair color, as well as most likely gay.
Bullying is a brutal and traumatizing act of force and often violence that often causes its victim emotional scars that often last a lifetime. It is actually a form of torture: Someone with superior force subjugates someone weaker with physical or emotional pain, or both. Most civilized people condemn torture.
However, there are those whom see bullying as a natural and normal part of “growing up”. Most of those folks who believe that are generally very conservative. many of them grew up in an unsophisticated environment where the strong were expected to dominate the weak. To them, bullying is nothing to make a fuss about. After all, they say, bullying has been around since the beginning of humanity, and yet here we all are.
Most people are aware of incidents of bullying that they either committed, participated in,, were the victims of, witnessed directly, or were witnesses to the consequences when they were younger. Recently the media has been reporting on the all-too-frequent teenage suicides resulting from repeated merciless bullying of a victim who could no longer endure the abuse and its resulting shame, rejection, fear, hatred and negative self-image that the bullying caused. it has resulted in many organized efforts to eliminate bullying in our schools and social networks.
As an act of violence, it is difficult to believe that anyone would “forget” knowledge of these acts. But Mitt Romney makes that very claim. He has, in fact, apologized for his “pranks” as a student at Cranbrook School in the 1960′s. But as a candidate for president he clearly has not gone far enough. He had the unique opportunity to come out forcefully against any kind of bullying anywhere. Instead, he remained totally silent on the issue, as if to lend tacit approval to the idea that bullying is a normal part of growing up and a part of the natural order of things.
After all, as founder and CEO of Bain Capital, Romney oversaw the buying of companies that were split apart and their components sold off for profit, causing thousands of workers to lost their jobs. That’s clearly a form of economic bullying, isn’t it?
And finally, perhaps more troubling concern about Romney’s 1965 bullying incident at Cranbrook School, which was organized and led by Romney himself, is about the victim being gay. It seems Romney singled him out because of his perceived sexual orientation, which says much about Romney’s view of this group of people. He evidently is intolerant of them and anyone else who is “different”.
Because of his millions, Romney is one of the “strong” who can prey upon the weak. Clearly, the Cranbrook school incident demonstrates that he is capable and willing to do so, and that makes Romney questionable at best as a commander-in-chief and policy-maker for the USA. Unfortunately, there are many voters who don’t see this and/or who agree with intolerance toward those that are weaker: gays lesbians, minorities, the poor, etc.
Luckily, the USA has a sitting president who is the exact opposite of Romney when it comes to diversity, acceptance, integrity and character.
Now all we need is to reach intelligent, open-minded, computer-savvy, fact-driven investigative voters to explore the real Mitt vs. the real Barack.
Those voters are out there…..somewhere…aren’t they?