Following news that Mitt Romney's idea of boyish pranky hijinks actually involved hilariously pinning a gay kid to the ground and hilariously cutting his hair off while tears welled up in his eyes (hilariously!), the sisters of the bullied boy have reacted with shock and disbelief. And anger. They think the tale of Mitt Romney's high school bullydom is all about politics, and that if their brother were alive, he'd be "furious."
South Bend, Indiana's Christine Lauber says that she and her younger brother John were "doing (their) own thing" when Romney pranked all over that kid's dignity, and that she isn't surprised that John never told her what happened. She admits that she wouldn't have been privvy to his private humiliation, but doubts the legitimacy of the claims.
Another of the sisters has condemned the Washington Post story, saying that she's horrified that the memory of her brother is being used to "further a political agenda."
But is this really agenda-furthering? Sure, it benefits the Obama campaign when Romney is presented like the antagonist in a 1980's teen movie. But the Washington post didn't craft Romney's damning response to the story. No one used John Lauber's memory to force Romney to grin like an idiot, laugh awkwardly, and explain to ABC that he didn't remember that time he held down a gay kid and cut his hair off while his friends cheered.