Some Quick Post Debate Thoughts

Wednesday, October 17, AD 2012

President Obama’s performance in the first debate was, unarguably, pretty lethargic, and he took a big hit in the polls shortly afterward. The general wisdom drawn from this, especially on the democratic side of the aisle, seemed to be that what was really needed in the debates was, thus, more aggression. Biden delivered this in his own unique way in the Veep debate, to such an extent that one wondered at times whether he would have to be removed from the stage in a straight jacket, still alternating between wild cackling and angry shouting, but at last he ran out of gas and calmed down in the last 20 minutes. Obama has a sense of personal dignity that Biden lacks, and so although he certainly came to the debate in a pugilistic frame of mind, he didn’t make himself silly in the way that Biden did. Nonetheless, despite the fact that the debate was supposed to feature the candidates answering questions directly from voters, it instead was most notable for intense bouts of the candidates rhetorically hammering each other.

The common wisdom is that this kind of thing turns undecided voters off. I saw some anecdotal evidence of this in the reactions of my less partisan friends on Facebook, one of whom posted in indignation:

Dear Gov Romney and Pres Obama,
Every time you keep talking when you are reminded that a normal citizen has a question for you, you reinforce that you think what you have to say is more important than the concerns of the people of your country. You both lost my vote tonight.

This aside, though, I think the focus on rhetorical dominance and aggression has probably been misplaced. Was it really that Obama’s performance in the first debate was so sluggish that cost him so much in the polls? I don’t think most Americans care whether the president is a skilled debater or not.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to Some Quick Post Debate Thoughts

  • Quite frsankly, I don’t think any of the questions, in and of themselves, were all that substantive.

  • I agree, I think most of them were pretty low quality. But then, I’m not an undecided voter, and I spend a fair amount of my time keeping up with politics.

  • My favorite question:

    QUESTION: Hi, Governor. I think this is a tough question. To each of you. What do you believe is the biggest misperception that the American people have about you as a man and a candidate? Using specific examples, can you take this opportunity to debunk that misperception and set us straight?

    This was, needless to say, not actually a tough question.

  • The questions were pretty weak and touchy feely, as is usually the case. The fact it was held in one of the bluest States in the Union (as opposed to a swing state) meant the questions were even less representative/relevant.

  • Why Dale, it almost sounds like you suspect that some of the people asking questions may not have been as undecided as they’d let on.

    You don’t say?

  • “Former Media Coordinator of CodePink Long Island Was One of the ‘Undecided’ Questioners”

    No doubt she was undecided in whether to cast her vote for Stalin or Lenin as write-ins.

  • Paul:

    Not so much that–btw, check the PW comments with links to Volokh–it’s not likely the same person.

    The questions, on the other hand, definitely skewed to the left. Honest to Colt–an assault weapons question? I guess asking a question about the Equal Rights Amendment was too much of a giveaway.

    NY’s heavily-Democratic electorate is hardly representative of the nation as a whole, which is more closely divided. Why not Ohio? Virginia?

  • NY’s heavily-Democratic electorate is hardly representative of the nation as a whole, which is more closely divided. Why not Ohio? Virginia?

    Why not hold it in Syracuse as opposed to Long Island? Upstate’s near a fifty-fifty split in federal elections and the hall would have been cheaper.

    The internal operations of this “Commission on Presidential Debates” are quite opaque. How do they come up with these moderators?

  • AD says The internal operations of this “Commission on Presidential Debates” are quite opaque.

    They seem crystal clear to me. The Commission is a division of the DNC and acts in a partisan manner.

  • This whole “more aggressive debater wins” paradigm just doesn’t sit well with me, regardless of who is doing it. I do like a speaker with passion, but it has to be passion about what he is saying because he believes in it. That, and being, you know, actually correct about stuff helps.

  • …you reinforce that you think what you have to say is more important than the concerns of the people of your country. You both lost my vote tonight. (Anon. Facebooker)

    The fact that Mr./Mrs. Oversensitive is disenfranchising him/herself is encouraging to me. It means Obama probably lost a vote.

Candy Crowley Grudgingly Admits That Romney Was Right

Wednesday, October 17, AD 2012

Last night I lambasted Candy Crowley for this:

“3.  Crowley Hearts Obama-Candy Crowley attempted to come to the rescue of the President in misstating that Obama blamed the Benghazi attack on terrorism in his rose garden statement.  That is incorrect.  The operative phrase in Obama’s statement:   Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.  We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.  But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.  None.  The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.  Crowley’s intervention indicated that she was not a moderator but rather an Obama partisan.”

Continue reading...

11 Responses to Candy Crowley Grudgingly Admits That Romney Was Right

  • Did you or anyone you read thus far, raise a question that Mr Romney raised about himself. When he said no Government or employer should tell women whether or not to take contraceptives. Did he duck the core First Amendment question abut the HHS mandate, or, as some suggest, reversed himself on contraception OR was that ever his view, that it should not be included in insurance. That would be very important to his backers.

  • “When he said no Government or employer should tell women whether or not to take contraceptives.”

    Romney was refuting the lie of the Democrats that anyone in this election is seeking to ban contraceptives for women. Having employers pay for “free” contraceptive coverage is not popular, so Democrats make up a strawman that not paying for “free” contraceptive coverage equals attempting to ban contraceptives.

  • A sour tart comes clean.
    It’s frightening how many worship at the alter of Bahl..opps obama.

  • This “debate” certainly confirmed my opinion that there would be collusion between the “moderators” and Obama. Lehrer and Raddatz were certainly favoring Obama and Biden in a less “in your face” way but it wasn’t helping them enough. Hence Candy Crowley.

  • With help like Candy Crowley’s Obama does not need those who are trying to hinder him. Her lifeline to Obama is featured in most debate stories today, as is the fact that she was wrong on substance. In attempting to shield Obama the Mainstream Media often does him little good, as demonstrated by this example.

  • Crowley kept the story alive by her ignorant intervention. It’s not about winning a point in the limited scope of a TV “debate”; it’s really about forcing the media to cover the story. Again. Though Nobama is their Dear Leader the lame-streamers hate looking to PRAVDA like on big stories.

  • Just because Obama is a “hard sell” at this point doesn’t mean that the co-opting of the Media is of no value to Dems or leftists (if there is a distinction now). An economy that would leave a Repub President at 40% or less has Obama at 45-47%. A 5% consistent advantage is a big deal and should be countered. I can only hope that the Repubs and conservatives don’t make the mistake of thinking a single election means the problem is gone.

  • Candy Crowley should be fired…..she showed your liberal bi-ass…..she tried to debate Romney too….Ms. Crowley are a disgrace to fair journalism….find another job! Of course I know CNN won’t do a thing..same old thing. America is truly on the down side thanks to socialist politicians and media….shame…shame on you….

  • I think everyone is focusing on one possible error of someone who may or may not support Obama in order to avoid the many mistakes made by Romney. The governor repeatedly interrupted Crowley and failed to actually answer many of the questions. He skirted around any inquiries that he either didn’t know the answer to or knew that viewers would not like his answers to.

  • Actually K.W. Crowley interrupted Romney 29 times and Obama only nine. She also gave Obama 9% more time to speak. Add this to her attempted Libya save of Obama and all she needed were pom poms and a Hope and Change T-Shirt to complete her role of Obama cheer leader in that debate.

  • What amazes me is Obama has been given more time, more assistance from moderators, and is still being coddled by the press and he still has to lie just to ever break even. Intellect is a funny thing. (especially if it is pseudo). You just can’t fake it. And that is what he has been trying to do for the last four years. Candy Crowley should be reprimanded, if not fired for trying to fix a debate. Don’t even get me started on Martha Radditz. She let bipolar, Biden, (What? What did you think the first two letters stood for?) interrupt Ryan 82 times. How is that being a good moderator. Biden is an idiot as well. Did you hear his most recent speech? He thinks we are at war with Iran.

I Was Watching a Townhall and a Fight Broke Out

Tuesday, October 16, AD 2012

 

 

 

Predictably Obama was very aggressive tonight.  Less predictably perhaps, Romney was just as aggressive.  Here are some thoughts:

1.  Wired Obama-Obama came loaded with talking points and spoke rapidly throughout the debate to get them all out.

2.  Face Time-Classic political theater with Obama and Romney having a few face to face clashes during the debate.

3.  Crowley Hearts Obama-Candy Crowley attempted to come to the rescue of the President in misstating that Obama blamed the Benghazi attack on terrorism in his rose garden statement.  That is incorrect.  The operative phrase in Obama’s statement:   Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.  We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.  But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.  None.  The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.  Crowley’s intervention indicated that she was not a moderator but rather an Obama partisan.

4.  Romney the Good-Romney gave another good debate performance and I expect he will do just as well in the third debate.  If Obama is hoping for Romney to stumble or commit a gaffe, I think he will wait in vain.

5.  Boxing match-Although the back and forth got a bit tiresome to me after a while, I did like the way in which both candidates talked directly at each other.  Romney did make the mistake of asking too many questions of Obama, as if he were going to get any forthright answers.

Continue reading...

12 Responses to I Was Watching a Townhall and a Fight Broke Out

  • I do think Obama was pretty slick in getting in the 47% dig in his closing remarks without Romney being able to respond.

  • I just want to point out that the big question is not really how soon (or not) Obama put the label “act of terror” on Libya– to me the really big point is about his LACK of ACTION. he might have (or not) said the right things. He is a talker after all. But he should have immediately taken some kind of action in our defense; not even beginning investigating for how long!

  • “I just want to point out that the big question is not really how soon (or not) Obama put the label “act of terror” on Libya– to me the really big point is about his LACK of ACTION. he might have (or not) said the right things. He is a talker after all. But he should have immediately taken some kind of action in our defense; not even beginning investigating for how long!”

    Romney gonna have a golden opportunity to fact check exactly what Obama said and rub his nose in it during Monday’s debate because Monday’s debate is entirely on foreign policy and national security.

  • 1. #3. paved the way and helped her favorite consistently. No F & F n’ stuff needed.
    Bet he got a handle on his four year term in the resort where he was trained for days for ‘townhall’ – in all but sincerity.

    3. Unprofessional. Broke rules. Not a moderator. Can just hear the screams if the shoe were on the other foot. The rule book would be on the table with condemnations forever.

    6. Mitt Romney striving for clarity and fairness, but incumbent wasn’t as usual.

    4. Very strong man to be able to withstand the cheating.

    7. Obama’s free pass from the media spoiled him – resents being questioned while he can continually point at and blame what is diverse from him. Playground bully, backroom thug.

    10. Too bad these debates are reported like sports scores. People see behavior and character, which hopefully helps them sort through truth and lies.

  • To me it was all about tone. Obama sounds angry, petulant. Romney exudes calmness, stability — what you want in a crisis. These debates demonstrate why I’ve supported Romney since the primaries. He’s going to win.

  • Watched the debate. Despite some sayind Obama won, i can’t agree. In my high school years I was on our class debate team. In my 20’s i was the leader of our debatng team in Jaycees. The key to winning a debate, is making your point strongly and believably – even if it is wrong – and being able to effectively counter any rebuttal to your argument. Romney was head and shoulders above Obama again tonite, although Obama came out fighting – unlike last time, and gave a much better performance. But he focussed on trying to tell everyone what Romney was “:really” saying – he had no positives for his own vision for America – because his record in four years is dog poo.
    I won’t say that Romney has gained further momentum from this, but has certainly held up his gains from last debate. Next week, I think that he will be able to close the gate on O’Bumbler when the porkies that O’Bumbler came out with will be confirmed by the media at large – not just Sean Hannity 🙂
    I’m beginning to agree with your assessment Don – that Romney will win in a lesson to the Dems. We have been having a debate here on our local Catholic blog about the US elections – and some are saying “so what?”
    Thepoint is, that what happens in the US has a major influence in the rest of the world – in particluar the western Anglo-Saxon- Celtic world, because we hold a common heritage and mindset different to the rest of world cultures, and the US, whether people like it or not, is the leader in this culture.
    I do really hope that Romney kicks O’Bumbler’s arse (ass in ‘mericaspeak) 🙂

  • Pingback: Candy Crowley Grudgingly Admits That Romney Was Right | The American Catholic
  • As long as Obama is defeat, that is all that matters. I am glad Romnry acquitted himself well again. I see many main stream news outlets saying Obama won, but they are liberal and that is to be expected.

  • I was walking Buddy (try to be the person your dog thinks you are) and snoring.

    Couldn’t bring myself to watch the Yanks roll over, either.

    Glenn Beck (on Imus) said, “Romney kindly emasculated Obama.” heh

    Old Chinese adage, “A liar is not believed even when he tells the truth.” Obama and his imbecilic worshipers have divorced themselves from facts and truth.

    Re: energy: Mitt missed his opportunity to ask why gas prices are so high during slow driving season, and for Obama’s advice to Americans choosing between buying gas to get to their jobs or eating.

    Benghazzi. . . 100+ recent violent episodes . . . repeated requests for security upgrades . . . spontaneous protest . . . 200 gomers armed with AK’s and RPG’s . . . for five days it was caused by an obscure YouTube video . . . video producer still in jail . . .

  • “video producer still in jail” . . . thanks for that info.

  • The amazing thing is how little discussion is being had in these debates and in the election in general about Obamacare. One would think that the signal achievement of Obama’s first term – the one that our esteemed Vice President called a “big f’n deal” would be trumpeted a bit more by President Obama. Curious.

  • Re: Obamacare and its invisibility

    The Left simply goes “underground” when there is public opposition to anything they are doing. They let the bureaucracy and activist judges carry the ball forward. The same thing is going on with the EPA etc. The Repubs have a candidate who doesn’t want to mention Obamacare that much either.

Debate Advice-Round Two

Tuesday, October 16, AD 2012

 

 

 

I posted debate advice for Mitt Romney prior to the first debate which may be read here.  My advice for round two is as follows:

1.  Don’t Get Cocky-You had an exceptionally good first debate.  Enjoy it and forget it.  That was round one of a three round fight, and who is left standing at the end of the third round is how you determine the victor.

2.  Don’t Sit on a Lead-  That is what Obama tried to do in round one and it was a disaster.  Don’t make that elementary mistake.

3.  This is a Townhall Meeting-We have Joe and Jane Citizens asking the questions and that is a challenge.  The media is predictable, ordinary citizens are not.  Listen closely to the questions and answer them. Ignoring questions at a townhall can be ruinous, especially if they are inane.

4.  Aggressive Obama-After his fairly passive performance at the last debate, Obama will probably come out full of fight.  That can work to your advantage at a townhall if Obama comes across as over the top before a live audience.  After the Biden debacle I think he will probably avoid this, but don’t be surprised if he has flashes of temper and be ready to capitalize on them.

5.  Jobs, Jobs, Jobs-You can bet that almost every person in that townhall will have a friend or relative who is either unemployed or underemployed.  Pledge to turn the economy around and put America be back to work.  Be detailed as much as time allows.  People were impressed the first go round at your breadth of knowledge and your ideas.  Play off of those strengths.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Debate Advice-Round Two

When Fake Messiahs Bleed

Monday, October 15, AD 2012

 

There is a great scene in Kipling’s story The Man Who Would Be King.  Two British adventurers take over  a fictional kingdom, with one of them pretending to be a god.  The whole exploit goes pear-shaped when the “god” attempts to marry a local girl.  She belts him and he begins to bleed.  The local pagan priests seeing this yell out, “Neither God nor Devil but a man!” and things head badly south for the two  conmen.

 

Something similar has happend to the erstwhile South side Messiah since his first debate with Romney.  Byron York interviewed a young woman who, I think, speaks now for many in her generation:

 

Danielle Low, a 22 year-old preschool teacher in Lebanon, is the quintessential Romney target voter.  In 2008, she was newly eligible to vote, and she chose Barack Obama. “But then I gave birth to my first son, and I knew we needed a change,” Low said. “We bought a house in ’09 and we’re struggling every day, my husband and I are.  I just want to see things turn around.  I want to be able to afford to have another child.  I want to be able to afford to buy a house where we want to live, and right now, with the economy the way it is, we can’t do that.”

“I think President Obama tricked me into voting for him,” Low continued in an impromptu discussion that could have doubled as a Romney ad.  “I feel like he lied to me.  He made promises he couldn’t keep.  He played on my young emotions.  He played on me because I was young and naïve.  I didn’t know anything about the world.  I believed that he was going to give us a change.  I just feel like he made a lot of promises — there’s no way he followed through with them.  I haven’t seen any change.  I’ve seen change for the worse, not change for the better.  So I hope Mitt Romney can carry us through the next four years.”

Continue reading...

4 Responses to When Fake Messiahs Bleed

  • Donald. Where in the world wide Web???
    You haul in some great materials, and this clip is priceless. Well done.
    Let’s pray Danielle and our clip star are just two of millions of kool-aid drinkers that have shaken off the “bad buzz” and become sober once more.
    Thanks again.

  • Thank you Philip. It is amazing what can be found with some digging.

  • I enjoy you and the all of the other “Fulton Sheen” presenters on your site.
    I live my faith however the lack of formal education shines into my response…so please be patient. My brothers laugh while saying big heart, small brain. It’s okay. I recall a pearl; “knowledge puffith up-while love buildith up.”
    The exception is the majority of your contributors, yourself included.
    Thank you for your research.

  • I’ve recently realized my “Emperor’s New Clothes” analogy regarding Obama was completely erroneous.

    The “New Clothes” are there, but they are are empty. The emperor is grossly deficient.

    Many of us saw it in 2008.

    “Youth is wasted on the young.” I think Yogi Berra.

One Response to Biden Contra Biden

  • Ludicrous Liberals Moments: A bunch of loons are a-twitter promising to emigrate if Obama doesn’t get four more years to finish us off. Most are looking to fiscally conservative Canada, not bankrupt, socialist Greece or Spain.

    Ergo, Regardless of the election outcome, I too am contemplating the northern escape. The USA likely is in terminal, fiscal condition.

    Note to Liberals: “You will not be missed.”

Socialism: The Poor Get Poorer

Saturday, October 13, AD 2012

 

Thomas Peterffy came to this country as a penniless refugee from Communist Hungary.  He could not speak English when he got here.  Currently he is worth five billion dollars.  It is obvious that almost all of the immigrants to this country have not succeeded materially in the outstanding fashion that  Peterffy has, but it is also safe to say that almost all have greatly bettered themselves materially, while enjoying freedom, the birthright of all Americans.  He is not the first refugee from Communism I have read about who has pointed to unsettling parallels between what he experienced in the nation that he fled from and what has been going on in this nation for the past few years.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Socialism: The Poor Get Poorer

  • Sadly, if it is noteworthy for someone to run an ad on what happens under autocratic socialism, then something is very wrong. These ads cannot overcome the historical rewrites and coverups that occur daily in schools, colleges, Hollywood and the media. Ironically the demise of the Soviet bloc has made it much easier to peddle various watered down versions of its political and economic philosophy.

  • Truth always wins out in the end Rozin, and the new media helps speed up that process.

  • I have just finished reading Ed Klein’s book, The Amateur It’s very revealing how far left Obama has attempted to take the US with his style of what I could only call “moderate communism” – certainly very left-end socialism. I really wonder if the large portion of the US people who support Obama really understand that. Ed has some very pertinent strategies that the Republicans need to take to defeat Obama . I hope – and I’m sure they are – taking this advice, and all other relevant advice they can to get the US back on the right track.

  • The sad thing Don is that I do not regard Obama as exceptional. He is extremely representative of a Democrat party that has shifted far to the left. The silver lining is that I believe the Democrats are going to get an electoral beating on election day that they and the country will long remember.

  • “The silver lining is that I believe the Democrats are going to get an electoral beating on election day that they and the country will long remember.”

    How I hope and pray that comes to pass, which it should. Thing is will the GOP continue to act like losers after they win?

  • GM said “Thing is, will the GOP continue to act like losers after they win?”

    This is viewing it in the wrong frame of reference. The question is whether they will continue to act as Republicrats because they don’t see anything hugely wrong with the Washington culture as run by the Democrats and their allies. (cf Rasmussen and his polls on the political class) The answer to your question is probably Yes. This is how Boehner has mostly acted, as we saw with the budget shell game he played in 2011. It’s also necessary to remember that the Dems will have more than 40 Senators so they can filibuster most things. Unless the Repubs sell conservatism and Constitutionalism to the public more forcefully, they will be fighting defensively the whole time even if they have the WH and Congress. The next Dem President will pick up right where Obama left off.

  • This is a bit old hat, but in the 1976 election in NZ, the Labour govt. was in power, and looked good to take the election again. The National party under Rob Muldoon (who, even though I voted for him, was a nasty little man) gave this advert. which swung the electorate massively, so that he had a landslide victory.
    Of course, with the USSR gone, the impact would not be the same today.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbevFgfuT6NE

  • Got the link wrong -( you need an Edit function 🙂

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbevFguT6NE

  • How I hope and pray that comes to pass, which it should. Thing is will the GOP continue to act like losers after they win?

    1. They have to win control of the Senate.
    2. The filibuster rule must be abrogated.
    3. They have to have a vigorous and crafted program, not a set of brochure bullet points or a set of incremental adjustments.

    Not holdin’ my breath.

With Apologies to Mr. Lincoln

Friday, October 12, AD 2012

Smitty at The Other McCain has a brilliant riff on The Gettysburg Address in regard to the debate last night:

Four score and five interruptions ago our zany uncle brought forth on this continent a new indignation, conceived in contempt for liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created to serve the state.

Now we are engaged in a soft civil war, testing whether that indignation, or any indignation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great debate-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a blog post for he who here gave 90 minutes of his life that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should blog this.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to With Apologies to Mr. Lincoln

  • b obama claims he was too nice and that’s why he didn’t do well– so Joe was going to try a different tack– not too nice. Dust in the air. Confusion. Not giving his opponent his fair turn. Cause a commotion and diversion so he could steal the show.
    I heard people at work today say they think Biden won or that it was at least a draw. I don’t think so, if they look it over again they’ll see what they missed in all the hubbub

    I really liked the things Ryan said in a quiet way…. as people review the debate and watch it again Ryan looks better and better. One of the best quiet things he said was. ” Was there a litmus test?”

  • Pingback: Four Score And Five Interruptions Ago. . . : The Other McCain
  • Biden’s behavior reminds me of 1/2 of a pick-pocket team. Rush the guy, rough him up just a bit, make a distraction so the pocket can be picked by your team mate– their goal being to rob R and R of their momentum.

  • Rallies against the HHS mandate will take place in more than 140 cities across the nation tomorrow, Saturday, October 20.

    Rally locations:
    http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/locations/

    Let’s make our voices heard!

9 Responses to Bishops: Biden Lied

18 Responses to Laugh Clown, Laugh!

  • What’s even swifter is you beat me to posting this by minutes.

  • This is a truly devastating ad in regard to having Biden anywhere near being President.

  • Thought of ‘Prudential judgement’ being exemplified by Paul Ryan’s restraint, during the de-bait with VP Silly Joker and his immoderator.

  • I’ve seen this making the rounds tonight:

    “If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet.”
    ~Proverbs 29:9
    (English Standard Version)

  • Not every Catholic supports Romney/Ryan. The Vice-President wasn’t a clown and if you’re examples of what Christ means to love our fellow man, then you might want to at least learn tolerance.

  • “The Vice-President wasn’t a clown”

    No, Barbara, he was more in laughing hyena mode last night. Loving our fellow man certainly does not include embracing abortion on demand as Biden does. If you think that is tolerance, you are welcome to it.

  • Tolerance to liberals is legitimizing the infanticide of the unborn as the right to choose and sanctifying the filth of homosexual sodomy as marriage, both in open defiance and disobedience to God Almighty. Tolerance to a liberal is equivocating the theft of the tax payers’ money as help for the poor. Tolerance for a liberal is what Judas Iscariot said when Jesus was anointed with costly oil, “This could have been sold and the money used to help the poor.” As Sacred Scripture says, he didn’t make that statement because he cared for the poor, but because he carried the money purse and would steal from its contents, and that’s exactly the kind of men both Biden and Obama are. The Vice President is as Catholic as Jezebel at the Church of Thyatira in Revelation 2:20-23.

  • Barbara,

    There you go again . . .

    What debate were you watching?

    To which Gospel do you refer?

    I’ve read them all a number of times each and I saw nothing that teaches it’s okay to vote for abortion, class hatred, infanticide, organized brigandage, etc. St. John writes that Judas was not outraged at the expensive perfume anointing Jesus because the money could have been spent on the poor. He didn’t care about the poor. Judas was a thief just like democrats who only care about political power not about the poor.

  • If Obama is the “empty chair”, Biden is the “whoopie cushion.”

  • Funny comments all.
    Biden looks like a snake.
    A Snake Oil salesmen might fit better.
    The Ad is perfect. (….are you?) What a great tag.
    Bye bye funny guy. Ryan is in.

  • Throughout the whole debate, all I could think was, “What’s so damn funny?” Uncle Joe was the only one laughing last night. No wonder the administration is in such a mess, there is nothing but clowns running this country right now.

  • The useless clown, Biden, did us all a wonderful favor: displaying his true, unedited genuine self. Completely lacking leadership, unconstructive, condescending, arrogant are a few descriptives to be applied, although, many more would be applicable. I don’t believe he has the slightest understanding of the term “statesman”, not that his unmentionable boss does. To state that the third string is on the field would be a gross understatement. Biden; a man who has accomplished very little, if anything worthwhile, throughout his entire political life. In fact, a parasite of sorts. My only wish, and for the “others” which shall remain unmentioned, is that this clown and they would discontinue referring to themselves as a Catholic. This is, in my thinking, a blasphemy, painful, self-inciminating, disgraceful and an utter lie. The thought that this insipid fool could assume the office of presidency is almost as frightening as what is currently occupying that once great office.

  • The Vice-President wasn’t a clown and if you’re examples of what Christ means to love our fellow man, then you might want to at least learn tolerance.

    Tolerance of what?

  • Biden was laughing during a conversation about the deaths of 4 Americans in Libya. Is that an example of loving fellow man?

    At least his Monster drink work off by the time the topic of abortion came up and he cut out the laughs and smirks. That’s really odd, because if there was any time a laugh was due, it was when Biden stated his position on faith and abortion. It’s sadly funny.

  • Can not believe how Joe Biden handled him self during this debate his laughing was rude and nu respectable. How can Democrats accept this behavior and how can Obama accept this behavior. Especially from a government that seems to give more speeches than facts. I think its time for a change in the US. Obama had his chance and he blew it.

Veep Reax

Thursday, October 11, AD 2012

Alright, I’m in full political crack monkey mode from here on till the election, so I’ll be the one to throw up the instant reactions thread.

My take: This was not the total blowout that the first presidential debate was. Ryan was calm and professional the entire time. Biden brought his Cerberus-style split personality, one head Cheshire Cat, the other head rabid attack dog. He called Ryan a liar in the very first exchange and kept it up all night, at one point even accusing the moderator of lying. Then, during the last fifteen minutes Biden meds ran out and he fell back on the gravely “I’m so concerned” voice for the rest of the debate.

Overall, I’d rate it a draw. I think partisan Democrats are mostly elated, since all they’ve wanted for the last week is to see someone interrupt a Republican and call him a liar, and Biden did indeed do that constantly. Republicans had nothing to cringe about in Ryan’s performance. Ryan remained cool and collected throughout and scored the one audience reaction line of the night in defusing Biden’s attempt to demagogue the 47% quote.

What Independents will have thought I honestly can’t say, though I see a CNN poll of undecided voters called it for Ryan by a 48 to 44 margin. My guess is, this does nothing to help Obama claw back from his collapse with the ordinary voting public, but it does help the Dem campaign by soothing the utter panic which has gripped much of the left over the last week. I’d guess we’ll see basically consistent poll numbers (between a tie and Romney up one) for the next week until the next Presidential debate. Then we’ll see. The big problem for Obama is that the next debate is strictly foreign policy and the one after that is a town hall meeting, so he never gets to imitate Biden’s mad dog routine on domestic policy.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Veep Reax

  • CNN/ORC POLL October 3 DEBATE WATCHERS Who Was More In Touch With Problems of People Like You? Ryan 51%, Biden 44%

    CNN/ORC POLL October 3 DEBATE WATCHERS Who Was More Likeable? Ryan 53% Biden 43%

  • I thought Ryan played it perfectly. He let the crazy old man keep interrupting, and he never lost his cool. He got off a few zingers, but let Biden basically beat himself.

    That said, I think the Veep debate will have next to no bearing on the election. It was a mild diversion that people will chuckle over, but it really won’t sway too many people one way or the other.

  • I can’t think of any Veep debate that has made any difference, and I doubt if this one was any different. I do think that the Democrats were praying for a win and laughing hyena Biden was unable to deliver.

  • Can’t see that Biden proved himself qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.

  • As Darwin wrote, “I think partisan Democrats are mostly elated, since all they’ve wanted for the last week is to see someone interrupt a Republican and call him a liar, and Biden did indeed do that constantly.” I would have liked liked them to feel humiliated and defeated. Ryan may have won the debate, but the liberals I know won’t be made to feel that way. To them, the laughing hyena behavior is victory.

  • “To them, the laughing hyena behavior is victory.”

    Which is a sad commentary on them. Serious times call for serious people. That grinning buffoon we saw last night is not a serious person.

  • Did not watch the debate, but from your reactions it sounds like the reverse, but lesser version of the expectations/performance of the Pres debate. Seems most people expected Ryan to mop the floor with Uncle Joe, but Uncle Joe did not do as badly as anticipated, while Ryan did not do quite as well as hoped.

    Yes, from the Dem point of view, that has to be taken as a victory. Maybe Uncle Joe can pinch-debate for the O next round?

  • Who could continue watching this debate with Biden acting like a buffoon & interrupting Ryan 82 times & the moderator did nothing about it. Who would want Biden as president after watching this? I have to hand it to Ryan as he remained respectable throughout the debate. Fact checking is showing Biden lied throughout the debate.

Laughing Hyena v. Gentleman Ryan

Thursday, October 11, AD 2012

 

 

If, as I expect, the Obama-Biden ticket goes down in flames on election day, Biden in his debate performance has ended his political career with a bizarre coda.  How bizarre?  Let us go point by point, along with my other thoughts on the debate.

1.  Hyena Joe- Throughout the debate when Ryan was talking Biden was laughing and smirking.  I assume Biden forgot about the split screen coverage on television.  Judging from the talking heads post-debate, it made a very bad impression.

2.  Manic-Depressive-Joe began the debate very manic as if he had swallowed a crate of jolt cola.  By the end he was completely wound down, like a wind up toy at the end of its cycle, or someone had shot him with an animal tranquilizer.  Very odd.

3.  Canned Responses-Biden obviously had a checklist of points he had to mention:  47%, check, etc.  The problem with having a checklist is that it takes fairly quick wits to put the list seamlessly into a debate performance, and I thought Biden’s interjections were far from seamless.

4.  Joe Making Things up Again-As he has throughout his career,  Biden simply made things up when he was in a tough spot in the debate.  In response to the Libya question which clearly had him flustered, Joe claimed that the intelligence community initially thought that the Benghazi attack was preceded by a protest over the Mohammed  video.  That is completely at variance with the facts.

5.  Wildman v. The Professor-Obviously the Democrats were reacting to passive Obama from the first debate.  Biden was always interrupting, some 82 times or thereabouts. The”moderator” was completely useless.  Ryan was too much the professor in manner and should have reacted more to the out of control Biden.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Laughing Hyena v. Gentleman Ryan

The Catholicism of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan

Wednesday, October 10, AD 2012

The differences about to be exhibited in the Vice Presidential debate between Vice President Joe Biden and Congressman Paul Ryan couldn’t be more striking, and no I don’t mean in just the political arena but in the religious realm as well. The Vice President proudly states he was never a “John Paul II guy, I was a John XXIII guy.” He relishes the fact that in class he openly doubted such central teachings of Transubstantiation during his Catholic school days. He tells us that when he went to Rome his mother told him; “don’t kiss the Pope’s ring.”  (Boy it is a good thing Mrs. Biden didn’t know my soft spoken mother, otherwise she would have received an uncharacteristic earful. Heaven help her if she met my German grandmother (my mom’s mother) who would have undoubtedly pulled a rolling pin, a frying pan and whatever else she could come after her with to put the fear of God into her.)

Congressman Ryan comes from generation John Paul II and is not afraid to tell us so. Faithful Catholics of Congressman Ryan’s age see the Joe Bidens of the world and roll their eyes. As one young woman once told me, “if they (Joe Bidens of the world) had any decency they would just tell us the truth; the only thing they believe in is their self absorbed, distorted views of their world. They should really leave since they are being disingenuous for staying in something to which they don’t believe.” she said. Well many have and the Joe Bidens of the world would have us believe that it is our fault for not “evolving.” This is a common word in Catholic liberal (and secular) parlance to describe their views on the world from abortion to same sex marriage.  In the case of the Joe Bidens of the world, if you can question the tenets of Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular, the beliefs of the Founding Fathers outlined in their landmark documents are hardly safe from revision.

In my just released book; The Catholic Tide Continues to Turn, I delve into the rise in vocations, devotions and the fast growing orthodox Catholic college campuses like Franciscan, Ave Maria, Benedictine in Kansas, Wyoming College and St. Thomas Aquinas. Folks like Joe Biden just don’t get it. To them Notre Dame is too conservative for in their view how could the university lose $120,000,000 in alumni contributions and face such opposition among student groups and the Holy Cross Seminarians concerning the controversial visit of and award given to President Barack Obama.

Continue reading...

19 Responses to The Catholicism of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan

  • Pingback: The Catholicism of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan | The American Catholic | News 47News 47
  • “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” When I was in the USAF, I saluted the officer’s rank and authority, not the man. It was not difficult. Same same the Pope’s ring. For non-Catholics, It is being polite. For liberal simps, refusing to kiss the ring is their way of telling each other, “I’m special!”

    There is a village in Delaware that is missing its idiot.

    Is Uncle Joe liberal because he’s stupid? Or, is he stupid because he’s liberal??

  • The priests in cassocks are protected by their garb from losing their vows to those temptations to be one of the crowd. My pastors are cassock wearing men, not very young, but very in love with the Lord.

  • Gosh, God bless our popes. to me John 23, Francis of Assisi, angels — are ones who have been softened, misinterpreted to the point of disregard. People think of angels as pretty little girls in rose colored robes with golden hair – some people think children who die as children become angels. Francis has been relegated to a nice hippie environmentalist nature lover who hated corporations and wanted people to compromise for the sake of peace–they write his efforts to convert a sultan as a good example of peacemaking for us– not noticing that Francis did not make peace– he told the truth, he was spared but the franciscan protomartyrs were not– francis was brave and thoughtful– Not a sap. and John the 23’s life is similarly misunderstood– people take what they want to take, to prove their own points.
    Joe Biden should read more and think more deeply about his faith and our popes.

  • I like what Anzlyn pointed out about St. Francis confronting that Islamic sultan. A few years ago I had to endure a presentation on peace and social justice by a liberal Franciscan cleric who used the story of St. Francis’ encounter with that sultan to criticize the war on terror as a war against Muslims. Of course I spoke up to explain that the Koran specifically requires its adherents to subject Christians and Jews to Dhimmitude which St. Francis never once advocated or even accepted, and that is exactly what precipitated the war on terror. He had no response, and went on to some other topic. I despise and loathe liberalism, political and religious. It’s always the same: peace at any price, especially if you and I are the ones paying the price. I go by what Jesus said in Luke 22:36, “And let him who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”

  • I’ll be praying the Chaplet of Mercy for Paul Ryan tonight. Let’s hope this night will be another nail in Obama’s coffin, but in all things, God’s will be done.

  • I just hope we don’t get over confident. Uncle Joe may be he national clown, as Donald M. says, but he does have decades of debating experience, and supposedly Paul Ryan is weak in foreign policy knowledge. I too will pray for Ryan’s victory, but I won’t watch the debate. I don’t need the anxiety. Voluntas Dei fiat.

  • Pingback: The Catholicism of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan | The American Catholic « therasberrypalace
  • “but he does have decades of debating experience”

    No he really doesn’t. He hadn’t had a serious challenge for his Senate after he won it in 1972. He had a disastrous run for President in 1988. In his 2008 run he dropped out fairly quickly and his debate performance could be considered undistinguished. Palin beat him in their one and only debate and Biden fell back on his preferred strategy when cornered: make things up.

  • And Sarah Palin wasn’t exactly an elite debater either.

  • I think it’s safe to say that Biden made up for not kissing the Pope’s ring by kissing a lot of butts.

  • Pingback: THURSDAY EVENING EDITION | Big Pulpit
  • The archbishop of Denver processed the Sacred Species through the streets of town 2 days before the first debate, and O was speechless. Yesterday was the first day of the Year of Faith, and Ryan schooled Joe on what a Catholic believes when it comes to taking care of the least among us. What is in store for the next debate? How will God work his Will into the outcome? Pray, people, pray. Prayer changes things.

  • Joe “The Plagiarist” Biden couldn’t find his rear end with both hands if you spotted him nine fingers.

  • I was struck by the comment the “Vatican II priest” made about the young priests in cassocks not being approachable. I heard a similar comment from an elderly religious sister explaining why her order’s abandonment of their habit. I don’t think that the habit made these sisters unapproachable, it was their demeanor. I was recently working with some of the Sisters of Life in the Archdiocese of New York. These sisters wear a very distinct habit. They are some of the most approachable people I have ever met, because of the joy that radiates from them due to their love of the Lord.

    I think our “Vatican II priests and religious” might have something to learn from the John Paul II generation.

  • Catholic Democrats use “caring for the poor” as their reason to remain Democrats even though the Democrat Party is solely responsible for the continued murder of unborn babies now at 52,000,000 dead. And to “care for the poor” they support sinning against the 10th Commandment; they support “coveting their neighbors’ goods.” And Catholic Democrat legislators like Biden, Pelosi, and Durbin are in the lead promoting that morally warped thinking which enables them to sin even more by “slandering their opponents” claiming they don’t care about the poor and want to “do them harm.” And that position enables the lay and clergy Catholic Democrats to commit “the sin of pride thinking they are ‘better,” than their political opponents.

    I’m so glad the Holy Spirit led me out of that sinful party a long time ago. I have never heard anyone in the party I eventually joined ever speak and act that way towards Democrats. In fact, it is said the main difference between the two major parties is that “Democrats think Republicans are evil; Republicans think the Democrats are just wrong.”

    The Democrat Party survives on the psychological illness of “projection;” which is “the attribution of one’s own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people, especially the externalization of blame, guilt or responsibility as a defense against anxiety.”

  • Obama/Biden (far left policies) have created more poor people. O/B will continue to create poverty.

    Romney/Ryan will work to restore prosperity to more Americans.

  • true you T. Shaw- that lie from college professor catholics
    (about poverty > abortion and obama being anti poverty hence working against abortion) is even more egregious if possible because they (those who justify their margins to the left) are actually causing poverty.
    Obama is bought and paid for by planned parenthood. And planned parenthood is not about poverty.

  • I am glad you spoke up defending the Catholicism of Saint Francis Paul Primavera! Just this last St Francis day I heard again about how he was about compromise and he taught us to compromise. This seems to be the interpretation of today’s Catholics still loyal to the Democratic party.
    Just as it says in the story of the Fall of Man– the devil is very subtle (cunning)

Big Bird and Scared Obama

Wednesday, October 10, AD 2012

 

When a political campaign gets spooked, the campaign often does foolish things.  Attempting to make Big Bird, Big Bird!, an attack vehicle for the Obama campaign has to be the stupidest move I have seen by any campaign this year.  Why is it stupid?   Let us count the ways:

1.  Big Bird Don’t Play That Game-PBS, predictably, has asked that the ad be taken down, and that is becoming the controversy rather than Romney’s vow to take the knife to PBS funding.

2.  Too silly- The attempt to claim that Romney views Big Bird as a bigger threat than white-collar thieves is too ludicrous for words.

3.  Bernie Madoff, Democrat Donor- Starting off with a mug shot of Bernie Madoff was  a laugh, since Madoff has given over two hundred thousand to the Democrats since 1991.

4.  Big Bird is a Big Issue?- With the country having a real unemployment rate, when discouraged former workers are included, of 14 percent, the Obama campaign is wasting time trying to make Big Bird an issue?  Seriously?

5.  The Count Responds- The Big Bird ad allowed the Republicans to fire back using the Count.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Big Bird and Scared Obama

  • Maybe Nebuchadnezzer will again eat grass like an ox. Daniel chapter 4. PS, my Big Bird is the American Bald Eagle, and I suspect that is true of most patriots in this country.

  • After the rogue’s gallery of greedy capitalist criminals, isn’t that the GM building?

  • Pingback: Big Bird and Scared Obama | The American Catholic « therasberrypalace
  • Idiots. It appears none of you know the cost, and certainly not the value, of public television. Politicians are opportunists, Dems and Reps., and will jump at any opening to slam their opponent. That is the way political parties operate. Hurry November.

  • “J.Henson”, thank you for those endarkening comments. The earnings from Big Bird merchandise alone each year could practically substitute for all Federal funding of PBS. What may have made some limited sense in the age of three networks back in the sixties when PBS was created makes absolutely no sense today when most consumers have hundreds of channels at their fingertips.

  • I do not care if PBS has value or not. It simply shouldn’t be funded by either the tax payer or by loans from Red China. If the people who love it so much really want it to continue, then they can finance it. They should put their money where their mouth (or keyboard) is. Let the free market work. But the reality is that they want someone else besides themselves to finance what they want. TANSTAAFL. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.

  • Sesame Street nets sufficient cash income so as not to need tax money.

    Most of the progressive propaganda on PBS will die because it’s watched only by minute groups of cranks.

    Anyhow, this whole episode can be summarized in four words: big bird small man.

  • The federal money into Sesame Street pays for the top folks reported on their last 990 form– who supposedly work 50 hours a week and make, um… ten to twenty times more than my husband, who works longer in the Air Force?

    Gotta get us a non-profit job, rather than a job that doesn’t make profit….

  • Most non-profits are a joke when it comes to the salaries of the top elite.

Now Who Is Second Guessing the Polls?

Tuesday, October 9, AD 2012

Last week, before the debate, I noted that Democrats were mocking Republicans for trying to explain away Romney’s poor performance in recent polling (while themselves showing a certain lack of reality in their assessment of the economy.) The debate came and Romney routed Obama on the debate stage in a way that exceeded my wildest hopes. Now we see an unprecedented post-debate surge for Romney in the polls, with Gallup and Rasmussen both showing Romney in a tie with Obama and a post-debate Pew poll showing Romney beating Obama by 4% among likely voters, a twelve point swing from Pew polling a month before in which Romney trailed Obama by 8%.

And just to show that the desire to fight the data is bi-partisan, now Democrats are trying to explain away the polls, with Jonathan Chait arguing:

Polls have very low response rates. Sometimes short-term events that dominate the news cycle excite partisans and make them more likely to answer pollsters — it happened when Romney picked Paul Ryan — but they don’t reflect a deep remaking of the public opinion landscape, which remains fairly settled.

Of course, that’s true. Polling is a very uncertain science, and there are lots of unknowns like partisan differences in response rates. Of course, that’s equally true whether your candidate is ahead or behind, but it’s something that people usually only emphasize in the latter case.

Romney certainly doesn’t have the race in the bag. There’s a month to go, and the Democrats will be going for Romney’s metaphorical jugular with everything they’ve got. But there’s enough polling floating around right now to suggest that the candidates are now even or else Romney is ahead. (As I go to hit “post”, I see a PPP poll sponsored by DailyKos and the SEIU is out showing Romney up 2% over Obama among likely voters.) It may not last, but I’m hoping it does and enjoying it while I can.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Now Who Is Second Guessing the Polls?

  • Imagine how the Lefties would howl if they could actually point to polls giving Romney an R-8 to R-11 advantage rather like the polls that routinely gave Obama a D-8 to D-11 advantage. Some of the polls that show Romney ahead still have a D-7 to D-8 advantage which means that in these polls Romney is winning the independents going away.

  • Hmm. I was expecting DarwinCatholic to explain the process by which the U.S. electorate is evolving toward a Romney win.

    My working hypothesis is that Romney’s pick of Paul Ryan as his running mate, Obama’s bungling of Bengazi, Romney’s debate knockout win over the incumbent, and (to a lesser degree) his recent well-received foreign policy speech at VMI has had the effect of giving permission to fence-sitters that voting for Romney is an ok thing to do. This is what’s reflected in Romney’s recent rise in the polls.

    Watch the Obama campaign for the rest of this week as they desperately attempt to head off the formation of a pro-Romney preference cascade among fence-sitters, low-information voters, and low-affinity elements of the Obama bandwagon.

  • Ed Morrissey notes a trend that has been consistent in almost every poll: independents are leaning heavily towards Romney. It’s difficult to fathom any way in which Romney loses if he has a 10-point advantage among independents. There is no feasible way the Democrat advantage on election day can swing the election to Obama if Romney wins the independents by a considerable margin.

  • Yeah, if independents do indeed break heavily for Romney, I find it hard to imagine how he doesn’t win.

Romney 49 – Obama 45

Monday, October 8, AD 2012

6 Responses to Romney 49 – Obama 45

  • As long as Romney wins – please, dear Lord Jesus, if it be Thy will, then make it so!

  • Advice for Romney/Ryan,

    Be humble!

    Work harder!!

  • Best to ignore Pew and the rest of the leftist pollsters whatever results they show. My personal belief is that they already have ready the next poll showing that Obama is back on top after the second debate. Rasmussen and to a lesser extent Gallup (if you subtract 2-3 points from the Dems) are the only ones to pay attention to.

  • Amen, T. Shaw.

    While the partisans certainly could be expected to have the ‘preferred’ results already drawn up, it would be suicide to post them should the outcome be obviously different. If Mr. Ryan pulls Joe Blow into a gaffe, a misstep or fit of hysteria, which I’m in my office pool at happining at the 7:02 mark, then anything but the truth will be an obvious fabricatrion. Pollsters can’t have too many black marks of that kind and still be taken seriously.

    And, just because I do this, I looked at my post, saw “7:02 mark,” reversed it and then looked up Mark 20:7.

    I swear this was not intentional. There are no coincidences.

  • I guess I am missing something. The Gospel of Mark has only 16 chapters. There is no Mark 20:7. My sense of humor and the ironic is missing this morning. Too much exposure to neutrons, I suppose.

  • I think it was Pew that published the most dubious poll of the season (which had a sample which had a Democratic component exceeding the Republican component by 19 percentage points). Best to stick to Gallup; they have been at this the longest.

Religious Bigotry: The First Refuge of Scoundrels

Monday, October 8, AD 2012

The Obama campaign is very worried about Catholic voters.  They have two strategies:  lie about Obama’s record and bash Mitt Romney for being a Mormon.

Deal Hudson reports at Lifesite News the type of calls that are being targeted to Catholics by the Obama campaign:

Just a week ago, I reported a call from an Obama supporter received by a Catholic in Pennsylvania. The caller, identifying herself as Catholic, insisted Obama was not pro-abortion and Planned Parenthood did not encourage abortions.

Joy Allen, co-chair of the pro-life committee of her parish, Saints John and Paul in Franklin Park, PA, received another call yesterday.  The first Obama caller had asked for her daughter; the second asked for her son — both are registered Republicans. The call came from 215-796-4259 at 2:00 p.m. on Sunday.

After telling the caller her son was not at home, the caller said she was from the Obama campaign and wanted to know how he would be voting.

Joy reported to me:

“Well, I could not believe that I had received another call from the Obama campaign looking for another of my college aged children in less than a week. I informed the caller that my son was a practicing Catholic and would not be supporting a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage candidate who did not respect the Catholic faith in his HHS mandate that would force all Catholics to pay for birth control, sterilization, and the abortion pill.”

At that point, the Obama supporter started reading from the same script that Joy had heard from the first call.

“Well, I am a practicing Catholic, and I have no problem supporting Obama. How can you support a Mormon who does not believe in Jesus Christ….”

Continue reading...

12 Responses to Religious Bigotry: The First Refuge of Scoundrels

  • It isn’t about policy or issues anymore. It is simply a question of which of these lies will you believe? What part of our propaganda will you accept? This is not a good sign for the future of this country.

  • All out warfare. I just read an e-mail from Dr. Jerome Corsie. He stated that 2 million DVDs of Dreams of my Real Father had been sent to three swing states. (residents)

    Pray, Pray And then pray some more.
    The movie suggests that FRANK is the real father….???

  • I am not voting for Mitt Romney to be my pastor. I am voting for him to be my President. And I am voting specifically for Mitt Romney over Barack Hussein Obama because Mitt Romney, while an LDS adherent, is far more of a Christian in his actions than Barack Hussein Obama has ever been.

  • Back in 2000, I ran state rep campaign . We were ahead in the polls by 2 points during the afternoon before the election. Throughout election day we had furious voters angrily denouncing our candidate at the polling places for her “lies.” It took hours to piece it together but a massive calling campaign had gone on the night before, asserting that they worked for our candidate and that our opponent was about to be arrested. Our opponent wasn’t about to be arrested and the false charges the callers made were patently obvious.

    We lost by little more than a point.

    The county committee figured it out about a week later: someone representing our opponent hired a Canadian firm to make the false accusations against our opponent. The county strategist, very matter of factly, explained that our candidate was polling as “honest” and “credible” and that the use of no negative adds by our campaign (truth be told, we couldn’t afford television ads and name recognition was the critical piece of our ad campaign, not information) meant that creating the appearance that our candidate was just as dirty as theirs was a winning strategy.

    The county strategist was very comfortable with this trick too, even admiring.

    My point is that those who make this politics their career use falsehood as the primary tool. We may hate this strategy but it was a winner in ’08 and will likely pay dividends this go-around too.

    How do political operatives and professional spin-doctors live with themselves?

  • So based on what G-Veg wrote, I wonder if Obama operatives will make a flood of phone calls asserting Romney is a polygamist or a child abuser or a pedophile or some such other nonsense. I pass nothing beneath their dignity to do.

    Political operatives and professional spin doctors live with themselves by not having either conscience or sense of shame.

  • “How can you support a Mormon who does not believe in Jesus Christ….”

    She should have replied to the campaigner – “how can you support a muslim who doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ?” that would have sent the campaigner into a fit – lots of fun! And keep on insisting the O is Muslim no matter what she says – would have prevented the campaigner from making other calls for hours!

  • All they have are dirty tricks and lies.

    Isaiah 5:20: “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.”

  • The name of Romney’s denomination is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The subtitle of The Book of Mormon is “Another Testament of Jesus Christ.” Its title page states that its purpose is to declare that “Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself to all nations.” The name of Christ is stated more frequently in the Book of Mormon than in the New Testament.

    Mormons have a distinct theology, but it is centered around Christ as the Son of God and the resurrected Savior of mankind.

  • I’ve allowed this comment through, but we will have no more comments about Mormon theology which frankly I view as hogwash, just as I am sure most practicing Mormons would regard most of Catholic theology as hogwash. I do not regard it as relevant to this political contest and does not alter one iota my determination to see Romney replace Obama.

  • Pingback: Unity Candle Religious Bigotry Religious Life SSPX Talks OK | Big Pulpit
  • I liked Paul Primavera’s answer that we’re not electing a pastor and such.

    If I receive such a call, I hope I remember to ask the “practicing Catholic” what’s her parish and what were the parts of last Sunday’s gospel reading she found the most inspiring.* (Yes, I admit that I’m suspicious that Obama’s phone bankers aren’t what they claim to be.)

    *Of course, a covering-all-the-bases script would tell the phone banker what to say about that too.

  • “but we will have no more comments about Mormon theology ”

    Apparently we had a problem with reading comprehension on this thread. The comments about Mormon theology have been deleted and the person making them has been banned.