Barbed Laughs

YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney appeared tonight at the Al Smith Dinner and gave the usual humorous speeches.  A few observations:

1.  Romney the Standup Comic-I was surprised at how well Romney did.  Comedy and Mitt Romney would seem to be mutually exclusive concepts, but he had good timing and delivered an effective series of jokes.  Funniest joke:  A reference to the Cardinal, because of Obama’s troubles with the Church, turning Obama’s wine into water.

2.  Flat Obama-Four years ago I praised Obama’s speech at the Al Smith dinner as being hilarious.  Not this year.  Most of his jokes fell flat and he seemed to be going through the motions.  Funniest joke:  He said at one point that for the third debate he was going to train as he did for the first debate.  Pause.  He then said that he was just kidding, that he only wanted to make Axelrod sweat.

3.  These Guys Really Hate Each Other-Both Romney and Obama at the end of their speeches gave unfelt praise to the other.  Their other comments dripped venom for their opponent, especially Romney’s comments.  No love lost here at all.

4.  Romney on the Attack-The usual humor at an Al Smith dinner is self-depracatory.  Romney had a bit of this but most of his humorous comments were fairly hard hitting attacks against Obama.

5.  The War on the Church-Romney was not shy in mentioning Obama’s attacks on the Church.  He joked that Obama has found a way to soften the attitude of the Church to the HHS Mandate:  the rules will be in Latin.

6.  Debates-Lots of debate references by both men, a tribute to how the debates have dominated this campaign.

7.   Contrasts-Romney has 14 years on Obama, yet he seemed fresh and alert tonight while Obama struck me as tired.  The office of the Presidency does age the occupant, that and heading a campaign that is going south.

8.  Dolan-Cardinal Dolan has come under criticism for inviting Obama to the dinner.  He did him no favors.  Romney hit Obama hard in regard to Obama’s attacks against the Church, just as I suspect Dolan was certain would happen.  Just 19 days from the election, I wager that Obama would have avoided the dinner tonight if he could have without sustaining political damage.

9.  THE CHURCH-Lenny Bruce, foul-mouthed comic of genius and pathetic junky, used to say the Catholic Church is what people always mean when they say the Church.  The Al Smith Dinner underlines that observation.

10. America-I think it says something good about this country that in the midst of a heated election the two candidates can sit down, separated only by a Cardinal, and break bread together.

 

 

59 Responses to Barbed Laughs

  • anzlyne says:

    my pick for funniest joke was about O looking around at the dinner guests and thinking — “so little time so much to redistribute”

    my husband liked :”better off than you were 4 weeks ago”
    no I think my favorite was advice to B16 if he has troubles to blame it on JP2

  • Elizabeth says:

    Governor Romney had me laughing out loud through most of his speech. He was REALLY good. Someone wrote him an excellent speech and he delivered it just perfectly. I wonder how Obama felt sitting through all that. I confess that I didn’t watch Obama’s. I really can’t stomach watching/hearing him at all. I’m sure I didn’t miss anything.

  • Great post Don, I particularly liked the Romney line about St. Peter facing an early doubter who kept saying, “You didn’t build that Church.”

    You know in each campaign there are moments that same to have no relevancy to the campaign, but later end up being some sort of indicator. In 2008 in an awkward moment John McCain was labeled as being old because he was fumbling around with his cell phone (which we many of us who are over 40 probably do on a regular basis.) Tonight it seemed President Obama didn’t want to be there (now in his defense I am sure a lot of candidates would rather be out on the trail 19 days before the election. ) However, as Don pointed out it seemed then Senator Obama really enjoyed himself in 2008.

  • PM says:

    ” … Rules of fairness have to be enforced, and what other safeguard do we have besides the press … My job is to lay out a positive vision for the country, and their job is to make sure no one finds out about it. ”

    ” Let’s just say that some in the media have a certain way of looking at things.
    … I’ve already seen early headlines about tonight … Obama embraced by Catholics, Romney dies with rich people. “

  • Don the Kiwi says:

    Watched the speaches on Hannity. I think Romney was better than Barry O’Bummer, even though his jokes were more pointed politically ( may have generated a little sympathy for Barry)
    I score it Romney 7 – “Hussein” 3 :-)

  • “3.  These Guys Really Hate Each Other-Both Romney and Obama at the end of their speeches gave unfelt praise to the other.  Their other comments dripped venom for their opponent, especially Romney’s comments.  No love lost here at all.”

    Maybe that’s good. Romney (unlike McCain in 2008) really wants to win. He is motivated as McCain never was. Obama, needs to face an opponent who won’t back down in front of him. He needs to sweat as does every liberal progressive Democrat.

  • Elaine Krewer says:

    So maybe Cdl. Dolan’s decision to go ahead and invite both candidates to the dinner wasn’t such a bad one after all? Just a couple of months ago there was all kinds of hand wringing and despair on the St. Blogs about how Obama was going to use this event as “proof” that he was “Catholic friendly” and win back the Catholic vote. Sounds to me like Romney was the one who benefited.

  • Anzlyne says:

    It might have been hard for O to be required to party with rich people, Catholics, and a rep of the Hierarchy– He did look angry. he obviously did not think his “joke ” about his middle name was funny. It is ok with me if he uses his middle name. I thought that him even saying that was a bid for sympathy pointing out the anti-multi-cultural bullies.

    he might have liked it better if Cardinal Dolan had not invited him– then he could appear morally superior to the church

  • Robert says:

    I just watched both links above. I though BO was funny. I didn’t see too much anger in his humor… I thought Romney should have kept in the spirit of the 4th point listed above and not been on the attack in this forum. But it wasn’t over the top either. I just would ave felt better if the focus was more off BO for a bit.

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    Romney was definitely more barbed. As for Crdinal Dolan’s invite, I still think he gave Obama the impression that he has nothing to fear from the bishops…and he doesn’t!

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    And until Cardinal Dolan apologizes to the state of Arizona and begs forgiveness for the his libelous attack on SB 1070, he will still be a disgrace and and embarassment.I also believe he owes the same to Catholics in America that he would sully the Church by using his position in such a disgraceful manner.

  • Mary says:

    I watched both speeches. Romney was terrific. On a side note, I don’t see how you can make a statement like this “these guys really hate each other”. Hate is a very strong word and I don’t think it’s something we as Christians should toss around lightly.

  • PM says:

    That Mitt Romney was able to bring up the subject of Fairness, with no interruption, reminds me of David and Goliath story.

    “Obamateurism of the Day
    posted at 8:01 am on October 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

    There is almost nothing worse in politics than the zinger that ends up as backfire. Barack Obama thought he’d scored a big point on Mitt Romney Tuesday night by attacking his wealth, and specifically his investments and pensions:

    Ha ha! That’s great — Obama got to tell Romney that his pension isn’t as big as Romney’s, reminding everyone that Romney’s rich. Unfortunately for Obama, not only did Romney turn out to be right about Obama’s investments in China and the Caymans, for which Obama has hammered Romney for months, Obama has far more lucrative pensions than Romney does (via Carol Platt Liebau):

    As president, he will receive $191,300 annually for life — win or lose in next month’s election — and receives a travel allotment as well as mailing privileges. Should Obama lose, his presidential pension kicks in immediately after leaving office.

    Given that the president enjoys a normal life span, the pension allotment would be worth upwards of $6 million.

    The federal budget spends about $3 million annually for the four living ex-presidents. Obama also will get Secret Service protection.

    In addition, Obama may be due a nice pension for the eight years he served in the Illinois Legislature as a state senator.

    Illinois is infamous for its lavish pension plan for former lawmakers. A Freedom of Information Act request for Obama’s pension amount submitted Wednesday to the General Assembly Retirement System of Illinois was not immediately answered, nor was a call to the Obama campaign.

    But what about Romney? He must be getting some fat-cat pensions based on golden parachutes made out of the skin of workers sacrificed to the gods of Bain and Capitalism, right? Nope. In fact, Romney has no pensions at all, and only has the money he’s saved on his own (worth a considerable amount, of course):

    His Individual Retirement Account could be worth in the neighborhood of $87 million, as documented in an extensive report from the Washington Post.

    But as for a strictly public pension? Zip, zero.

    Romney only served one term as governor of the Bay State and did not take a salary, so he is eligible for nothing.

    So while Romney appears headed for a happier retirement financially, he’ll be footing his own bill — unless, of course, he wins next month. In that case, his nest egg will be even that much bigger than Obama’s.

    You think that a man who runs the most powerful nation on Earth might know something about his own portfolio before trying out that attack. Then again, Obama has rung up four straight trillion-dollar deficits, so clearly fiscal management isn’t one of his strong suits.”

  • I agree with Greg Mockeridge. I thought that Cardinal Dolan should never have given public recognition at a Catholic event to an abortionist and advocate of sodomy. The Cardinal, like most Roman clerics, is too enamored with the false gospel of social justice and the common good. But having Obama at a public forum hear with his own ears the disdain he has inspired in his opponent is something he needs. I am happy that his liberal, sanctimoniously open-minded, tolerate and diversity-supporting nose has been rubbed in that disdain. All liberals need to understand exactly how close-minded, intolerant and divisive they really are. Romney was barbed? Good! I hope some of those barbs went beneath the skin of Barack Hussein Obama and causes him to realize what a wreck he has made of this country both economically and morally, and how he just may fall in defeat on November 6th after all.

  • Donald,

    Maybe you are correct. After all, Cardinal Dolan is a consecrated successor to the Apostles, having received the seal of Holy Orders (is that the right term?). As such, maybe it is the Holy Spirit who has inspired him to invite both candidates to the Al Smith dinner. I never thought inviting Obama to any Catholic function was right, but I am not in Apostolic succession as Cardinal Dolan is. Maybe I should trust that the Holy Spirit knows what He is doing.

  • Dolan probably depended mainly upon his native shrewdness Paul, but perhaps the Holy Spirit gave a nudge or two. I think the night turned out badly for Obama and I think Dolan expected it to. He had met both Romney and Obama on several prior occasions and I think he had the measure of each man.

  • philip says:

    Cardinal Dolan, in my very humble opinion, has out classed, out smarted and allowed humility to trump the arrogance of Chicago city organizer. Much of the public is aware of the violation of 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion in relationship to the HHS mandate, despite the MSM blackouts.
    My hope is that tomorrow’s national rally for freedom of conscience will in some miraculous way help the undecided to vote for protecting our right to support the unborn.
    Cardinal Dolan took the high road, not the easier predictable road of “eye for an eye.”

    I pray it works.

  • Elaine Krewer says:

    “Illinois is infamous for its lavish pension plan for former lawmakers.”

    After the last election, one newly elected Republican lawmaker chose not to enroll in the General Assembly Retirement System — the first legislator that anyone can remember declining the pension. He only got one chance to enroll so his decision will stick. Now there are a growing number of Republican and even a few Democratic candidates for legislative seats promising voters that they won’t take the GARS pension, and it seems to be a popular move with voters. Giving up the GARS pension (which kicks in after only 8 years of service) is probably the easiest, most popular and most relatively painless form of Illinois pension reform out there right now since most legislators have other employment to fall back on. I would not be surprised to see the GARS system closed to further enrollment within the next few years.

  • philip says:

    So Michael Voris would have us to believe that the Master would so no mercy. Better to bring on the persecution huh.
    I can’t buy it.
    The money changers and Dolan hobnobbing together for WHAT gain Darth Vortex?
    I see it now. So he is popular with the Catholic Dems. What next Mike? Having us to believe that Dolan is on the take. I see it now….the jet, the private estate, the scandal of it all.

    Thank God that He, God is our Judge, and not man.

    Please give Dolan the benefit of the doubt, and pray more…slander less.

  • To Paul Z and Donald M,

    What does the reference to minute 16 mean? Sorry. I really don’t know.

    To Jasper and Chris P.,

    I did not agree with Cardinal Dolan’s invitation for Obama to attend the Al Smith dinner. I thought it was like John the Baptist acquiescing to King Herod. But Cardinal Dolan is a successor of the Apostles, having been consecrated as a Bishop in Holy Orders. I do not therefore believe that Obama’s embarrassment and discomfort at the Al Smith dinner occurred without influence of the Holy Spirit on Cardinal Dolan’s decision to invite him (though Donald says that that is more likely attributed to Cardinal Dolan’s own craftiness). Indeed, while I am a big fan of Michael Voris, I think here in this video he comes dangerously close to laying his hands on the Lord’s servant, and even David would not do that to his enemy, King Saul. Of course, that means I have been guilty of the same,

    The other issue Michael Voris raised of all those rich people who fund the Al Smith dinner and are also contributors to pro-abortion, pro-homosexual politicians should be dealt with. but surely there are ways of communicating this to Cardinal Dolan without the kind of criticism we see here in Voris’s video. Again, my own similar sins come to mind.

    All this being said, the best thing that came out of the Al Smith dinner is Obama having to sit in the hot seat and publicly display facial signs of discomfort or anger. His real side is showing more and more this election season and the voters are seeing that. So while I had thought that Cardinal Dolan erred in the invitation, maybe I am the one who is in error. God’s will will be done. I hope that does not involve persecution of the Church as Voris advocated in his video, but Romans chapter 11 comes to mind. Would Voris himself remain true to his bravado in the actual face of such persecution, or would it be Cardinal Dolan who remains true?

  • Paul Zummo says:

    Paul, it’s a reference to “15 minutes of fame.” I believe it was Warhol who suggested that all people are famous for 15 minutes. The implication is that Mr. Voris has reached the zenith of his popularity.

  • Thank you, Paul Z.

    Cardinal Dolan, in having valid Apostolic succession, does not need the 15 minutes of fame as those without such succession apparently crave when they speak with the authority reserved for someone in such valid succession.

    My sins of self-righteous criticism come to mind.

  • Chris Pennington says:

    Paul P,
    I agree with much of your post, especially this:

    I am a big fan of Michael Voris, I think here in this video he comes dangerously close to laying his hands on the Lord’s servant

    All I can say is this, I spent 45 minutes in Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, then brought my young daughter with me for 5-10 minutes (about as much as she will behave) to spend with our Lord. As I reflect on this my time spent in Adoration, as her father I cannot imagine doing anything that would give the possibility of scandal to her.

    This whole affair just doesn’t sit right with me.

    Also, regarding John the Baptist and King Herrod, I was implying he did not acquiesce; He did not dialogue, he condemed Herrod.

  • philip says:

    I too have enjoyed the vortex, and I have been hard on Mike in this post. I lived near Milwaukee when Bishop Dolan, appointed by JP II, flew in to a post Wakeland Catholicism.
    I met Dolan at Holy Hill at an ordination mass on July 16th for a Carmelite deacon. To many, Bishop Dolan was and is the warm Spring breeze during a very long and cold winter.
    I’m biased, yes.
    I feel that Mike was unfair with his assault on our Cardinal.
    Please accept my apology for my harsh rebuttal to Mikes video.

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    While I have my share of problems with Voris, his video on this is pretty measured compared to other things he has said on other subjects. I don’t think it was a good idea that Dolan invited Obama. I think Mr. McClarey’s wishful thinking about the leadership of our bishops vis-a-vis the HHS mandate is in overdrive. I don’t see the shwredness in this decision at all. Obama didn’t come away from this looking any worse. In fact, he may have looked a little better. After the two debates he cames away looking like the thinskinned Messiah complexed ideologue that he is. His presentation at the dinner made him look like someone who could at least have a sense of self-deprecating humor. Whereas it was Romney looked like more of the attack dog at the dinner. Of course, I don’t have a problem with that. But Obama looked no worse for the wear.

    But I think reasonable people can disagree as to whether or not it was a good idea. Even though I have a very low opinion of Cardinal Dolan for the very serious reasons I state in a previous post on this thread, I think some of the King Herod comparisons regarding the invite were over the top. I just think he just reaffirmed in Obama’s mind that he has nothing to fear from the Catholic bishops in this country. Voris does raise a valid point about how he is going to deal with the self-professed legally married to her lesbian lover who is likely to be the next mayor (at least according to Voris I haven’t followed NYC politics close enough to know of her electoral chances). I’m not quite I embrace Voris’ view on that, but, like I said, it’s a valid point.

  • philip says:

    Greg.
    ..nothing to fear from the Catholic bishops…

    Let Obama think that. I hope he does. It should be the sheep that Obama fears.
    We will see if the Sheppards united effort this past year will be fruitful. I read that 52% eligible Catholics voted for Obama in 08.

    With the help of our Bishops this could be 20% or less come the 6th. Okay….I can dream.

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    Letting a bully think the object of bullying is weak will only increase the bullying. Tell me how do you figure any shift in the Catholic vote will be due to the efforts of the USCCB?

    I would suspect that if a Republican president had tried something like this HHS madate, the invective from the bishops would be signiifcantly more fierce than it has been toward Obama. The same USCCB joined forces with the Obama Admistration against AZ’s SB 1070, a just law that is clearly consistent with Catholic morality, in thier Amicus brief to the Supreme Court. They had the nerve to (get this) say it was aviolation of religious liberty. Did the USCCB file an Amicus against Obamacare when it went up to the Supreme Court, even though it had funding for abortion? Nooooo!!!

    As I point out in an above post, Cardinal himself launched what I believe is clearly a libelous attack against SB 1070 http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?d=36322.

    Look up the text of SB 1070 and explain to me how an honest reading of the law warrants anything that remotely justifies Cardinal Dolan’s equating it the the KKK.

    Cardinal Dolan never dared levelling anything near that kind of invective at Obama.
    What kind of moral cerdibility does a Prince of the Church have when he engages in such behavior? Quite frankly, how anyone who calls himself an orthodox Catholic can read what Cardinal Dolan said about SB 1070 and not be outrage is itself an outrage.

  • ” I don’t see the shwredness in this decision at all. Obama didn’t come away from this looking any worse. In fact, he may have looked a little better.”

    That is a funnier comment than anything Obama said at the Al Smith Dinner Greg. I defy anyone to compare and contrast Obama and Romney at the Dinner and think that Obama came off looking the better for it. You have an axe to grind against Dolan because he does not share your support for the Arizona law and it colors your perception of what I think was a clear defeat for the South Side Messiah.

    http://www.seraphicpress.com/romney-roasts-obama-at-al-smith-dinner/

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/19/al_smith_dinner_humanizes_romney

    http://therionorteline.com/2012/10/19/skewered-one-sympathizes/

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/10/report-democrats-flock-to-meet-romney-at-alfred-e-smith-dinner-in-nyc-video/

    http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=37771

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    Donald I have “an axe to grind” against Dolan BECUASE HE SLANDERED THAT LAW, NOT MERELY BECAUSE HE OPPOSED IT!!!!!AND YOU KNOW IT!!!!!! I have provided clear divdence of it. It is a serious scandal!!! THis is something all poeple of goodwill, especially Catholics, ought to be outraged about, whether they agree with the law or not. Llike I said, the fact that anyone who calls himself an orthodox Cathoilic and not be outraged by Dolan’s conduct is itslef an outrage. Donald, tell me how an honest reading of the Arizona Law (you can find it online, it’s only 15 or 16 pages) justifies Dolan’s equating it with the what KKK did in the South.

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    Okay, chilled. But Dolan was not just wrong, but scandalously so. You do not find it to be a serious problem when the most influential bishop, with a huge reputation for orthodoxy, engages in the same kind of calumnious race baiting Obama and the rest of the left does?

    As far as the Al Smith Dinner goes, I think it was a bad idea on Dolan’s part yes. But I also pointed out that reasonable can disagree. I thought Romney looked a little oetty in his obvious attack mode, although I liked the digs and Obama looked less like the thinnedskinned ideologue he really is. I even said I thought, despite my utter contempt for Cdl. Dolan, I thought the Herod comparisons were over the top.

    Donald, for bishops moral credibility is everything, particularly now. You may not want to come to terms with this, but the bishops don’t have any, all the fawning notwithstanding. They are a big reason why Obama thought he could get away with the this HHS Mandate. And they have supported policies that enabled this. And until they acknowledge their responsibility in helping cause this, all their posturing will amount to nothing bu a dog and pony show.

    Chill enough for you?

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    P.S. Donald I used caps in the previous post, to make my indignation over your mischaracterization of my problem with Dolan as being merely his not sharing my view on the AZ when you know that was not the case. A retraction on your part is in order I think.

  • I personally think Greg that bishops should rarely speak out on any political issue, with the exceptions being where there is a clear violation of Catholic teaching of the magnitude of abortion. In regard to immigration my preference would be for the bishops not to take any side at all on the issue, since it doesn’t rise to the level of abortion, and reasonable people can disagree, as opposed to abortion. I have actually been quite heartened by the reaction of the bishops to the HHS Mandate led by Cardinal Dolan. Dolan’s benediction at the Democrat convention was of a piece with inviting Obama to the AL Smith Dinner. I believe he is playing a very clever game in regard to Obama, and I think it will show when one of the factors leading to Obama being defeated is his losing the Catholic vote decisively in the swing states.

  • philip says:

    Greg-
    Letting a bully…

    Read the accounts of St. Maximilian Kolbe, and the conversions that followed. St. Steven. Gondi. Countless heroic acts of Faith in the face of bullies have brought about deep and lasting change. It has a soul piercing effect that moves mountains and this is why I believe it works, even in this case with the naked emperor.

    As I mentioned before, my HOPE and prayer is that a miracle takes place. Today the third stand up rally takes to our public streets. The third this year. More priests are openly speaking from the ambo to Catholics everywhere of the fight that the administration brought to us. We did not pick the fight, however we will not walk away from it. This message from our Bishops has permeated to local churches, and my prayer and hope is for a miraculous catch. Say 32% swing.
    Let down your nets for a catch.

    I’m trusting, hoping, praying and physically on the street to bring attention that this current emperor is naked. That we Shall Never submit to Laws that trample our consciences regarding the protection of the unborn
    If Christ is with us who can be against us? The bully is toast.

  • Greg Mockeridge says:

    Well, Donald, that you have no problem with mischaracterizing the positions of another, and allowing it to stand,s speaks a very unflattering truth about you. But that’s my problem it’s yours.

  • Donna V. says:

    I also disagree with Dolan on the Arizona law. However, I am startled by people who seem to expect that Dolan should refuse to have anything to do with the President of the United States, and the leading NY pols. I’ve always enjoyed my visits to NYC. However, it’s a deep blue, very liberal city with a very high abortion rate and its’ elected officals reflect that. So…what is the Cardinal supposed to do? Hole up in St. Patrick’s Cathedral, shunning all the terrible sinners out there? Or does he go break bread with the sinners and engage with the world? The Cardinal of NY, the most high profile Catholic in the nation, cannot be a monk, turning his back on the sinful world. He has to go out there and engage people, powerful, worldy people, including those who hate the Church and all that it stands for.

    Believe me, secular leftists would like nothing more than for Dolan to do what purer-than-pure Catholics seem to want him to do – disengage from politics and refuse to meet with or entertain politicans who are less than pure (by definition, that’s just about every pol out there).

  • While I disagree with Cardinal Dolan’s position on illegal immigration, he is NOT the enemy. We should remember that Satan is the enemy and the Democratic Party operatives his foot-soldiers. Yes, the words Cardinal Dolan used in criticizing the politicians in Arizona who enacted the immigration reform laws that he does not like were harsh, but certainly no harsher than words which I have used to criticize Democratic Party operatives among the clergy. There is a world of difference between Cardinal Dolan who clearly has his heart in the right place, and Bishop Hubbard of the Diocese of Albany who authorized the distribution of needles to heroin addicts in his city, and who gave Holy Communion to pro-abortion, pro-sodomy Andy Cuomo and his live-in mistress Sandra Dee at the Gubernatorial Inaugural Mass, praising Cuomo for ushering in a new age of the gospel of social justice in NY State. Ezekiel 34:1-10 clearly applies in the case of the latter, whereas in Cardinal Dolan’s case, what we should do is write him letters, explaining with reason and dispassionate analysis why his position on illegal immigration is wrong. I get the impression that unlike clerics such as Bishop Hubbard, Cardinal Dolan is amenable to logic and not beholden to partisan politics. True, he has a streak of social justice in him, but I attribute that to the indoctrination which most Catholic clerics received in Seminary in the post-Vatican II environment. And no, there is nothing wrong with Vatican II per se, but rather its interpretation and implementation in liberal Western societies, but that is a topic for a different discussion.

    Suffice it to say that I can disagree with Cardinal Dolan on issues like illegal immigration, but I do think he is a hero when it comes to making Obama feel the discomfort of the influence of the Holy Spirit convicting his soul. I think that has something to do with why Obama launches into Planned Parenthod advertisements right after the Al Smith dinner. He doesn’t like a prince of the Church putting him on the hot seat, so he ups the support for what the Church opposes as though to say, to use a Battlestar Galatica term, “Frack all you Catholics.” I say praise the Lord for Cardinal Dolan (but I still will oppose all that social justice nonsense tooth and nail).

  • Chris Pennington says:

    I think some of the King Herod comparisons regarding the invite were over the top.

    In hindsight I shouldn’t have said that. My passions get the best of me quiet often. I think the best thing to say is I think it was a bad decision to invite Obama and leave it at that. Bad analogy, I apologize.

  • Jane says:

    The comments have been an interesting conversation.

    I watched both videos more than once–this was a national broadcast that matters alot, I think! I watched it from my home in South Puget Sound, WA state, which assuredly will go to Obama thanks to the People’s Republic of Seattle. I loved loved LOVED Romney’s remarks; he may have benefited from a low bar–he is not known for being a great wit. I loved the attacks on Obama, thought they were all wickedly funny; Obama had some funny lines too, but he was not warm and graceful like Romney. Maybe he is dealing with his upcoming election loss, but he has also oft been described as having a “cool” temperament and maybe this has served him poorly. He might have been a better president had he been lampooned this effectively more often in public and the MSM. Finally, I have thought for a while that he has crummy speechwriters; who remembers anything great from his speeches? I sure don’t; what he will be remembered for is that silly line about the oceans rising, etc at the time of his nomination, and his gaffes.

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .