You might think it would be more offensive for Mitt Romney to skip the NAACP convention entirely than to show up and give a respectful speech as he did yesterday — but you’d be wrong. (Well, actually you’d be half-right: the left probably would have accused Romney of racism either way.)
According to MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell, Romney outed himself as a race-baiter just by showing up at the NAACP. As this theory goes, Romney apparently knew that getting booed would send a subtle signal to racists that he was on their side (via Washington Examiner):
Speaking to TheGrio.com’s Goldie Taylor, O’Donnell said, “Tell me, Goldie, if I’m being too cynical, to think that the Romney campaign actually went in that room today with the hope of getting booed, at least three times, because they want the video of their candidate being booed by the NAACP to play in certain racist precincts where that will actually help them.”
Taylor agreed with O’Donnell’s assessment, adding Romney appeared “paternalistic” and criticized him for using a “derisive word” like “ObamaCare” to describe the President’s Affordable Health Care act.
Okay, but why would Romney even need to send some sort of clandestine signal to these “racist precincts” O’Donnell mentions? I assume that many of the people in these “racist precincts” possess eyes, and have already caught on to the fact that Obama is African-American and Romney is white. For racists, that choice would probably be self-explanatory. No need for any secret dog whistle there.
And yet for some reason this absurd MSNBC claim seems to have caught on. At the Daily Beast, Michael Tomasky also chimed in:
But [Romney] wasn’t a race-baiter until yesterday. That speech wasn’t to the NAACP. It was to Rush Limbaugh. It was to Tea Party Nation. It was to Fox News. Oh, he said some nice things. And sure, let’s give him one point for going there at all. But listen: You don’t go into the NAACP and use the word “ObamaCare” and think that you’re not going to hear some boos. It’s a heavily loaded word, and Romney and his people know very well that liberals and the president’s supporters consider it an insult. He and his team had to know those boos were coming, and Romney acknowledged as much a few hours later in an interview with . . . guess which channel (hint: it’s the one whose web site often has to close articles about race to commenters because of the blatant racism). Romney and team obviously concluded that a little shower of boos was perfectly fine because the story “Romney Booed at NAACP” would jazz up their (very white) base.
Again — why would Romney even need to wink-nudge pander to this large group of mythical white racists Tomasky speaks of? And if Romney really wanted to show his solidarity with racists, why wouldn’t he just skip the NAACP altogether? That’s like going to address a NARAL conference in order to send a message to the pro-life movement that you’re on their side. No matter how chilly the reception, abortion opponents aren’t going to appreciate it.
In the end, Romney did the brave thing. He addressed a group that he knew he had political differences with and little chance of winning over. He put forward his best case without compromising his political message, and he did it respectfully. That’s more than can be said about President Obama, who didn’t even take the time to attend the conference.
Your last sentence highlights the reason the Left is spinning the Romney appearance this way. A) Romney went on enemy turf and handled himself with dignity B) Obama has never/will never do this and C) He can't afford to lose even a couple percent of the black vote.
This is almost unbelievable. The presumptive republican nominee for the presidency of the United States meets with the NAACP. This is exactly what he should do and the NAACP is an important and meaningful organization worthy of Mr. Romney's time. But, people now accuse Mr. Romney of sending a racist message because he met with the group and those in attendance booed him. How upside-down is that? n nAlana is absolutely right that Mr. Romney should have met, should have spoken, and where he differs with the NAACP, he should say so, as he did. Those who disagree with Mr. Romney's views have every right and, I think, obligation, to discuss their differences. (They can boo if they like, but that's a separate matter and one up to the attendees.) This is what politics in America is about, it's how politics works, and it's how groups can lobby their leaders to take positions that are better in-line with each other. Sometimes that works, other times it doesn't. n nThe first step, of course, is to meet, outline one's differences, and then discuss how the two groups can come together. Even if there is no common ground, and I think there is lots of common ground between Mr. Romney's outlook and those of the NAACP, the minimum step is mutual respect. And in this case, there should be mutual respect. n nKudos to Mr. Romney for speaking even in front of what was a hostile audience. I hope that now that he's done so the NAACP will respectfully reply to his speech and seek common ground to see where they both can work together in the future.
"Romney told his donors of the NAACP convention attendees, 'Remind them of this: if they want more stuff from government, tell them to go vote for the other guy — more free stuff. But don't forget, nothing is really free.' " n n"Hmm. So, the far-right presidential candidate deliberately antagonized the nation's most celebrated civil rights organization in the morning, then complained to his donors in Montana about the black voters who want "more free stuff" from the government in the evening." n n"I speculated yesterday that Romney may have provoked the booing on purpose. Soon after, he told Fox's Neil Cavuto he "expected" the negative reaction, and soon after that, Romney was using the incident to deliver a cheap line at an exclusive fundraiser." n n"Remember, for nearly a year, one of Romney's standard lines has been that President Obama is trying to divide Americans, pitting people against one another. Yeah, tell us another one, Mitt."
At some point — and I hope we are not there yet — the only logical thing left for Republicans to do will be to outright "write off" the Black vote — to outright say "we care neither about you nor your issues, you are simply irrelevant." n nThis "damned if you do, damned if you don't" stuff is not sustainable — what the NAACP runs the risk of doing is creating a situation where the best interests of the NAACP and the best interests of the GOP are in direct conflict, at which point the GOP would have no choice but to look after itself at the expense of the NAACP. And of those for whom the NAACP claims to advocate for. n nPolitics is coalition building around mutual interests and shared values. The so-called "win-win" situation — and when one looks at the shocking unemployment rate of Black teenagers — not to mention the equally shockingly low level of basic academic skills possessed by said Black teenagers (the latter being quite relevant in the former) — Romney's message is quite relevant. n n(The average Black male 12th grader has the reading and writing ability of the average 7th grade White female — facts matter and we do need to recognize this.)
These attacks on Romney are pitiful and will only help him with anyone who is fair minded. He got applause when he said he aimed to be President of all the people, notg only those who voted for him. A farf cry from any Democrat, especially Obama.
To me, the Obama diss of the NAACP is all you need to know of the soon to be ex-POTUS, how audacious, and arrogant. However, the NAACP will vote for his highness regardless. Romney continues to show class and character, traits I find refreshing and important.
No, Mr O'Donnel, you are not being too cynical. You are obsessively batshit crazy. Period.
Well, Romney outed himself, and I will too: I AM A RACIST!!! Yes, I HATE THE PHUKHEAD RACE, consisting of Nancy "Clean-out-the-swamp" Pelosi, Joe "I-like-to-hear-myself-talk" Biden, Barry "Mr-Transparency/Alinskyite-community-organizer/if-I-can't-fix-this-in-3-years-then-I'm-a-one-term-president" Soetoro or whatever his name is, Michelle "Come-on-let's-all-go-to Spain-on-the-US-taxpayer" Obama, Timmy "Tax-cheat" Geithnew, Tom "Tax-cheat" Daschle, Arnie "Failed-Chicago-public-schools" Duncan, David "Can't-tell-the-truth-even-if-it-served-me-better" Axelrod, Kevin "It's-only-going-to-get-better" Jennings, Van "Communist" Jones, Kathleen "Abortion-is-great-and-not-against-Catholic-teaching!" Sebelius, Hillary "Shame-on-you-Mr-Obama-during-the-08-campaign" Clinton, Sonia "I'm-a-wise-latina" Sotomayor, etc, etc, etc. Yes, I hate the phukhead race. I AM A RACIST!!!
IT is like this: Typical left; nRomney goes and the left wins, Romney does not go and he loses.
"…NAACP is an important and meaningful organization worthy of Mr. Romney's time…." No, it is not! We need to start to say it like it is. The NAACP in attendees were rude, disrespectful and demonstrated the narrow-mindedness of the progs…since they will vote 95% for Obama no matter how awful he is to them, I am glad Romney went…it goes to show decent people and independents just what the NAACP is all about: hatemongering!! They will not acknowledge a fact they have been acutely aware since his run for the Senate in Chicago…but no one speaks aloud of it: Barack Obama is not an African American as in "from a past of slavery"…his father was not American, but Kenyan. He has not had the experiences that African Americans have had…so, Obama, who has no clue what the average American is all about and who doesn't know what being African American is all about….will still get the black vote for no other reason than the color of his skin. Sad!