Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Boooo

Boooo

I thought it was disrespectful and racist to boo, even on policy matters.

At least that’s what we’re told when there is a virtual boo of Obama in the right blogosphere, or someone shouts out at Obama.

Now I don’t think there was a racial motive to the booing of Romney when he said he would repeal Obamacare.  Just sayin’.

Via BuzzFeed:

Mitt Romney was repeatedly booed during a speech at the NAACP convention Wednesday, as the Republican stuck to his standard campaign message of criticizing President Obama’s economic record, and pledging to repeal Obamacare.

Full video of speech at Common Cents.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

He got more applause then boos. I actually think Mitt might have won a few votes (secret ones, of course) by this speech.

LukeHandCool | July 11, 2012 at 1:03 pm

When the Daily Caller reporter asked a question of Obama recently, the MSM “journalists” were like delicate Victorian maidens in need of fainting sofas, one hand held to their foreheads, as the other hand searched for the sofa. Little Faberge eggs, the lot of ’em.

Booing a candidate showing the goodwill to address a hosile audience some other candidates would refuse to do as a meaningless waste of time? No biggie !!

And then they turn around and complain about a lack of GOP outreach. There has to be at least a tiny bit of reaching back from the other side, too, or it just becomes a pathetic charade, no? Boo on that.

    PhillyGuy in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 11, 2012 at 3:51 pm

    That Daily Caller reporter was rude. Then he wrote a holier than thou article about how others have done it and he felt it was his duty to do it too. Give me a break.

    That doesn’t excuse what others have done but when our side does it, we shouldn’t be defending it. Rude is rude.

      LukeHandCool in reply to PhillyGuy. | July 11, 2012 at 4:25 pm

      I’m not excusing what he did. Just the over-the-top reaction to it.

      I happened to catch him on TV (I believe Hannity’s show) and he apologized for his timing. He basically said he was expecting Obama to turn and leave without taking questions (as usual) and, anticipating Obama was about to finish, asked his question.

      His apology and reasoning might be baloney, but the MSM’s disproportionate reaction was laughable. They never reacted that way when reporters anticipating the closing remarks from Bush or Reagan, etc., shouted out questions before the Republican presidents were completely finished talking.

      SmokeVanThorn in reply to PhillyGuy. | July 11, 2012 at 10:04 pm

      And you know holier than thou . . .

DavidJackSmith | July 11, 2012 at 1:06 pm

Really looking forward to Obama also entering hostile territory when he addresses the NRA about his plans to circumvent the 2nd Amendment via a UN arms treaty.

Gutsy call Mr President!

I’m no fan of Romney (to put it nicely), but I’ve got to hand it to him for seeing it through.

Good for Romney — enters lions den, does not pander to lions.

Romney actually articulated some good Conservative positions to a crowd that he knew would not OPENLY harmonize with all of them.

Good on him!

Too bad some there are so sold into the Collective plantation they are skeered by notions of freedom.

Decorum is a one-way street. Classic Alinskyism.

But…the NAACP isn’t doing itself any favors. I don’t think they’re doing very well; this is not the behavior of a strong, self-confident group. This is a rabble coming apart.

    punfundit in reply to CalMark. | July 11, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    Community organizations can (and do) exist in conservative/libertarian corners as well as leftist corners. We need to give people real social alternatives to the Collective Plantation.

    Right now, the only alternative minority communities see is the Republican Party and frankly I don’t blame them for turning up their noses. We need to do better. That requires us to do what Romney did (as much as it pains me to write that).

      CalMark in reply to punfundit. | July 11, 2012 at 2:05 pm

      The NAACP has gone from worthy social organization to Democrat-client dinosaur.

      As for “alternative minority communities” — WHAT? SERIOUSLY? Why do we even need such things?

      They can join a Tea Party. Or if that doesn’t suit, they can join some leftie group (and see how well they’re treated there. Ha.)

      Time for “minorities” to stop balkanizing themselves and enter the mainstream.

        punfundit in reply to CalMark. | July 11, 2012 at 2:39 pm

        You might misunderstand my intent because I did not write clearly. Allow me to clarify that statement: “…alternative *that* minority communities…” Meaning the only “alternative” they are “allowed” (by their cultural elites, like Al Sharpton) to see is the GOP which has been successfully lampooned and maligned. And personally I’m fed up with the Establishment GOP.

        Should minority groups stop balkanizing themselves? Should we be a homogenous society, a melting pot where every culture contributes meaning and value to The American Family? Of course.

        But in our modern society, “whitey” (thanks to generations of leftist agitprop) telling minorities to join “the mainstream” will result in noses being turned up. It simply won’t happen overnight. Despite seeking the most wrong-headed goals, Alinsky understood a number of important truths about encouraging groups of people to enter your orbit.

        Consider the generally conservative nature of many minority groups’ family values and so forth. We can build on that. Gingrich was correct in asserting that we need *inclusive* minority events. Not just “hey here’s the bandwagon we built for you, jump on.” How is the latter any different than the Democrats’ platform, well except they’re better at pretending to be Santa Claus than our guys?

great unknown | July 11, 2012 at 1:32 pm

You seem to have fallen into a bit of a trap here. Many sites, backed up by video, report that he was applauded many times, and received a standing ovation at the end.

But MSM couldn’t report that for fear of triggering a preference cascade* among minorities, so they emphasized the booing. And, despite your appreciation for the “honesty” of MSM, you bit.

*see, e.g., http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2012/06/03/preference-cascade/ And as usual, it has the fingerprints of the blogfather all over it.

Of course it’s not racist to boo a white man. What ever gave you that idea? [sarcasm off]

    Ragspierre in reply to persecutor. | July 11, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    Speaking truth to power.

    OR

    Displaying ill manners to challenging ideas from someone who has no power.

    One of the two…

I just read that Romney was applauded for expressing support of traditional marriage and charter schools.

THAT sure as heck wasn’t reported. Doesn’t fit the narrative, I guess.

Subotai Bahadur | July 11, 2012 at 1:58 pm

Any group that defines itself exclusively in terms of race IS RACIST.

Subotai Bahadur

However, NBC’s Garrett Haake tweeted that Romney got a standing ovation as he finished his speech, and National Review’s Jim Geraghty noted the cordial reception by the NAACP.
—Newsbusters

Typical. We get what the Mushroom Media pushes on the airwaves.

Suppose he were to say to that audience that every dollar used to subsidize the insurance of the rich people who make more than the poverty rate, up to 4 times the poverty rate, is one less dollar to pay the cost of health care for anyone below the poverty rate?

State clearly that part of ObamaCare is barely-disguised welfare, but only so long as the real winner is the insurance company and not the nominal beneficiary.

I caught much of his speech on TV today, and I honestly think that Mitt was wonderful; he did a terrific job! I heard far more applause and even cheers than I did boos (which were mixed in with APPLAUSE). It was nice to see Mitt strong and confident, and I think he may have (secretly) gained some respect from his audience by not pandering to them. Whether people admit it or not, it is the truth that strength and confidence always garners more admiration that weakness and butt kissing ever will.
Listening and watching Mitt was soooo much nicer than watching 0’s stammer-stuttering or how 0’s head goes back and forth left and right as if he’s watching an intense ping-pong match when he reads from his dueling teleprompters. And Mitt doesn’t condescendingly and insultingly adopt different fake speech affectations in a lame attempt to impress various audiences.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to Zilla. | July 11, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    I watched it also and noticed that the applause was tepid and had a polite feeling at first. When he began talking about failing schools and slowly fed in school choice, the applause seemed to catch hold and there were a few shouts. When they booed him, his reaction was superb. His unblinking, meansured reaction was the difference between a thin-skinned community organizer and a man who has been in some really hostile places, such as a contentious boardroom or in debt negotiations. The boos left him unfazed, and I think his long, dramatic pause and unapologetic reply was the shining moment of his speech. I also feel like the audience, while not falling in love, at least saw someone who was genuine. That is to say they are used to the phony street-speech of Hillary Clinton and even Obama, as well as the pandering of Kerry. The only other politician I’ve heard make that kind of move with the NAACP was when Bill Clinton touched on welfare reform and was met with a smattering of boos. Same kind of push back.

    With me, anyway, Romney reached a milestone. It could have just as easily been a millstone.

    Way to go, Mitt.

When they disagreed is more significant than they disagreed.

An audience voicing it’s displeasure at specific items within a speech is just fine in my book. If decorum permits interrupting applause it must also accept some sort of audible indication of disapproval.

This, in contrast to what often occurs at our institutions of ‘higher learning’ where some voices are drown out or otherwise prevented from being heard. To my mind the NAACP has today improved their stature as a civic organization.

Lets see Obama speak at a TEA party affiliated event.

And the MSM does their usual schtick of ignoring the news they don’t want you to see or hear.

TrooperJohnSmith | July 11, 2012 at 3:10 pm

The [900-pound gorilla in the room] double-standard to which minorities are held is the result of the Left’s ever-pervasive tyranny of low expectations. You know, that paternalism that masquerades as acceptance and tolerance. Yeah, that one.

Therefore, when a reporter yells at the president or a Congressman shouts, “You lie!” they are held to one standard. When an assembly of the nation’s foremost black leaders, movers and shakers boos a presidential nominee, it is tolerated and dissected for some sort of divine meaning by pundits and politicians, rather than condemned. There is a tacit, unspoken opinion that begins with, “Well, you know how they are…”

It’s the same soft racism from the Left that accepts the existence of a white America and a black America.

-White politician forced to address the NAACP, or be labeled a racist

-anything and everything spoken by a white politician to the NAACP is inherently racist

-pointing out all the overtly racist statements made by leaders of the NAACP over the years is racist

-Forced by political correctness to give legitimacy to an arm of Black Liberation Theology

Yea, I’m booing

    Browndog in reply to Browndog. | July 11, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    Whadya know-

    The response from one NAACP leader after Mitt Romney’s speech before the organization on Wednesday? He favors white people.

    “I believe his vested interests are in white Americans,” Charlette Stoker Manning, the chairwoman of Women in NAACP, told the website BuzzFeed following the Republican candidate’s Wednesday speech in Houston.

    (Maureen Dowd still looking for the “real” speech transcript-the one she has doesn’t match the one she heard; all she heard was “,boy.”)

A tip of the hat and a thank-you to the woman STEM professionals who have contributed to the discussion. They demonstrate that there is not a conflict between enlightened self-interest and the common good. (The Left would have us believe otherwise.)

    gs in reply to gs. | July 11, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    Jeez, I did it again. This belonged in the STEM post. Boooo, indeed. 🙁

    Maybe Somebody is telling me to focus less on the world’s issues and more on my own. I’m giving myself a time-out.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to gs. | July 11, 2012 at 3:42 pm

    Did you post this in the wrong comment section?

      Indeed I did, sorry. The mistake started with having two posts open via browser tabs.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to gs. | July 11, 2012 at 4:28 pm

        Not to worry. I posted my amended 2012 federal tax return on Hot Air.

          LukeHandCool in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 11, 2012 at 4:41 pm

          I remember that! Do you have any idea how much Juan y Maria y Carlos y Pedro and Ian from Ireland paid me for your social security number?

        LukeHandCool in reply to gs. | July 11, 2012 at 4:34 pm

        Dude,

        You don’t wanna be put through Professor Willy Wonka’s Spanking Machine.

        Ol’ Spanky never met a bare bottom he considered too red.

        LukeHandCool (who isn’t talking about some Dominatrix-type thing … just the good ol’ fashioned kids’ spanking machine in which the spankee crawls through the legs of a line of kids (the spankers). Not the best picture, but you get the idea. LI should form a spanking machine team).

        http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2197/374/1600/weddingmachine2.0.jpg

          http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2197/374/1600/weddingmachine2.0.jpg

          prolonged whistle Oh please, Brer Luke, whatever you do, don’t throw me in that spanking machine! Anything but that spanking machine!

          LukeHandCool in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 11, 2012 at 5:25 pm

          Oh, gs, I can picture it perfectly:

          Girls: That’ll show you!

          gs: Ha! That didn’t hurt one bit!

          Girls: Let’s put him through again, ladies!

          Repeat cycle endlessly …….

          TrooperJohnSmith in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 11, 2012 at 6:55 pm

          Where do I sign up for this? I’ll go top or bottom, wherever you have space. I ain’t particular. I’ll even bring kolaches and beer. And a big, antique hairbrush!! 👿

          LukeHandCool in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 11, 2012 at 8:22 pm

          The losing team in a game of tlachtli, a game played by the ancient Mayans and Aztecs before spectators in a stadium, would be sacrificed, usually by decapitation, symbolizing warfare and its consequences.

          Few things show how quickly and compassionately Homo sapiens has evolved in just a few centuries than a naked spanking machine punishment meted out to the losing team of a game of nude Twister.

          We’ve come a long way. It still all represents warfare and victor and vanquished … but the “sacrifice” is just a stinging red buttocks.

          But, Never mind the buttocks, here’s the proof, lest you think I jest …

          http://vanduzera.edublogs.org/files/2010/05/Mayan-Ball-Game-Dude.jpg

          LukeHandCool in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 11, 2012 at 8:26 pm

          P.S.

          No hairbrushes allowed!

          Get your kinks or split-ends out some other way.

          Let’s keep it unkinky, clean fun.

I was talking to an Obot yesterday, one of those Obama apologists who declares any criticism of Obama is unwarranted .. ie has expressed ridicule of Obama detractors by saying “If it rains outside its Obama’s fault.”

Anyway, there was a story on the news talking of Republicans scheduling a repeal vote of Obamacare.
And I commented that Obama is done, and Republicans are going to repeal this garbage.

They said Republicans are NOT going to repeal it.
Romney is a liar!.
Obamcare was designed on Romneycare, they (both parties) are one in the same, and its not ObamaTax because John Roberts enabled it as a tax.
So apparently Obots DO believe its RobertsTax, Chief Justice John Roberts’ name is signed on the bottom of the Affordable Care Act, which is Law of the Land , and that law now holds a powerful new tax weapon to be unleashed by Congress onto the American public in untold new ways.
…and We The People are powerless.

They bolstered their (both parties are the same) argument with this: Governor Engler (R) signed a 2002 law to increase unemployment benefits (I’m sure probably at the time viewed as “Helping People” and Governor Synder just signed a law reducing benefit weeks that included a measure to recover interest on the amount of improperly paid unemployment benefits.
(-apparently they were a “99 week” Unemployment benefit recipient who was somehow overpaid and is now being hammered with penalty and interest because they didn’t notice the extra loot ENTITLEMENT or protest the overpayment decision.)

allowing OmoonBot to overlook that Governor Granholm (D) increased taxes on Small Business to 22%, destroying jobs, and along with Democrats and Pelosi in Congress to extend the NEW Federal Unemployment “job creating” ENTITLEMENT umpteen times, overburdening Michigan and bankrupting the Michigan Unemployment Fund since 2008, to the tune of $4 Billion borrowed from the Federal Gov’t, money that must be repaid and is expressed as an increased TAX on employers to replenish the Fund, that kills jobs and simply declare meany Rick Snyder (R) is just passing laws all willy nilly and conclude that HE just took my state tax refund check

So the silver lining is that Obots and some conservatives can both just resolve to DO NOTHING about Obamacare, sit back and just declare that its Roberts Boooosh’s Fault!

Or maybe take a tip from Mexico
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szwlWYewPsw

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to OcTEApi. | July 11, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    Stream of consciousness? I tried to read that last paragraph as it was punctuated and… passed out. 😀

Of course, there was no racism in booing Romney! The NAACP displayed its true colors, so to speak, when the convention “went wild” over Holder. They thunderously endorsed Holder’s overt racism. The trustees of the NAACP should be asked what would have to occur in order for them to conclude their organization is no longer needed and could be dissolved. I am sure that at some point in the recent past many of them would have answered “the election of a black President.”

Yep..good speech. Very presidential. Mitt is rising. And, of course, people understand that Obama has tried very hard..lol.

Captain Obvious | July 11, 2012 at 6:43 pm

“Now I don’t think there was a racial motive to the booing of Romney when he said he would repeal Obamacare.”

Not to quibble too much, but this IS the NAACP we’re talking about here… they can’t put their pants on in the morning without a racial motivation.

BannedbytheGuardian | July 12, 2012 at 1:40 am

Yes well done Mr Romney. Every black mother wants to get her kids into Charter Schools even if they know the kid is as thick as a brick. At least there he won’t get stabbed.

mitt did get a hearty round of applause for employing
the time-honored political tradition of dissing gay folks (currently called ‘protecting marriage’) but then, this is the same crowd who cheered holder for smuggling guns to mexican drug cartels (“we’ve got his back”).
i do give major props to mitt though for declining to adopt a phony preacher-cadence, as is so commonly done by politicians when speaking to predominately black audiences. the guy is who he is, take it or leave it…gotta respect that.

Romney took the mittens off.

First of all, the audience was black (therefore they CAN’T be racist) and, second of all, Mitt is both white and a Republican! So, it goes without saying that Mitt is a racist.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend