Romney doesn’t grasp minorities’ right to vote for Obama (LIBERALS CONTINUE TO OINK AND GLOAT)

Chicago Sun-times ^ | November 15, 2012 | JUNIOR MARXIST NEIL STEINBERG nsteinberg@suntimes.com

[Chi-townChief]

When the election was finally over, and Barack Obama had been re-elected despite the bad economy and other strikes against him, there was a single quiet moment where the question was raised: What would the Republicans learn from their defeat? How, chastened, would they return to the national stage, humbled but committed to fix our common problems?

Ah, hahahahaha . . .

“In the afterglow of Obama’s victory, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Ayatollah Khamenei, Vladimir Putin and Chris Matthews, as well as millions of pot-heads, sodomites, pro-aborts and all common moochers, are sharing a collective thrill,” wrote Joel Richardson, in his “A Christian Response to Obama Victory.” “The American people by a clear majority have rejected fiscal responsibility, energy independence, national security, border security, traditional family values, and worst of all, standing with the most defenseless and innocent among us. Barack Obama’s re-election is a complete political, economic, moral, social and spiritual catastrophe.”

Now Richardson, author of “The Islamic Antichrist,” is an obscure fundamentalist ranter — well, as obscure as a person can be and still pop up on Fox News to share his insight. And it is unfair to seize the most extreme voice in a group and pretend it represents the whole. We can’t let a fringe crank speak for the mainstream of the defeated party. So let’s let the presidential candidate himself, Mitt Romney, interpret his defeat:

“The president’s campaign focused on giving targeted groups a big gift,” Romney said on Wednesday, in a phone call to some of the donors who gave nearly $1 billion to his campaign, adding the president was “very generous” to blacks, Latinos and women; “the gifts,” including health coverage “in perpetuity,” were “highly motivational” to voters.

Points for consistency — in July, Romney told the NAACP, of all people, that a vote for Obama was a vote for “more free stuff.”

I would draw a red circle around Richardson’s “all common moochers” and connect it to Romney’s polite “giving targeted groups a big gift” and “more free stuff” lines and suggest they represent the same idea.

But maybe Romney was misspeaking, again, the way he says he did when he called 47 percent of Americans parasites (not to be confused with wealthy people who will lose all desire to work or earn money, the theory goes, should the tax rate go up, even a little).

What about his running mate, Paul Ryan? Why does he think his ticket lost?

“I think the surprise was some of the turnout, especially in the urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race,” he told a Wisconsin TV reporter.

“Urban areas,” in case you need to be told, is code used by those who can’t force their mouths to form the words “black folk.”

Welcome to the post-election narrative that Republicans are now telling themselves: Obama was re-elected by minority freeloaders who want “free stuff” so much they’re willing to re-elect a socialist Muslim terrorist lazily flipping cards into a hat while American diplomats were killed in Libya.

The phone rang.

“Ninety-six percent of blacks voted for Obama,” a reader began. The actual number was 93 percent, but close enough, “why hasn’t the media reported that?”

“Fox News sure was muttering about demographics,” I said, but that flew by, so I tried another tack. “Blacks are 13 percent of the country,” I said, when he paused. “Obama could have gotten 100 percent of their vote and it wouldn’t have gotten him elected.”

“But it put him over the top . . .” the caller countered, and away he went again.

Funny. For hundreds of years, America tolerated — heck, nurtured, built, defended — the most elaborate superstructure of institutionalized racism known to human history. A solid 100 percent of white voters voted for the 100 percent white candidates for president between 1789 and 2004 because there wasn’t a major black candidate to vote for.

And now that a black guy whom Republican revanchists despise won, again, suddenly there’s something dubious about voting for the candidate of your own color. The GOP is like those Chicago firefighters who spent decades happily dwelling in racist firehouses, smashing the communal coffee mugs used by black firemen unlucky enough to be among them. Then suddenly, if someone attempts to correct all these years of racism, they abruptly discover fairness and collapse in a heap, sobbing about the injustice done them.

“Black people are allowed to vote, right?” I said, but my caller wasn’t about to agree.

My point is, Obama and the Democrats shouldn’t waste too much time waiting and hoping for Republicans to grasp what needs to happen in our country next, since they obviously have so much trouble simply wrapping their heads around what has already occurred. It’s going to be a long four years.

[ronnie raygun]

Romney told the NAACP, of all people, that a vote for Obama was a vote for “more free stuff.”

nuff sed, you need not elaborate.

[Sola Veritas]

I don’t give a hoot about the “race” of a voter. However, I do have a GREAT DEAL OF HEARTBURN over what I consider, Ghetto voters influencing an election.

I do not think that persons that are entirely dependent on the government (local, state, or federal) for their food and sustanance (I am not talking about pensions or social security) being able to vote.

I tired to explain this to my teenage son who wondered why this group (like in Philidelphia) would vote for Mr. Obama and continued unemployment instead of Mr. Romney where there might be a chance of economic turn around. What I told my son is that this class of ghetto dwellers is not now or ever going to be interested in “employment.” All they care about is getting their government money...with NO strings attached (except that they do not work). Because they NEVER intend to get a job and EARN an income. They don’t care if the the rest of the country suffers and cannot find work.....they will continue to get their government checks whether there is 1% or 15% unemployment.

When I explained it that way, he could understand. They don’t expect (or care) Mr. Obama to help decrease the unemployment. They just expect him to keep feeding them and giving them toys. Bread and circuses!