Republican convention

[meltzerboy]

Clint Eastwood wasn’t there to give a speech. He was there to be Clint Eastwood. The man is an entertainer. He entertained. Like many entertainers who use politics as their subject, the truth of his statements was the genesis of the humor.

Yes the man is elderly, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t entertaining nor was his presentation ineffective. You wouldn’t have found it funny since his statements spoke against your candidate and your philosophy. I don’t find Bill Maher or Ed Schulz funny either. Does that mean you’re “right” and I’m wrong? No it means we have different perspectives.

Lisa

I know you may disagree, Lisa, but Ed Schultz doesn’t do comedy. On the other hand, Chris Matthews…

 

[LisaA]

It’s not worth much to me but thanks. There was exit polling in 04 right on election day that had John Kerry becoming our 2nd Catholic POTUS. Like Abyssinia said there’s only one poll that matters. And of course in 2000 one candidate won the polling by popular vote. The other was awarded the Electoral College. And that took weeks after the election.

Exit polls are NOTORIOUS for being a very poor source of actual results. The point of Abyssinia’s links was to show that indeed there was a bounce after the Convention. Had there NOT been a bounce, whether or not it lasts, then it would have been time to start hanging the crepe. The Romney Ryan ticket is sitting well for the upcoming election.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

I know you may disagree, Lisa, but Ed Schultz doesn’t do comedy. On the other hand, Chris Matthews…

Oh really? Ed Shultz meant that Laura Ingraham was a s**t? He wasn’t trying to be funny? And I thought it was simply a joke in very poor taste…

Chris Matthews…HE is supposed to be funny? Wow I used to wonder why my ex husband laughed at the Three Stooges and I would look askance at their stupid actions and leave the room. If people think Matthews is entertaining then they must be coming from a different perspective completely. OK to each his own.

Obviously people have a different sense of humor. The problem on the Left is that so much of it depends on foul language and sexual innuendos…Mr Thrill Up My Leg might ring a bell here.

We’ll have to disagree on that one…must be a girl thing
Lisa

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I think the GOP are using the pro-life movement for votes.

I would agree with that, as well, observing that we Catholics unwittingly created that opportunity with the HHS mandate standoff, given how it is being portrayed in the press.

 

[_Abyssinia]

I disagree. Suggesting the President of the United States, any President of the United States, was sitting there using words like “shut up” and telling his opponent to do something to himself, was derogatory to the President and to the Presidency of the United States. But it’s not unusual in Republican circles so I wasn’t surprised. I recall the AZ Republican governor with her finger in the President of the United States’s face. So nothing surprises me anymore.

Clint Eastwood was being comedic with the chair. Derogatory things were said to George Bush and liberals lapped it up

 

[_Abyssinia]

How is putting one’s faith in a “prince” any different than putting one’ faith in a political party? I think the GOP are using the pro-life movement for votes. On economic and application of war issues, the GOP are not any closer to catholic teaching than the democrats… perhaps even less so. I think the cheerleading at these conventions even more disturbing. They are behaving as if the GOP are a sports team.

You are undermining the authenticity of the pro life views. More religious are more likely you will be pro life. Republicans are more religious than democrats so are more likely to be pro life

 

[CMatt25]

When liberals make ridiculous commets such as this,I have to wonder …are they really so unaware of the snarky nasty often times vile comments said by their side on a regular basis?Or do they know this to be a fact and are merely trying to be annoying

Jeanne, I merely commented about something that went on at the topic of the Republican Convention. But that’s ok. Someone else back there said I was an annoying liberal. Peace.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9715868&postcount=834

 

[meltzerboy]

Meltzerboy my goodness, do you think I am completely ignorant? I knew what Obama meant figuratively but it was also characteristic of his Messiah complex, both his own and that attributed to him by the media.

I think Romney used the phrase which WAS immediately recognizable to make a contrast between himself and Obama. Obama’s claim somehow that HE was nominated would thereby result in a ridiculous and impossible sea change, world change, planet change. Romney let that ludicrous image, the Greek columns, Oprah crying (set up perfectly by Mr Eastwood) the whole maudlin utopian dream speak for itself. And four years later we have record unemployment, higher poverty, an absolute debacle in Afghanistan, a powder keg in the Middle East, Iran getting a nuke, Syrians being slaughtered in the streets. How’s it working out for ya’ll?

He then paused, looked into the crowd and promised he would help us and our families.

Perfect.

No this wasn’t “code” for heh heh we Republicans don’t believe in science! It was to contrast the empty suit and the broken promises with the vast claims made by Obama. It was to say that Mitt Romney wasn’t looking to heal the planet, he wants to help American families.

Isn’t that what we need right now?

Lisa

I think we need BOTH right now: economic recovery and environmental recovery. The time for concern about climate change is not sometime in the future; then it will be too late. I also think it is somewhat unfair to blame Obama for Afghanistan: after all, HE is the one who is getting us out, unlike the prior President who got us in, switched course to Iraq without just cause, and left us in a two-war fiasco. With regard to Syria and Iran, what would you have Obama do: start two more wars? If so, you might get your wish if Romney is elected: both he and McCain are apparently itching for renewed conflicts in the Middle East.

No, Lisa, I don’t think you’re ignorant at all; you’re very well informed on the issues and I enjoy discussing and debating them with you.

 

[Jeanne_S]

I disagree. Suggesting the President of the United States, any President of the United States, was sitting there using words like “shut up” and telling his opponent to do something to himself, was derogatory to the President and to the Presidency of the United States. But it’s not unusual in Republican circles so I wasn’t surprised. I recall the AZ Republican governor with her finger in the President of the United States’s face. So nothing surprises me anymore.

No,your statement is that you have come to expect derogotory statements from the Republicans

 

[meltzerboy]

Oh really? Ed Shultz meant that Laura Ingraham was a s**t? He wasn’t trying to be funny? And I thought it was simply a joke in very poor taste…

Chris Matthews…HE is supposed to be funny? Wow I used to wonder why my ex husband laughed at the Three Stooges and I would look askance at their stupid actions and leave the room. If people think Matthews is entertaining then they must be coming from a different perspective completely. OK to each his own.

Obviously people have a different sense of humor. The problem on the Left is that so much of it depends on foul language and sexual innuendos…Mr Thrill Up My Leg might ring a bell here.

We’ll have to disagree on that one…must be a girl thing
Lisa

With regard to Chris Matthews, what I mean is that he is so petulant and haughty that I find his demeanor funny. I’m not talking about his sexual innuendoes. I didn’t actually hear Ed Schultz say that to Laura Ingraham but read about it. He apparently got a one-week suspension without pay after apologizing to her, and she accepted his apology. Personally, I think both he and Rush Limbaugh should be fired for their demeaning remarks about women, but that won’t happen because it might affect the ratings, especially in Rush’s case.

 

[CMatt25]

No,your statement is that you have come to expect derogotory statements from the Republicans

You misread my statement out of context then. True from my experience over the past few yrs from healthcare townhalls and protests, Hitler mustaches, to the Republican congressman at the SOTU shouting “you lie” at the POTUS, to Mr Eastwood at the Republican Convention, I’m not surprised. But nothing surprises me is how I ended my “statement”. I’m not surprised when a Democrat says something like things Ishii keeps bringing up either. I might not always find them comparable to Mr Eastwood saying the POTUS was sitting there saying “shut up” or to whatever it was that Mr Eastwood could not repeat to Mr Romney that got the crowd so excited. But not much surprises me anymore.

 

[LisaA]

I think we need BOTH right now: economic recovery and environmental recovery. The time for concern about climate change is not sometime in the future; then it will be too late. I also think it is somewhat unfair to blame Obama for Afghanistan: after all, HE is the one who is getting us out, unlike the prior President who got us in, switched course to Iraq without just cause, and left us in a two-war fiasco. With regard to Syria and Iran, what would you have Obama do: start two more wars? If so, you might get your wish if Romney is elected: both he and McCain are apparently itching for renewed conflicts in the Middle East.

No, Lisa, I don’t think you’re ignorant at all; you’re very well informed on the issues and I enjoy discussing and debating them with you.

Well thank you.

I would like to get back to the point of Mitt Romney’s remark not debate George Bush’s policy. Beating dead horses is a waste of energy IMO.

The purpose of Mitt Romney’s speech was to speak to the undecided out there and contrast the sort of “pie in the sky” approach of Mr Obama with his own down to earth focus on specific problems that impact virtually all Americans. He is offering people a very distinct choice and playing on his strengths which are not stem winder speeches and identity politics. I think he focused on what is concerning Americans today, the kitchen table topics and I believe he was effective. The use of the “oceans subside and planets heal” metaphor was to set up that contrast. I truly do not think there was any ‘code’ or dog whistle under the radar meaning to that statement. Mitt Romney is a practical man with a nuts and bolts approach to our problems. I think it’s what many Americans are looking for.

Lisa

 

[CMatt25]

I would like to get back to the point of Mitt Romney’s remark not debate George Bush’s policy. Beating dead horses is a waste of energy IMO.

It’s not a waste of energy in at least the areas where there is little if any daylight between Romney and Bush. I didn’t see it all. Did the last 2 term Republican POTUS speak at the Republican Convention? Was he even there? I know former President Clinton is speaking at the DNC this coming wk. Even though I didn’t always agree with him I am looking forward to hearing him.

 

[Robert_Bay]

Threads longer than 1,000 posts are closed for technical reasons. There is another Republican convention thread here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=707835