A Catholic Answer? Site Seeks to Silence Biden Critic

Fighting Irish Thomas ^ | 12-07-08 | Tom O'Toole

[mlizzy]

Yes, I guess I can agree with Catholic Answers that my calling Senator Biden "Ding-Dong" (or at least implying that Joe was the person in the un-holy Obama-Rham-a-Ding-Dong trinity) is uncharitable. I suppose "hypocrite" or "heretic" would be more technically correct, at least from the Catholic critic's standpoint.

[Alex Murphy]

Ping to read later

[Tax-chick]

Similarly, it's hard to believe the long-time conservative Catholic Mark Shea would, in an article on the eve of the Iowa Caucus, trash the election's most ardent pro-life candidate, Michael Huckabee, if it didn't involve cash.

Right, fella. The only reason anyone would oppose a pro-amnesty nanny-stater is because he's paid for it.

And I'm SO bored with people who think that, just because their basic facts are correct (like Joe Biden's as Catholic as Joe Lieberman), they can use any kind of tendentious and hyperbolic language and call it "speaking the truth in love." And then complain when a privately-owned website chooses to neutralize their participation. (Golly, that sounds familiar ...)

Any writer who can't make his points with perfect clarity, while using language acceptable in the most uptight company, needs to spend more time with the dictionary (or the Catechism, if he's Catholic).

Two strikes on this blogger. No personal offense intended to the poster if he/she is the writer or a relative.

[dangus]

Calling Sen. Biden a ding-dong is just stupid and hurts our cause. Whoever the fool who wrote that was, I bid him good riddance.

[mlizzy]

The author uses humor in his articles. Here is the Urban Dictionary definition of "Obamalamadingdong" from which the original article makes a pun: Link to Urban Dictionary

Obamalamadingdong
Obamalamadingdong: A Barack Obama campaign assistant who goes door to door for the candidate.
+++
Goodness, Harry, there's an Obamalamadingdong at the door!

P.S. I'm almost certain (however I haven't searched it out) that I could find worse words than "ding-dong" (on Free Republic) defining Joe Biden. :)

And does calling Tom "stupid" and a "fool" help your cause? If you are a Christian fighting "for life," he's on YOUR side.

[mlizzy]

Any writer who can't make his points with perfect clarity, while using language acceptable in the most uptight company, needs to spend more time with the dictionary (or the Catechism, if he's Catholic).

+++

The writer's clarity is usually too clear. And he is an avid reader of the Bible and Catholic Catechism. He's forever encouraging me to read the readings and gospel, even marking them out with a bookmark at daily Mass (because I am hearing-disabled and can't hear the priest).

And you are correct, Tom does not appeal to the "uptight" crowd (nor the humorless). I don't think Christ did either. Certainly Mother Teresa of Calcutta wasn't very politically correct here nor was Frank Pavone here nor Michael Voris here and yet all these people work (or worked) tirelessly for God and His Kingdom, and would (and did in some cases!), in fact, work for free for "the cause."

And, thanks for your apology, no personal offense is taken.:)

[Tax-chick]

Or in other words, “just because their basic facts are correct, they can use any kind of tendentious and hyperbolic language and call it ‘speaking the truth in love.’ “

And it’s it bit highfalutin’ for a blogger, especially one who slanders those who disagree with him about political candidates, to compare himself to Christ or Mother Teresa.

[mlizzy]

And it’s it bit highfalutin’ for a blogger, especially one who slanders those who disagree with him about political candidates, to compare himself to Christ or Mother Teresa.

He didn't.

[Tax-chick]

He or his proxy.

[mlizzy]

Time for a walk! Or as The Saint of the Gutters used to say ...

"It is impossible to walk rapidly and be unhappy" --Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

:)

[Petronski]

...just because their basic facts are correct . . . they can use any kind of tendentious and hyperbolic language and call it "speaking the truth in love..."

Precisely. You nailed it.

[Tax-chick]

Thank you. We often run amok verbally on FR, but rarely (I believe) do we claim we’re being charitable while doing so. At least those of us who are still here.

[Tax-chick]

True. Also while watching “Zoboomafoo,” the show with the Kratt Brothers and their leaping lemur.

[trisham]

Similarly, it's hard to believe the long-time conservative Catholic Mark Shea would, in an article on the eve of the Iowa Caucus, trash the election's most ardent pro-life candidate, Michael Huckabee, if it didn't involve cash.

********************

The above is a vicious slur, offered with no evidence whatsoever. It immediately identifies the author's opinions as irrelevant.

[Tax-chick]

Alan Keyes, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, and Ron Paul were all in the race at that point. Huckabee over Keyes as a pro-life candidate?

[trisham]

Alan Keyes, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, and Ron Paul were all in the race at that point. Huckabee over Keyes as a pro-life candidate?

*******************

Huckabee may have been the worst candidate of the group. He had nothing to recommend him beyond his pro-life stance. I confess I am not a single-issue voter; I want the complete candidate.

[Tax-chick]

I’d probably have taken Huckabee over Ron Paul, because of Paul’s isolationism. As it was, he wasn’t even on the ballot in my state, but I got to cast a symbolic vote for Alan Keyes.

[trisham]

Huckabee promotes open borders. That makes him unacceptable to me.

[Tax-chick]

I don’t like that, either; also, Arkansas FReeple were very negative about his spending.

[trisham]

Yes. As a candidate, he’s flawed.