Romney Booed at NAACP Convention


Did you see Log Cabin Republican's reaction to his speech? They liked it. Well, except for the one part where he said something they didn't like, but other than that they kinda, sorta liked it.…

Repubs must be hard wired differently, huh?
"See? Those black people are so rude."
This isn't going to hurt him at all with the core Republicans. I'm half-convinced his campaign wanted something like this to happen.
As I understand it, proper etiquette dictates to sit politely and not boo as a matter of respect, as a lady and a gentleman, to the speaker.
I do sort of give him kudos a bit for showing up. But at the same time, holy tone deafness, Batman! It shows how Republicans are out of touch with the non-white non-rich-old-men segment of the population; Romney thought that he should show up and spout his stump speech to that audience. Why not try to tailor the message or talk about how you're going to help poor black people?

Of course, the fact that Republicans have no plan or desire to do so sort of hobbles him, but, who's counting?
If that's honestly your takeaway point, Gay Dude, you're as clueless as your candidate.
This is a story not because Romney was booed, it's a story because of Romney's incredibly tone-deaf and ham-handed response to the crowd.

I predicted it.
Have to admit that I agree with #3 and #4. I don't like Romney's policy proposals any more than the boo-ers at the NAACP convention, but it's both bad politics and bad manners to interrupt an invited speaker this way.
Well, to be fair, the last time a black person spoke at the Android American Rights Council annual conference, he was booed as well.
So they booed when he talked about a policy they didn't like? They didn't just boo when he stepped to the podium?

They weren't booing him, they were booing the policy that they (rightly) see as bad news.

The real takeaway from this article is Romney's pathetic "If you knew what was in my heart..." Heads up, Mitt, if you have to do this lame schtick, maybe you're not cut out to be a politician.
@4 Unless it's Joe Wilson yelling "liar" at the Presient of the United States...wait, the President is black so I suppose in that case it's okay with you then?
Did anyone yell, "You lie!"? Because THAT would be really rude.
They were saying "boo-urns," "boo-urns"
He's a Mormon republican. What was his intention ? NAACP members would never vote for him. Call me cynic, but he got exactly the sound bite he was after. The rude Negro clip will galvanize his racist base.
Yes, we must NEVER insult an invited guest. Even and especially when they've promised to seek, potentially, your death and/or impoverishment should you get sick.
@ 8, you sure did.
Mittens should have worn a hoodie with a bunch of bling and arrived driving a 1963 Chevy Impala low rider. THAT would have made this so much more shitacular!!
@5 What has he done that has ever given you the idea that he even has any sort of plan for the non-white, non-rich Americans?
@5, I think you just pointed out the real issue here. His speech wasn't tone deaf, it just wasn't intended for the audience in front of him, but the tbags who would watch it - heavily edited, and endlessly replayed - on Fox News. His intention was to set up the NAACP to look "intolerant" of and "reverse racist" towards white conservatives.
It's being reported that Joe Biden will speak to the NAACP this year, not President Obama.
@21, you're right on all counts. And the NAACP audience walked right into the trap. And @16, I think the best approach is to listen, in stony silence, through Romney's speech--I speak before large groups for a living, and believe me, this treatment is worse than booing. When they're booing at least you know they're listening and engaged. Romney ends his speech to continued awkward silence (no applause for the Invited Guest; silence speaks volumes in this case)--no way does this make for good, politically-useful video for Romney. The organization's announcer re-takes the podium and then refutes every point that the Invited Guest just made to audience applause. That's the classy way to do things.
@22 So what.
@4: As the quote goes, "Respect is earned. Honesty is appreciated. Trust is gained. Loyalty is returned." What has Rmoney done to make you think he has cultivated any of those things?
Aww...poor guy had to go off script and everything. I don't know how he stood it - or why they didn't boo him more for it.

And then he concluded with, "I hope to represent all Americans, of every race, creed or sexual orientation, from the poorest to the richest and everyone in between." That was the best laugh I had all day :)
@4 You and the other self-hating republican gays can go ahead and respectfully listen while Romney tells you all that he doesn't think you should get married and throws you all under the bus to gain the favor of bigots. You can call it polite - we all know that it's really just cowardice.
@24, what I take away from that is the President doesn't want all those NAACP folk nipping at his heels about what is he going to do for the African American community insofar as economic policy, education, etc. and why he hasn't done enough.
Also, Romney seems to be saying that the only reason that the NAACP audience doesn't like him is because they're too stupid to understand him.

He's not Inception, people.
@14 wins
Why is Danny posting about real news?

Did Romney ejaculate into the audience's face?

Was there an orgy in the crowd?

Why is Danny posting about something other than deviant sexual behavior?

Maybe Danny wanted to show Paul how it is done.....
Tell that to the congressman who yelled "You Lie!" at Obama.
or to audiences at the Republican debates
or to the Tea Party in general
or... oh we could be here all day.

I've been meaning to ask you gay dude, and I'm sure you get this a lot. Why do you support a candidate/party who literally thinks you're a second class citizen and wants you to have less rights than me? Why would you support a party that thinks you are a bigger threat than Al Qaeda? I'm not even talking about marriage but also your right to be in the military or even exist. Why would you support a candidate who thinks that your mere existence is a threat to his own marriage and the nation as a whole? Please explain why you would support them.
What do you think about the DEATH THREATS Brad Pitt's mother is receiving for expressing her disapproval of homosexual "marriage"?

Is it only a hate crime when the victim agrees with you?

Is Homosexual Hatred A-OK in the Qunited States of Gaymerica?

Is this an attempt to slur Arabs/Arabic speakers as well?
Let's be honest here. They were booing because they are racially committed to Barack Obama. For 90%+ of NAACP members, Obama could raise tax rates to 100% and cede the southwest to Mexico and they would still vote for him.

Romney should have spoken about the epidemic of black on black murders in Chicago and challenge the NAACP on what they will contribute to ending the pathology among young black males.
@36 That's some serious White Man's Burden shit right there.
@37 Word. @33 He doesn't want to pay any taxes. It's, sadly, as simple as that. He's happy to be held in open contempt and used as a boogeyman by the politicians he supports as long as he doesn't have to pay any taxes. Greed warps the mind, apparently.
@36: Yeah, it's so unjust that they won't give a fair shake to the guy whose religion, until 1978, taught him that blacks where subhuman and fit to be enslaved. What could they have against that?
39 mormonism didn't teach that.
Double down, Mittens. Turn every advertisement you have out there to a stark high-contrast emblazoning of "The President Should Not Be A Nigger."

Because really, that's what you and your supporters mean.
@33 - He's answered this before. He supports Romney because he believes Romney is lying about all of that. Yeah, I know. Great reason.
@33: Does your sexuality dictate your political ideology? For me it has no more consequence than being human dictates my ideology. The fundamental questions are the role of government and the role of the individual; from that should be your core dispositions for your political choices. One's sexuality is an attribute, not your core being.
"Does your sexuality dictate your political ideology?"

Usually, yeah. Why do you have to ask?
Change it to skin color.
How many blacks do you see publicly supporting the Klan?

Oh, that's right. Because you're only here to defend racists.
Not to make any comments on anything associated with gay rights.

"The fundamental questions are the role of government and the role of the individual; from that should be your core dispositions for your political choices."

Really? Because that sounds kind of stupid when the platform of the party you are supporting is against you having the same rights as others.

Or didn't you think about that?
Which is why you don't see to many blacks trying to join the Klan.
@43 When the candidate states my sexual orientation means I'm undeserving of human rights, you're damn right it defines my political ideology. But hey, maybe I'm just spoiled, living in the UK where I have the luxury of choosing between political parties who aren't raging homophobes (they all just suck for other reasons)
This had to be deliberate, the dog-whistles are full-pitch:

"ROMNEY: Remind them of this, if they want more free stuff from the government tell them to go vote for the other guy -- more free stuff. But don't forget nothing is really free."

Pretty brazen this early.
If nobody boos our politicians, how are they going to know their speeches sucked? Political crowds are far to polite these days.

There was a time when the ability to deal with hecklers was admired and sometimes you just had to keep reading a speech no one could hear over the boos.

It used to be this country had guts. Now we watch a bloodless technocrat debate a facimile of a man which was created to become the President by a conglomeration of business and religious interest groups.
@44: That's right. That's the next step. If the party that best suits your political ideology has a platform that you disagree with, then you need to work within that party to change the platform. This is far better than joining a party that you have ideological differences with but that has a platform that you like; otherwise you'll be disillusioned and unsatisfied in the long term with a party that ultimately is at odds with your ideology.
"When I mentioned I am going to get rid of Obamacare, they weren't happy ... That's okay, I want people to know what I stand for, and if I don't stand for what they want, go vote for someone else, that's just fine. But I hope people understand this, your friends who like Obamacare, you remind them of this, if they want more stuff from the government, tell them to go vote for the other guy—more free stuff."…
How many blacks do you see publicly supporting the Klan?

"If the party that best suits your political ideology has a platform that you disagree with, then you need to work within that party to change the platform."


"This is far better than joining a party that you have ideological differences with but that has a platform that you like ..."

So denying gays basic rights is only a "platform" and not an "ideology".
I think you're trying to make a distinction there that does not exist.
Holy malcolmxy!

Not to mention your extensive usage of the "false dilemma" fallacy.…

How many blacks do you see publicly supporting the Klan?
@21 If I never heard the term "reverse racism" again it would be too goddamn soon.

@18 Real Gs roll in the '64.
I love how Gay Dude @4 proves seatackled's prophecy @2 merely four minutes later.

Ideologues are at least predictable.
@52 So of someone says "that was not proper etiquette" to a black person, it's racist?

Still, it's a political rally, not a cotillion. If cheering is allowed, then so is booing.