Mediate has more on the story, and the fact is that the WaPo reported portions of this story in its coverage of Romney’s bullying tactics. It was an off-hand comment that got short shrift in comparison to the bullying, but it has importance of its own. It also addresses how Romney and entitlement rub shoulders:

Conason’s reporting, though, does add an extra layer to this. Lawrence O’Donnell was overselling a bit when he said Romney had a “fetish” for uniforms, but the specific detail of the state trooper’s uniform, laid out on the bed years after the prank everybody already knows about, ratchets up the weirdness factor considerably.

Whether the story catches on depends on what people think it reveals about Romney. In selling this story (by selling, I mean shaping its importance; The reporting itself is solid), Conason and O’Donnell use the uniform as the pivot point to Romney’s avoidance of service in Vietnam. It’s an obvious choice, but shallow; it doesn’t really track beyond that surface similarity.

The detail that is revealing is that the uniform was given to Romney by his father, George Romney, rather than being earned through skill and public service. That theme, the desire to wield unearned power, and a broader sense of entitlement, resonates much more strongly, and encompasses Romney’s avoidance of service in Vietnam. Romney’s support for the draft, even as he went on to avoid it, isn’t so much an indication of hypocrisy as it is of that sense of entitlement. Of course, Romney can support drafting other people’s children, husbands, and fathers to die in Vietnam, yet not go himself; that’s not what Romneys are for. No one suggests that a cattle rancher should submit himself for milking or slaughter, do they?

It goes to character, judgment, and authority (and how to deal with it).