Caption this

Wednesday, July 11th, 2012 · 13 Comments »

Sometimes the intertubes really redeem themselves, don’t they? Today’s redemption comes courtesy of BuzzFeed, which has just put up the best post ever in the history of the internet: Reaction Faces From The Crowd At Mitt Romney’s NAACP Speech.

The first picture is my favorite:

I simply cannot stop laughing at the expression of the woman on the right. Maybe because that’s how I feel every time I hear Romney speak.

Seriously, it would be so great to have a time stamp on each of the photos so we could key them to the points in Romney’s speech. Was this the part where he was saying he would be a better president than Obama for the African-American community?

Filed under: Various and Sundry · Tags:

13 Responses to “Caption this”

  1. Ugsome says:

    Comedy gold aside, at least Romney had sufficient respect for them to show up and speak to them. Who does that for women’s groups? No, it’s apparently sufficient that liberals administer a political beating to their wimminfolk with the Roe stick every four years. Only now it’s the contraception bat. A librul dudebro acquaintance who said “Any woman who votes Republican deserves what she gets” could not grasp how rapey that sounded, so normal a manner of addressing women voters that has become.

    Speaking of which, the ‘sweeties’ (PP, NOW) are falling into line and endorsing. No wonder nothing ever changes.

  2. Violet Socks says:

    And for his encore, Romney goes full “welfare queen”:

    Romney himself said he “expected” to be booed for it, and in remarks first reported on The Rachel Maddow Show tonight, he demonstrated why. According to a pool report from Romney’s Hamilton, Montana fundraiser, he brought up the booing, and told donors “if they (Obamacare supporters) 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.”

  3. Violet Socks says:

    Comedy gold aside, at least Romney had sufficient respect for them to show up and speak to them.

    He didn’t go there out of respect. He went there to inflame the right wing. The whole thing was a set piece and the NAACP audience were just props. The purpose of going there and getting booed (deliberately) was so that Rush Limbaugh, et al, could talk about how Brave White Mitt entered the lion’s den and told the truth to “those people.” Check out the reaction on the right and you’ll see: it’s all racism and smug white superiority to the “welfare queens.”

  4. Sweet Sue says:

    Well, I don’t suppose Romney could be much worse for the AA community than President 14% unemployment.
    Not that I’d vote for either of them but are we really pretending that there’s a mustard smear’s worth of difference between Shit Sandwich A and Shit Sandwich B?

  5. Violet Socks says:

    I think there’s at least a mustard smear’s worth of difference. There’s Romney’s history as a foe of the NAACP and his elimination of affirmative action in Massachusetts. But there are also the current GOP goals: repeal ACA, eliminate public sector unions, give more tax cuts to billionaires. These things are generally not favorable to the black community.

    It’s of course true that Obama has basically governed like a traditional Republican and is a massive disappointment to all progressives. The differences between him and the current GOP are marginal. But “marginal” does not equal “nonexistent.” And for women and minorities, the margins are often where we get killed.

    For example, I hate with a passion that the Obama administration threw us under the bus with Stupak and Plan B, and made a serious unforced error on contraception. But I hate even more that the Republicans want to enforce state-mandated object rape, criminal charges for miscarriage, personhood for zygotes, and the complete elimination of all abortion services if possible.

    Four years ago I wrote an essay about this. The dilemma facing women (and other progressives) isn’t an illusion. We really are seriously at the mercy of two evils. And recognizing that the Democrats are bad doesn’t magically make the Republicans better. They’re still worse.

    That’s why the brief window of leverage we got with the Hillary campaign was so precious. We don’t have that now. We’re back to the status quo: no leverage.

  6. anna says:

    “Four years ago I wrote an essay about this.”

    Could you link to it, or post it if it’s not online? I’d like to read it.

  7. Violet Socks says:

    Anna: Archimedes’ Lever.

  8. Ugsome says:

    Violet. Ah. In that case I wonder why the NAACP consented to have him speak to them? I doubt they appreciate being used as a GOP prop. Did they see a political payoff in it, such as ‘Everyone left of Attila the Hun will see what an ass he is?’

    And I still wish someone would bother to campaign for women’s votes as if we were real political actors, not beat them out of us with stupid fear tactics.

  9. Violet Socks says:

    Ugsome, I could be wrong but I think presidential candidates are always invited to speak at the NAACP convention. The crowd there was clearly ready to listen to whatever case Romney wanted to make, but he didn’t make a case. He just trolled for boos so he could score points with white racists.

    This article is way over the top with the race-baiter theme, but I agree with the basic analysis of how Romney’s speech was constructed, and the difference between genuinely engaging your audience and just scoring points for your watching friends. Romney’s speech to the NAACP wasn’t respectful and it wasn’t calibrated to actually meet the concerns of the audience. It would be like Romney addressing the NOW convention and airily mentioning in passing that he would improve our lives by getting rid of things like the murder of preborn babies.

    And speaking of which, it would be amazing if presidential candidates bothered to address the NOW convention.

  10. tinfoil hattie says:

    I don’t know. I don’t think there’s much of a difference between Obama and Romney. Obama just pretends there is, and his sycophants fall for it – and fall in line.

    If Obama has not only NOT advocated for women but has also sat idly by while things get worse and worse for us, then he’s not a reasonable choice at all. I’m voting green. Any feminist who reads the Green Party platform might be impressed.

  11. quixote says:

    Chalk up another dissenter. The Democrats aren’t fighting what the Repubs do. They’re using it. That makes them part of the same gang running the same protection racket. “Hey, sweetie, better gimme your vote, and then the other guy won’t break your thumbs. This time.”

    To hell with them. Both of them.

  12. Sweet Sue says:

    But “marginal” does not equal “nonexistent.” And for women and minorities, the margins are often where we get killed
    That’s all true; that argument worked on me in 2008 and I voted for Obama in the general, hoping that he would rise to the occasion and the office.
    Well, we all saw how that worked out.
    This year, I’m voting my conscience and damn the torpedos. Is that a stand born out of privilege? I suppose so, but Obama’s embrace and furtherance of the Bush policies, the drones and the “kill list” make it impossible to support him again.
    This time, the “lesser of two evils” is just too evil.

  13. scott says:

    I love the pic. Anger, contempt and even a small element of shock (“did he really say that?”) mixed in. Priceless.