One Progressive’s View: The Conservative’s Mindset-Mitwitt IV, the NAACP Convention
I bet you all were thinking that I was going to start this article by criticizing Mitt Romney. On the contrary, I will commend him for having the courage to show up at the NAACP convention in Texas to address the audience last July 11th. I was surprised; I did not think that he had the conjones to face such an audience. Courage is a quality that when I find it in a man or woman, covers a multitude of sins, and Mitt has plenty of them (sins). I criticize the audience for booing the man; we should all treat everyone in a cordial way as we wish to be treated. This applies to the rightwinger as well!
People to left of me say that Mitt was not there so much to address the obviously pro-Obama, African American audience as to show undecideds and independents that he is no George Wallace. I would not say that, but I do think that he should fire his handlers. Who sent him into the lion’s den so poorly prepared? What I was looking for from him rather than bashing Obama is his alternative that would address the concerns of our community. More of the standard GOP rhetoric he has been using in the campaign trail is not good enough. When 97% of the audience is pro-Obama, you do not go in to this group using the term “Obamacare” in the place of the Affordable Care Act. This was a simple, glaring and obvious oversight. Romney is simply not clever enough to have a devious backdoor agenda for his reason to address the convention. He is consistently out of touch regardless of the audience that he addresses. Why should it be any different here? It is just that the nature of the audience he was to address this time required a bit more preplanning.
The political right continues to irritate me with claims that Romney spoke as he did to the convention to avoid pandering. But, Romney is a natural panderer, just look at his primary campaign tactics. It is not pandering to do your homework and take the time to make your position relevant to the audience to whom you are speaking. Then the right comes up with this insane perspective that the President is taking black audiences for granted by not making an appearance. That is also going nowhere. We, as a group, are for the most part allied with the President and I want him to spend his time working those states and constituencies that are on the margins. So, if Mr. Obama showed up he would be accused of pandering to the black community and when he doesn’t he is taking them for granted? Why would Mitt Romney spend a lot of time in Utah, for example? As usual, the rightwinger’s reasoning is ‘dead on arrival’.
Mr. Romney is not very engaging and will have trouble in the debates when he will be challenged by something other than friendly fire. While the GOP thinks that they can buy the election, a ham handed performance by their standard bearer could make things more difficult. For the sake of Republicans and conservatives they had better hope that Romney can ‘up his game’ soon.