There’s another thing about Romney’s chuckle chuckle notpology.
“Back in high school, I did some dumb things, and if anybody was hurt by that or offended, obviously I apologize for that,” Romney said in a live radio interview with Fox News Channel personality Brian Kilmeade.
Here’s what the other thing is about that. He was responding to the Washington Post article, so he knew what he was notpologizing for – he knew that it was for collecting at least five other senior boys to attack a junior boy, hold him down while he screamed for help, and cut off his hair.
Yet his response is to say “if anybody was hurt by that or offended, obviously I apologize for that.” If? If? If anybody was “hurt” or “offended” by being attacked by a gang of older boys?
What does he mean “if”? What can he possibly mean by it?
There is no “if.” It’s not an iffy thing. Assault isn’t conditional in that way. Assault isn’t a matter of taste – no, not even for masochists; assaulting a masochist is still assault. There is no “if.” Romney doesn’t get to change the well-understood meaning of things like a gang of boys attacking one younger boy, because he wants to make himself look better.
It’s odd, really. He could have done better. He could have promptly admitted it was a dreadful thing to do, and talked about how horrible it was for John Lauber, and said he feels really terrible that he was a mean, privileged bully as a teenager. I should think that would play better even as public relations. Instead he laughed, and minimized it as dumb, and made his apology conditional on people being petty and whiny enough to be “offended” by being attacked by a gang of older boys.
So he’s a shit; instinctively a shit. Not surprising, but not pleasing, either.