Suddenly I heard a voice shouting, “There he is, the bastard!” It was Mitt Romney, who went on: “He’s the guy who favors health insurance reform with an” -- he spat out the words -- “individual mandate. Let’s get him, boys.” I tried to outrun them, but soon enough I was pinned to the ground as they whipped me with the brochures I had been handing out and said things like, “You want to cover pre-existing conditions? We’ll show you some pre-existing conditions.…”
I have been wracking my brain for some memories of life at Cranbrook, which I attended during the 1960s, as did Mitt Romney. As everyone knows, the Washington Post has reported that Romney once led a gang of bullies who held down an unpopular fellow student and forcibly cut his hair. Did this really happen? And if so, should the antics of a teenager 40 years ago affect our assessment of Romney as a potential president of the United States?
Apparently it did happen. The Post has five witnesses, and Romney doesn’t deny it. Or rather, in what we are coming to see as his characteristic style, he neither admits it nor denies it but has issued a shifting series of apologies that add up to an impatient plea of “nolo contendere” -- roughly translated as, “Whatever, let’s move on.”
The Post makes Cranbrook seem like a military academy, where one student could actually take offense at another’s haircut. The Romney camp would rather paint it as “Animal House,” where cruel pranks were actually all in good fun.
I would say it was somewhere between these two extremes. The teaching was excellent but there was no cult of academic rigor. Believe it or not I was unaware of the concept of a “prep school” until I got to college and met kids from Andover and Choate. It was a place you went if your parents cared more about your education than belonging to a country club -- or that’s how I saw it. I can’t speak for Mitt.
And what about bullying? Was this just one unfortunate teenaged episode? Is the Romney of today a completely different person who has nothing in common with his younger self? Let me recount a few other episodes that might cast light on this question. In fact, it’s clear that Romney has stayed remarkably consistent throughout the years.
As I recall, it was important policy issues like health care reform, rather than purposeful cruelty or the length of someone’s hair, which drove Romney to organize posses and take matters into his own hands. Any defense of the federal deficit enraged him. Overregulation in any field could lead him to call out the dogs. One questioned so-called “right to work” laws or said anything favorable about unions at one’s peril. In fact, any remark that indicated a favorable attitude toward Washington could produce a sneering riposte (“If you think Washington is so great, why don’t you just go there, you creep?”) and another torrent of abuse. One of his favorite insults was: “Your mother is an assistant secretary of agriculture! Take it back? Make me, you future federal bureaucrat. And screw the pandas.”
Mitt, as a natural leader, used the skills that would later prove so useful in business in order to build consensus (then known as “team spirit”) on campus. I remember the time Mitt gathered us all in a nearby Episcopal church to say that Mormons and other Christians should join together in their shared dislike of homosexuals -- “and dweebs,” he added. “Look, boys -- there’s one now. Let’s go!”
Or maybe I just imagined all that. It’s been a long time.
At Cranbrook (and this part is really true) we were all required to write a “theme” a week: about 1,000 words on an established cycle of topics -- autobiographical article, informal essay, formal essay, light verse, serious verse, and so on. Decades later, this is essentially how I make my living: about 1,000 words a week on a recycling list of topics: the national debt, abortion, capital punishment, global warming, nuclear winter, North Korea, South Korea, and so on. I can only hope that my scribblings have long since been destroyed. Romney probably hopes so even more.
Romney was three years ahead of me at Cranbrook. I barely knew him, and he didn’t know me at all. I should have been paying more attention. My complete lack of anecdotes about someone I attended a very small school with for three years -- and who I should have guessed might pop up again in the wider world -- is a professional embarrassment that has left me no choice but to make some up, including all of those above. I apologize to my readers for this, but I really had no choice.
(Michael Kinsley is a Bloomberg View columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)
Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View.
To contact the writer of this article: Michael Kinsley at email@example.com.