rickyp wrote:Mitts response to this has been whats really wrong. I don't think anyone can beleive that its possible to forget gang tackling a person and forcibly shearing their locks.. And yet to say, after denying recall, "but I'm certain I didn't think the guy was gay..."
This is the biggest clue to his character... .
No, actually, it's the biggest clue to your gullibility. I already pointed out some inconsistencies in the WaPo piece, but that apparently doesn't bother you.
What if the WaPo piece is wrong? What if Romney to make the thing go away so he could talk about things that actually matter, gave a generic apology? If you think that's a stretch, think again:
The WaPo article focuses on the alleged John Lauber haircutting incident, including quotes from Romney childhood friend Phillip Maxwell: “’It was a hack job,’ recalled Maxwell, a childhood friend of Romney who was in the dorm room when the incident occurred. ‘It was vicious.’”
Apparently not so vicious, however, for Maxwell to relate the incident for the Auto Mag article. Auto Mag does, however, quote Maxwell giving crucial details notably missing from the Post piece: “’I'm a Democrat, so I won't vote for him,’ says Maxwell. 'But he'd probably make a pretty good President. He's very smart, very principled.’”
The Post neglected to mention these relevant facts, just as it neglected to mention Maxwell’s skepticism about Romney’s religion as reported in the Auto Mag piece: “‘He’s determined to claim the highest office in the land--to be the first Mormon to do it. He keeps that undercover because he doesn’t want to frighten people.’”
The Post also creates inferences about Romney that seem to be debunked in the Auto Mag article. Horowitz quotes Matthew Friedemann, the most vocally harsh critic on the Lauber haircutting, in a manner inferring that Romney was a snobbish kid who owned his own car: “When Romney left the campus on weekends, he never invited him. ‘I didn’t quite fit into the social circle. I didn’t have a car when I was 16,’ Friedemann said.”
Well, neither did Romney, according to his friend Gregg Dearth in the Auto Mag article: “’Mitt didn’t get a car at sixteen--ike many Cranbrook kids did.”’ And Romney did invite classmates home on weekends, according to Maxwell--a fact once again nowhere to be found in the Post article.
More:
After nearly 50 years, Stu White only heard of the Lauber incident a few weeks before the Post contacted him for his impressions of it. Yet “investigative journalist” Jason Horowitz does not ask the basic journalistic question of “who” told Stu White of the incident--and “why” suddenly now, after 50 years. Does WaPo just dismiss this as miraculous coincidence?
Isn’t that perhaps the most crucial element to the Post story--the question of why Obama’s epic same-sex marriage announcement seemed to have been timed so precisely with someone tipping off Stu White after 50 years, and with the Post's publication of its gay-bullying hit piece on Romney? White's anonymous informant and the Post's piece seem hardly coincidental.
To summarize: two current articles based on interviews with some of the same former classmates. But they present two differing and largely inconsistent portraits, with Horowitz's Washington Post either failing to investigate, or deliberately omitting, crucial and relevant information revealed by Murray in Automobile Magazine about Romney's character in high school. It would seem that the Post’s investigative journalism standards leave much to be desired.
[url]http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/1206_mitt_romney/?ti=v2
Original Auto mag piece here.[/url]
I've already seen some lefty blogs dismiss this as a "puff piece." Well, put the puff piece and the hit piece (WaPo) together and it sort of makes sense, I think. The WaPo edited out the things that made Romney seem less sinister, embellished those that helped damage him, failed to name sources, got facts wrong--and yet, you believe that one without any reservation.
Hmm, it's almost like . . . you're biased or something.
11 May 2012, 10:12 am 
