During the first Presidential debate, Mitt Romney made what many perceive to be a racially-tinged comment comparing President Obama to one of his “boys”:

“Look, I’ve got five boys — I’m used to people saying something that’s not always true but just keep repeating it and ultimately hoping I’ll believe it. But that is not the case.”

In some corners, the comment was viewed as reminiscent of the many times African-American men were called “boys” during slavery and beyond as a tactic to humiliate them, degrade them and strip them of their manhood.

What’s worse than likening the President of a free world to a “boy”? Having your child follow your disrespectful lead.

Mitt Romney’s son, Josh Romney (above, far right), told a crowd in Iowa on Tuesday:

“I don’t know if you guys saw the debate last week,” Josh Romney said, as the crowd cheered and applauded. “I take a lot of pride in that, because — I don’t know if you noticed, but I was — me and my brothers were responsible for my dad doing so well. We were the ones, as kids, that kept saying the same thing over and over. And we’d say the same lie over and over. And my dad learned then, not to believe it. While we didn’t go to any of the formal debate preparation, we did the real hard stuff.

So as a father, he learned how to debate an obstinate child. We had a lot of fun, we had a lot of fun watching the debate.”

Did that make you cringe? You’re not alone.

Debate President Obama’s policies all day, if you will, but have respect for him regardless of his political affiliation or his race. To insult an accomplished man by comparing him to an “obstinate child” reeks of elitism and racism, especially coming from an even younger man: Romney’s progeny.

Tags: , ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • LaNubiana

    I think instead of running for office, they should call it the political circus.

    AfriCom is here so whomever is elected is going to be the new face of American Imperialsm in Africa. Obama has already showed us his drone muscles. #getthehelloutofafria

    • African Mami

      THANK YOU! At least it wasn’t me that said it.

    • Rue

      The new wave of African Imperialism is being helmed by China.

    • LaNubiana

      Nope. It’s called AfriCom and perpetuated by none other than Barack aka Berry Husain Obama.

    • Rue

      First, this was set up about 3 tears b4 Obama took office. second, i can’t find any record of muscling out leaders, doing drone strikes or much really, except when the Libyans basically asked for help in ousting Gaddafi so do you mind sharing? not trying to sound snarky or condescending but i am curious to know what the us media leaves out in their constant crap-throwing.

    • LaNubiana

      @ Rue

      Actually, it all goes back to the brew of geometric boundaries that today divide Africa into 50 plus irregular nations under Eurocentric subjugation all started in Berlin, Germany on November 15, 1884.

      See the infamous Berlin Conference still remains Africa’s greatest undoing in more ways than one, where colonial powers superimposed their domains on the African continent and tore apart the social, political and economic fabric that held the continent together. By the time independence returned to Africa between 1956 and 1994, the African realm had acquired a colonial legacy of political fragmentation that could neither be eliminated nor made to operate wholly independent from the former colonial masters.

      We Africans had been too much battered, bruised, undignified and others brainwashed so much that up to today, Africa is battling to remain united due to continued and uncalled for interference, at every opportunity, by the imperialist hawks.

      For the last three decades, the same Germany, the womb that gave birth to colonialism is unashamedly been hosting and developing of AfriCom, the United States of America superior military command formed to superintend on America’s milking of African resources, at the expense of not only Africa but other fair dealing countries of the world. There is no doubt that Germany and United Kingdom are seeking re-colonisation of Africa, this time, creating space for its big brother and the infamous slave mater of our brothers and sisters, the United States of America. The giant military project is not only an affront to African democracy but an insult to African humanism as it seeks to reverse all the gains brought about by independence, from sovereignty to control of natural resources and self governance.

    • LaNubiana

      @ Rue


      Africa will not forget that in 1884 at the request of Portugal, German chancellor Otto Von Bismarck called together the major western powers of the world to negotiate questions and end confusion over the control of Africa. Africa itself was not invited because Europe believed we Africans had no meaningful contribution to make towards shaping OUR OWN destiny.

      See, before the Berlin Conference, 80% of Africa and its natural resources had remained under traditional and local leadership but thereafter the new map of the continent was superimposed over the one thousand indigenous cultures and regions of Africa. Concurrently, our wealth as pronounced by its vast human and natural resource base was appropriated by our colonisers. As a result, the new countries lacked and still lack rhyme or reason and divide coherent groups of people and merged together disparate groups that really did not get along.

      All in all, 14 countries were represented in cooking up the scheme: Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden-Norway (unified from 1814-1905), Turkey, and the United States of America.

      France, Germany, Great Britain, and Portugal were the major players in the conference, controlling most of colonial Africa at the time.

      At the Berlin Conference the European colonial powers scrambled to gain control over the interior of the continent. The conference lasted until February 26, 1884, a three month period where colonial powers haggled over geometric boundaries in the interior of the continent, disregarding our cultural and linguistic boundaries already established by the indigenous African people.

      By 1914, the conference participants had fully divided Africa among themselves into 50 countries.

      Great Britain targeted a Cape-to-Cairo collection of colonies and almost succeeded through its control of Egypt, Sudan (Anglo-Egyptian Sudan), Uganda, Kenya (British East Africa), South Africa, and Zambia (Southern Rhodesia), Malawi (Nyasaland), Zimbabwe (Northern Rhodesia), and Botswana. They also controlled Nigeria and Ghana (Gold Coast).

      France took much of western Africa, from Mauritania to Chad (French West Africa) and Gabon and the Republic of Congo (French Equatorial Africa).

      Belgium and King Leopold II controlled the Democratic Republic of Congo (Belgian Congo) while Portugal took Mozambique in the east and Angola in the west.

      Italy took Somalia (Italian Somaliland) and a portion of Ethiopia while Germany took Namibia (German Southwest Africa) and Tanzania (German East Africa). Spain claimed the smallest territory — Equatorial Guinea (Rio Muni).

    • LaNubiana

      @ Rue

      Continued (2)…

      Until recently, Africa had stood firm against the hosting of AfriCom and the same Germany has offered an alternative and hosted AfriCom until 2012, then of course Obama’s camp found a suitable base in Africa. The truth, however, remains that once Africa allows the hosting of AfriCom, it will have subcontracted all its powers to AfriCom, to USA and its exploitative military ventures.

      The fierce resistance from Africa, which should continue through experienced leaders like President Mugabe, Hosni Mubarak, Mumar Gaddafi (hence his last UN address), Omar al-Bashir, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo and new but progressive thinking ones like Jacob Zuma, Bingu waMutharika and Rupiyah Banda, AFriCom resistance resulted in the drone strikes of Libya and Egypt and nations who resisted this were deemed terrorist supporters and dictators.

      And if you want a vision of Africa under AfriCom tutelage, look no further than Libya, NATO’s model of an African state: condemned to decades of violence and trauma, and utterly incapable of either providing for its people, or contributing to regional or continental independence. The new military colonialism in Africa must not be allowed to advance another inch.

      But the lies and propaganda continues: The US. Claims in several meetings, briefings, and statements, high-level officials have said that AfriCom has three main goals: (1) to counter terrorism on African soil as part of the Global War on Terror, (2) to protect oil resources, recognizing that the US currently purchases approximately 24 percent of its oil from Africa, and (3) to counter China’s growing economic investment on the continent.

      So basically, AfriCom is designed to bring stability to Africa, but only as it serves US interests. It is our belief that AfriCom will actually destabilize the continent in the long-run and will put Africa at risk. For all the talk of it being a new, innovative engagement, AfriCom will simply serve to protect unpopular regimes that are friendly to US interests while Africa slips further into poverty, as was the case during the Cold War.

    • LaNubiana

      @ Rue

      Continued (3)…

      Creating security and stability in Africa is not something that can be accomplished by the U.S. military- by any military- regardless of specialized training and cooperation with experts and good intentions. If the US government truly wants to promote peace, stability, and human development in Africa, it should not do so by a military command but by offering a civilian-driven just security approach.

      Once AFRICOM moves to African soil, Africa is doomed and finished. It will have to religiously follow the American exploitation gospel and the founding fathers of the African revolution will turn and wince in their graves from anger and disappointment.

      I know this is long but hope it gives you our reality without the filtering of Western Media.

  • Anthony

    I wish Obama had handled his business at the debate. If he had, this “boy” crap would never have come up!

    • Rue

      something would have come regardless….

  • No, it didn’t make me cringe but honestly I’ am not surprised. As the saying go tigers and strips