Romney's speech for NAACP

[Georgy Zhukov]

Does he really think black people are stupid? He just spent the whole time talking down to them.

[arnold layne]

It wouldn't surprise me. He looks like a condescending asshole.

[Georgy Zhukov]

He is a condescending asshole. He was like "Don't worry about rich people, they are fine" and went on how he will make a better president for black people. That got him booed.

The audience was great, they were civil, polite, waited for Romney to start insulting them. When he did they let him know how he felt. What a stupid way to get the black vote, Obama is more likely to get the Mormon and evangelical vote than Romney ever getting the black vote.

[Projected]

[TeeJay410]

Well considering Romney is a practicing member of a group that was officially racist (and still is in its theology) until 1979, at which point he was an adult capable of deciding not to participate, no wonder he doesn't fare so well with black voters. Not like he had a shot anyway with them considering the incumbent.

[Desperado]

He looks down on everybody who makes less then 10000000 dollars per day

[Budweiser]

He looks down on everybody who makes less then 10000000 dollars per day

Honestly, this type of rhetoric that the left is propagating is strictly bullshit. Be smarter than that.

[Dazey]

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

[Budweiser]

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

[Dazey]

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

Oh well as long as they get to be more than that then what are we all complaining about? "Shut it Sambo, you've never had it so good now shut the fuck up and get back to the fields!" I'm just looking forward to the debates when he throws Obama the keys to his Rolls Royce and tells him not to scratch it.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Dazey

[DirtyDeeds]

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

I think by the same token, Bud, that you can do better than that, too. Not your strongest comment.

[Dazey]

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

I think by the same token, Bud, that you can do better than that, too. Not your strongest comment.

Nah man what are you on about? Dude's got a point innit! Them darkies should just be grateful and be done with it!

[Budweiser]

He is a condescending asshole. He was like "Don't worry about rich people, they are fine" and went on how he will make a better president for black people. That got him booed.

What? Did we watch the same speech? I didn't hear a single boo. And what isn't true about that statement? The rich will be fine. Under Obama, they are doing just great. And under Romney, nothing will change.

The audience was great, they were civil, polite, waited for Romney to start insulting them. When he did they let him know how he felt. What a stupid way to get the black vote, Obama is more likely to get the Mormon and evangelical vote than Romney ever getting the black vote.

I don't think you even watched the speech. Please cite the insults. I'm getting the impression that if you did even watch it, you are just sensitive to the truth.

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

I think by the same token, Bud, that you can do better than that, too. Not your strongest comment.

I don't understand why people apply the 3/5 compromise as a negative connotation of a modern-day debate. The 3/5 Compromise what a PRO African-American policy. It was a sign of progress in a time that was utterly fucked. But it has little to do with America as a singular unit, but rather an entire world-view.

Well blacks are only three fifths of a person after all.

Maybe you would have preferred that they were just 0/5 like they were before?

I think by the same token, Bud, that you can do better than that, too. Not your strongest comment.

Nah man what are you on about? Dude's got a point innit! Them darkies should just be grateful and be done with it!

Is SunnyDRE back at it again?

[DirtyDeeds]

The 3/5 Compromise was pro-Southern-white-people-having-a-say-in-Congress-that-actually-carried-any-weight-against-states-that-were-more-populated-with-white-people. That's what it was pro.

Edited July 11, 2012 by DirtyDeeds

[PappyTron]

Well, I'm glad that we can compromise on our moral integrity as long as it gets us to congress.

[Dazey]

I don't understand why people apply the 3/5 compromise as a negative connotation of a modern-day debate. The 3/5 Compromise what a PRO African-American policy. It was a sign of progress in a time that was utterly fucked. But it has little to do with America as a singular unit, but rather an entire world-view.

Because it wasn't long ago that it was still believed and the reference was to Mitt Romney who was part of an officially racist organisation well into adulthood and for some reason saw no problem with this. Is that not relevant in a thread about him addressing the NAACP?

[DirtyDeeds]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

[Projected]

[Dazey]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

[Budweiser]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

I guess you buy into the Jeremiah Write/Obama connection then, right?

[Dazey]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

I guess you buy into the Jeremiah Write/Obama connection then, right?

Was Jeremiah Wright speaking on behalf of the whole of Christianity?

[TeeJay410]

Mormonisms theology is plagued with racism throughout. As an adult Romney chose to participate in a church where it's official hierarchal policy was racist, there could be no black leaders. This doesn't make Romney racist, but it is questionable judgement at best, if not entirely spineless.

[Budweiser]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

I guess you buy into the Jeremiah Write/Obama connection then, right?

Was Jeremiah Wright speaking on behalf of the whole of Christianity?

This is a pretty pathetic attempt to hide your hypocrisy here.

[Dazey]

Mormonisms theology is plagued with racism throughout. As an adult Romney chose to participate in a church where it's official hierarchal policy was racist, there could be no black leaders. This doesn't make Romney racist, but it is questionable judgement at best, if not entirely spineless.

Not to mention the fact that you'd need to be batshit crazy to believe in any of that bollocks to begin with. I mean most religions are fucking whacked but the Mormons are one step down from Tom Cruise and his lot! I mean fuck me, golden plates and all that as recently as two hundred years ago? Fuck a doodle do, I've heard everything now!

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

I guess you buy into the Jeremiah Write/Obama connection then, right?

Was Jeremiah Wright speaking on behalf of the whole of Christianity?

This is a pretty pathetic attempt to hide your hypocrisy here.

Not as pathetic as saying blacks should be happy to be classed as less then real people but hey ho I guess that makes us both bad people. Also the Jeremiah Wright thing has been all over the news many times and Obama's been through it over and over. Did he display poor judgement? Yeah of course he did but he didn't spend 32 years of his life following a faith where it was OFFICIAL DOCTRINE?

That's a massive error of judgement at best but more worryingly I don't think any of them really even thought enough about it to give a shit and that's the scary part! If you want to split the difference on this then you could at least say that Obama had the balls to publicly denounce Rev Wright's comments whereas Romney steadfastly refuses to this day to do the same over his church's policy.

Oh and you will note that in my original post I made no mention of Obama at all, I was addressing the topic in relation to Mitt Romney and in the context of the thread. Jeez, it's like the Axl defence force turning any negative comments about old ginger bollocks into an Axl v Slash pissing contest.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Dazey

[DirtyDeeds]

Dazey, where is your evidence that he had no problem with the racism in Mormonism?

I would say the fact that he was an active member of the church at a time when the practice was condoned would be reasonable wouldn't you?

No, not necessarily. I'm not saying he was or he wasn't, because I do not know, but it is very conceivable that he was not in favor of the Church of Latter Day Saints' racist teachings and policies. If you are part of an organization that has an aspect that you find wrong, that does not necessarily mean that you bail on it. I think there are two main approaches that leave your moral integrity in tact. 1) You bail or 2) you do your part to change it and/or protest (this is not necessarily some grand gesture that will bring you all kinds of news and notoriety, by the way. In religious organizations, to work change from within, it's often best not to make grand gestures but a whole lot of small ones, which is absolutely not being passive about it. Religious organizations are like Silly Putty. If you pull gently over a longer period of time, it will stretch out gracefully. If you yank hard all at once it snaps off abruptly). Another thing you can do is to grin and bear it or ignore it, but that's a spineless approach. The hardest, but probably best approach that helps to improve the world a little bit is to work to cause change. I'm not saying Romney did or did not do this because I don't know. That's why I was asking. He could have any number of reasons for staying Mormon. It is quite possible he chose to stay a Mormon because of his belief in most of the teachings and theology, despite parts that he wished would change. Again, not saying this is or is not true, but you don't necessarily just bail on something because it has an ugly part to it. If so, I don't think any of us would have a country, and a lot more of us would be voluntarily unemployed. In fact our whole societies would cease to exist. It's a good thing that people don't just leave something every time an aspect of it is wrong.