Mitt Romney Bully Story Is An Issue Because He's Still A Bully

By now, you've probably heard about how Mitt Romney allegedly bullied a kid in high school.  Mitt's "denial" was that he did some crazy things in high school, doesn't remember this incident, and besides, he didn't know the kid was gay.


First, gay kids aren't the only ones who get bullied.  As a straight kid who got bullied a lot, I know.


Second, by saying he didn't know the kid was gay, but doesn't remember this incident leads me to think that maybe he did bully the kid.  Maybe not to the extreme portrayed in the post, but by his own admission, he wasn't exactly an angel.


So, why does it matter?  Well, because Mitt hasn't really grown out of it.  As Paul Begala wrote:


One can draw a straight line from the young man who pinned down a terrified teenager and walked a blind man into a closed door, to the adult who put the family dog in a kennel and strapped it to the roof of the car, to the businessman who laid off hundreds of people, cancelled their health benefits, and paid himself millions while their company went bankrupt. And the line continues: the governor who slashed education and raised fees on the middle class, and the possible president who would use his power to cut taxes on his fellow millionaires while pushing for the gradual demise of traditional Medicare. 
Then there is the aura of someone who acts as if the rules don't apply to him.The Post reported that the abused boy was ultimately expelled from Cranbrook—for smoking a cigarette. Really. The victim got expelled for smoking a cigarette, but Mitt faced no sanctions for maliciously victimizing a vulnerable student and a teacher. It's good to be a prince. Maybe that's why Romney felt entitled to take a $10 million bailout for Bain, but opposed President Obama's bailout of the auto industry. He thinks there's one set of rules for the privileged, and another for the rest of us.

There is also the story of his arrest for disorderly conduct.  He had gone to  launch his boat in a lake.  There was a park ranger there who told him not to launch the boat because the registration had been painted over.  Mitt launched anyway, because it's only a $50 fine.  That "I'll do what I want" attitude is common among bullies.  

Or, there's any time a reporter or someone else calls him out on his "evolving" stances on issues.  You see, Mitt Romney is consistent on issues.  His current stance is the stance he's always had, regardless of what evidence you have to the contrary.  Mitt has always been at war with Oceania.  He gets upset when you ask him why he used to be at war with Eurasia.

Character matters in politics.  People's character often doesn't change in their lives.  If Mitt could provide any examples that his character has changed, I'd give him credit.  Unfortunately, evidence shows that he hasn't changed.

My View on Marriage

The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in 1905. From left to right: John Rex Winder, Joseph Fielding Smith, and Anthon Hendrik Lund. Public Domain; Courtesy Church History Collections, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Intellectual Reserves, Inc
The gentleman on the left is my third-great-grandfather John R Winder.  Born in England in 1821, he became the manager of a shoe store in Liverpool.  After joining the LDS Church in Liverpool, he arrived in Utah on October 10, 1853, exactly 99 years before his great-great granddaughter (and my mother) was born.

While in Utah, he engaged in several business ventures, including Winder Dairy, which still exists today (as Winder Farms).  Winder led the Nauvoo Legion against Johnson's Army in the Utah War, and served as Chairman of the "People's Party" while seeking to establish a two-party system of politics in Utah.  He also served as a delegate to serveral state Constitutional Conventions.

Winder was called to be the Second Counselor of the Presiding Bishopric of the Church in 1887.  As Second Counselor, he oversaw the completion of the interior of the Salt Lake Temple.  He was called to be the First Counselor in the First Presidency in 1901, a position he held until his death in 1910.

John Winder married Ellen Walters in 1845 in England.  He Married Tilda Jensen (my Third-Great Grandmother) in the President's Office in Salt Lake City in 1855.  In 1857, he married Elizabeth Parker in the Endowment House in Salt Lake City.  In 1893, he married Maria Burnham.

That's right, John R Winder practiced marriage that went beyond "one man one woman."  When the government banned plural marriage in 1887, they were in the wrong.  Any attempts since then to define marriage are equally as wrong.

I believe that marriage is a religious ordinance.  As a religious ordinance, it is between men and women.  Much like I believe that baptism, another religious ordinance, is to be done by immersion, and the baptism should only be performed on people older than 8.  Should the State of Utah pass a constitutional amendment banning the baptism of infants, so as to preserve the sanctity of traditional baptism?  Should Massachusetts ban immersion?

And, if we are to regulate marriage, how far do we go?  I'm just waiting for Alabama to pass a law further "protecting traditional marriage" by ensuring that marriage for eternity (as practiced by Mormons) is banned.  After all, the tradition is "til death do we part" is it not?

The "Sanctity" of Marriage

If my friend John has been in a committed relationship for 9 years.  There is a lot more "sanctity" in that relationship than in my friend Sam's 18 month marriage.  Or my friend Tim's 8 month marriage.  Newt Gingrich has married two people who previously held the title of "mistress" before they were his wife.  Sorry, but "marriage," as it stands now, really means nothing.

But, if Gay Marriage were legal, The Church would have to perform gay marriages.

Well, that part is a complete lie.  A Baptist marrying a Catholic is legal, but it doesn't mean they are legally allowed to be married in the Temple.  In fact, I have many good friends who are both LDS that were not allowed to get married in the Temple.  So, to say the Church would have to start performing Gay Marriages is, well, being dishonest.

I'm confused, what is your position?

Well, marriage should be a religious institution, unregulated by the Government.  However, it has also become a civil contract entered into by two people and endorsed  by government.  And, as a civil contract, it should be open to any two adults who want to enter into the contract.

Mitt Romney's Re-writing History on Pakistan, bin Laden

<$BlogPageTitle$> <$BlogItemBody$>

How to Kill a Lying Attack Ad

<$BlogPageTitle$> <$BlogItemBody$>