Having criticized Sharron Angle’s dangerously wacky remarks on Friday, I have been informed in no uncertain terms that I am a leftist and liberal. That, of course, is the only conceivable reason anybody would question a Tea Party darling. Having been thus exposed, I figure I might as well throw caution to the winds and criticize yet another Tea Party darling, Rich Iott, currently running for Congress in Ohio. Here’s a warm endorsement of him as a “new voice for our values”.
Now, here’s the funny thing. Last week, when I criticized Angle’s dark suggestion that, should the vote not take care of our “Harry Reid problems”, then “second amendment remedies” might be on the table, lots of readers flipped out. The tenor of the flip out was more or less this: “She’s not saying that and besides when the government becomes tyrannical, the citizens may have to resort to ‘second amendment remedies’ and plus it’s because you don’t have the same level of mistrust of our government that her statement seems so strange and extreme to you. I suspect the Germans and Russians never thought it would get to the point it did either.” Pressing this point a bit further, I inquired, with trembling, whether people really serious believed that the US was on the verge of a) outlawing of all political parties but the Democrats, b) Obama (or, even more incredibly, Harry Reid) seizing absolute control of the whole government and economy and jailing or executing any one who criticizes him, c) mass rallies and pogroms and book burning, d) the erection of a death camp systems or a gulag, e) engineered famines deliberately ordered toward the murder of milions of American citizens, f) mass experimentation on helpless undesirables, g) the establishment of a Gestapo and an SS tasked with the job of crushing opposition to the regime and ruthlessly torturing and murdering any citizens who offer resistance?
Some samples of replies:
I hope you are all ready. And you think Auschwitz was Hell….
Yeah violence is so bad. What a modern notion. Do you call the popes of the Crusades lunatics? Americans during WWII? Hey buddy let me give you a hint, what you modern day milquetoasts call violence is what gave this country freedom in the first place, ended the holocaust, drove the Moors out of Spain. I can see this type of thought in Spain, “don’t talk about violence, turn the other cheek” (coming from one-verse Charlie’s)speaking to the Moors, “they’ll leave.” Lol. With this kind of thought Spain would be a Muslim country and it is this kind of thought that could lead modern nations down the same road. The examples of righteous anger and just wars are plentiful. As Dr. Warren Carroll correctly states when referring to Christ’s righteous anger driving the money changers out of the temple “it serves as an example that physical force is not intrinsically evil.
Did anybody in 1930-33 Germany seriously believe that Germany would experience Hitler’s abuse of powers and horrors? Yeah I guess a few did, the “lunatics.” Most were praising the regime, nominating him for a Noble Peace Prize, making him Time Man of the Year,if I’m not mistanken and holding the 1936 Olympics in Berlin.
So there does seem to be a fair amount of incipient hysteria out there. It reminds me of nothing so much as the Lefties who spent eight years screaming “Bushitler”! What nobody seems to notice is that by the time Hitler had been in office as long as Obama, he was not worried about losing lots of seats in the Reichstag midterm elections because he had outlawed all other political parties and thrown his critics and opponents into Dachau. To paraphrase blogger Kathy Shaidle, “If Obama is Hitler, why aren’t you a lampshade?”
One person, however, did say something prescient amid all the panic:
I didn’t say it would start tomorrow. It may not even be Obama who would be the one to try to do it. It could come from the right as a a backlash from the horrible misgovernment of the left.
Which was, you know, kind of my point. And Mr. Iott seems to have been appointed by Heaven to illustrate what I’m talking about concerning the dangers of reflexively closing ranks to make excuses for somebody merely because he is a member of one’s own political tribe.
Here is our Tea Party darling (second from the right), dressed (I am not making this up) in his very bestest Waffen SS uniform and quaffing drinks as he and his fellow faux Waffen SS members fondly remember the good old days of WWII and the jolly murders of Hungarian Jews:
At this point, one grasps at straws of charity. The Atlantic photoshopped this. Nope. It’s genuine. Iott was part of an SS re-enactment club for several years. Well then, re-enactments are just weekend fun, aren’t they? Somebody has to play a confederate soldier in a Civil War re-enactment. So it’s all just “purely historical re-enactment” as Iott says, etc.
Mhm. Duly noted. Only, here’s the thing. The purpose of historical re-enactment is to re-enact history. As in, “what actually happened”. When you go to the website in which these guys describe the historical Waffen SS unit they are re-creating, you get
a lengthy history of the Wiking unit, a recruitment video, and footage of goose-stepping German soldiers marching in the Warsaw victory parade after Poland fell in 1939. The website makes scant mention of the atrocities committed by the Waffen SS, and includes only a glancing reference to the “twisted” nature of Nazism. Instead, it emphasizes how the Wiking unit fought Bolshevist Communism:
Nazi Germany had no problem in recruiting the multitudes of volunteers willing to lay down their lives to ensure a “New and Free Europe”, free of the threat of Communism. National Socialism was seen by many in Holland, Denmark, Norway, Finland, and other eastern European and Balkan countries as the protector of personal freedom and their very way of life, despite the true underlying totalitarian (and quite twisted, in most cases) nature of the movement. Regardless, thousands upon thousands of valiant men died defending their respective countries in the name of a better tomorrow. We salute these idealists; no matter how unsavory the Nazi government was, the front-line soldiers of the Waffen-SS (in particular the foreign volunteers) gave their lives for their loved ones and a basic desire to be free.
These are, recall, the creatures who did most of the heavy lifting in the extermination of millions and millions of untermenschen. But this description makes them sound like well-meaning Tea Partiers and Minutemen who just happened to get some bad advice from their “unsavory” leaders. Undiscussed in this portrayal of this particular unit of courageous idealists working for a better tomorrow is their labor in slaughtering Hungarian Jews during a forced march in the spring of 1945. So dedicated were these brave men to personal freedom and their very way of life that they remained fanatically devoted to killing Jews right up until the bitter end of the war. So how could any sane person swallow this pollyanna description, much less call “purely historical”? How could any sane person swallow this description, don an SS uniform, and then imagine that he could run for Congress without somebody, you know, asking a question or two about his sanity?
The breathtaking thing is how Iott asks us to “contextualize” all this. His decision to join this group of SS romanticists was, we have to understand, that he did it as a father-son bonding thing. Cuz nothing says “Sound judgment and leadership potential” like a father who chooses to teach his son to celebrate the brave and idealistic Waffen SS freedom fighter who fought for personal freedom and his very way of life in the name of a better tomorrow.
Now if this were somebody on the Left doing this, let’s be honest: We conservatives (and I am one, mind-reading charges to the contrary notwithtanding) would have a field day with this lunacy. The guy wouldn’t even have to be famous, just some crazy in a crowd with a swastika sign and we’d run the photos on the blogs and talk about what moonbats there are on the Left. Lefties do the same trick, of course. They love to go to some prolife rally, photograph a few kooks with some nutty signs, and declare them representative of the whole group. None of this is particularly meaningful since, in any large gathering of human beings, you are bound to find a few nuts. So it’s not that Tea Partiers have these people in their ranks.
It’s that they elevate them to positions of leadership and really do want them to be, in the most literal sense of the word, Representative.
That somebody this stone blind to moral idiocy could be a Tea Party *favorite* tells me all is not well in Right Wing Populist Land. That the circle of people Iott chose to hang out with express their admiration for the “idealists” of the SS in terms that sound weirdly like the Right Wing culture war rhetoric of today suggests that not all the menaces to our “personal freedom and our very way of life” come exclusively from the Left.
My point is not “Vote for Iott’s Democrat opponent Marcy Kaptur” (a somewhat tepid abortion supporter whom Democrat abortion zealots denounce as “anti-abortion” but whose record basically comes down to “70% less evil than other Democrat candidates!”). I will not support *any* candidate, Right or Left, who supports grave intrinsic evil. Kaptur does (as do virtually every candidate from both parties, which is why I look for third party candidates and am frustrated at the Tea Party’s rapid slide into becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of the GOP.)
No, my point is if Tea Partiers are going to be a force for change then for Pete’s sake, nominate competent and viable conservatives who aren’t moral idiots begging for a completely justifiable defeat. Now it’s possible (indeed, likely) that the Tea Partiers simply backed this guy without having bothered to check what a morally dubious fool they hitched their wagon to. He made the right noises about taxes, war, abortion and so forth. People got excited. Nobody stopped to Google and find out if he was celebrating those romantic heroes who helped to carry out the Holocaust. If so, then the lesson to draw from this is that people who wish to succeed in changing our politicial landscape seriously need to learn how to vet their favorite candidates so they don’t wind up backing turkeys. If the GOP and the Tea Partiers did know about this rather spectacular skeleton in the closet and supported him anyway, then that means they backed him knowing that he had no problem palling around with people who regard the Waffen SS as brave freedom fighters and valiant heroes working for a better tomorrow.
Much will be clarifed once we see the reaction from his supporters. If they express some serious dismay and revulsion about this, then I’m willing to buy that they screwed up, didn’t do the background check, and got snookered. If they make excuses for this stuff, or worse, try to defend it by the tired expedient of denouncing critics of Iott’s spectacular moral stupidity (and, pf course, political stupidity as well) as Leftists or un-American or secret Kaptur supporters or whatever, then the *charitable* take on this is that the GOP and Tea partiers—frightened of some shadowy Leftist totalitarian nightmare that might, in the not-too-distant future, require “second amendment remedies”—are themselves choosing as their representative people who weirdly mirror the totalitarian bogeymen upon whom they focus their frightened gaze. “Opposite evils, so far from balancing, aggravate one another.” - C.S. Lewis
Update: Eric Cantor and the GOP leadership move away from this doofus faster than you can say, “Sieg Heil!” That’s a very hopeful sign. The next hopeful sign will be when Tea Partiers figure out that just because some candidate makes pleasing noises about abortion, taxes, and war that tell them what their itching ears want to hear, it does not follow that anybody who questions or criticizes that candidate is a heretic, traitor, secret Leftist, un-American or un-Christian. It means they are doing due diligence so that your party doesn’t wind up embracing a dangerous fool as your chosen representative. Indeed, it can even mean that the critic i>wants conservatives to succeed. Next time, instead of closing ranks, embracing and defending fools merely because they belong to one’s own political tribe, my suggestion would be to recall Proverbs 27:6.
Comments
Post a Comment
Oye Vey!!!!
Step off the stumping box and step back into the pulpit. I don’t care about your politics, I care about your theology!
If you don’t think that making excuses for mass murderers has something to do with theology, I would suggest you review the fifth commandment.
yea, mark. stick to your apologetics. politics is not your gig..
Shouldn’t our theology inform our politics? I’ll admit when I first started reading Mr. Shea I hated it whenever he brought up the war or torture. And that was because I knew he was right and didn’t want to be reminded about it. He’s doing all of us right wingers a favor by bringing up those issues that conflict between what modern conservatives want and what our Faith tells us is wrong. Besides, wouldn’t you want to know that you were about to vote for a morally stunted brain dead idiot like Iott? I’d be horrified to know I’d give my vote to someone like that.
So you have no problem with celebrating the SS as idealists and freedom fighters working for a better tomorrow? Wow. Enjoy the Kool-Aid, Robert.
To answer those who want Mark to stick to theology: didn’t some fat English guy write that all arguments are theological arguments?
Good stuff Mark.
Keep speaking the truth no matter how uncomfortable it makes us. We need to live the faith especially where we feel the most passionate, and thus tempted to compromise for the sake of hollow victory.
Keep it up, Mark. May the Holy Spirit send you Fortitude under Fire.
Mark -
You did right here. Our faith must saturate every facet our life. Politics included. We’re citizens of another place. We’re Catholics first, republicans/democrats infinitely second.
Mark, I find this whole thread to be full of prejudice and is non-constructive in a blog devoted to God’s glory. Saying (or implying) that all Democrats are blah blah blah is as idiotic as saying tea partier’s & the GOP believe blah blah blah.
Come on, you’re better than this!
I believe that All God’s commandments should be observed. I believe that it is right and correct that our founding principals as a country come from the 10 Commandments. I believe that without fear and a firm reliance on God, our republic will fail. I believe that charity comes from a willing & grateful heart and not from legislative fiat. I believe that salvation is individual and not collective.
Finally, I believe that idiots are part of our society. They exist in all political persuasions in equal proportions. Picking out one idiot and calling him the poster boy of the Tea Party is helpful as calling Sean Penn the voice of the Democratic Party. I am a Tea Party supporter and I am Catholic. I find the two to be completely compatible.
This whole thread is not borne from love of neighbor but from partisanship, oneupmanship and childish Na na na nah!
I have come to expect a more charitable tact from you Mark.
The guy is not just some nut. He’s a nut who’s running for Congress and people need to know what his values really are before they vote. Mr. Shea performs a public service by informing voters.
Mark,
Again, your right on the mark! I used to be an “obedient Catholic”, except when it interefered with my political party of choice. Through prayer, God opened my eyes, I now am a Catholic first. Saint Avitus said it best, “God overthrows the thrones of those who are disobedient to His law. My political views are those of the Our Father”.
I shall be putting a link to this post on my Facebook page, at which time I think some of my liberal friends, who would for NO OTHER reason go to a faithful Catholic web site, just might be captivated by an honest voice and stay to read more. Who knows?
You asked whether or not some seriously believed that the U.S. was seriously on the verge of: “f) mass experimentation on thousands of undesirables.”
I would contend that this is already happening in our society under the form of embryonic stem cell research. I’m not trying to promote a political angle. Just throwing it out there…
I was at a dinner table with a friend who was studying political science at a local university. Although we had differing views on how we ought to order our lives (politics), it was a good conversation because I let my friend talk. By that I mean, I didn’t scare him off with red flags. Openness is a prerequisite for instilling conviction in an opponent’s salutory view of one’s own beliefs. This same process in necessary in apologetics.
Bottlecaps:
Quite true. But, of course, the thing to note is that this is largely the initiative of free enterprise (ah! Glorious Capitalism, so much less sinful then Bad Communism), which has been champing at the bit to tap into the vast number of babies we Freedom Lovin’ Americans butcher each year in the privacy of our own abortuaries. The State has, with reluctance, come around to permitting it (and will no doubt figure out ways to profit from it as Caesar and Mammon get ever more cozy). But this is rather remote from a centralized, State-sponsored system which experiments on and slaughters adult human beings against their will. Aesthetics still very much persuades us Americans to do our dirty business of exploitation and slaughter on victims too small to be seen and in the arena of Glorious Free Enterprise instead of death camps. So while there certainly is an echo of Nazi contempt for human life and Nazi tendencies to view the human body as Nature’s renewable resource, the approach still doesn’t exactly suggest that we are on the verge of a Nazi centralized police state. The great genius of the American systems is that we are seeking to *voluntarily* kill and eat our young without a gun at our backs.
As Catholics, we would do well to remember this document from the USCCB: Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
You have no idea what you are talking about. You talk about German history with the same level of knowledge as the typical Starbucks denizen when he spouts off about Catholic theology.
I await your next ill-advised foray into matters historical, in which you condemn Civil War re-enactors to the dustbin—-that is, the ones who are so “depraved” as to wear gray!
Pathetic stuff.
As I made clear, I have no problem with re-enactment per se, so long as it is really historical. Whitewashing the SS is not history. However, given that your rant appears to be ordered toward some sort of defense of the SS, I suspect that if you keep talking, Larry, you are going to make Iott’s defenders cringe. Please. Do tell. Are the Waffen SS freedom fighters and brave idealists whom we should “salute”?
I can’t STAND nazi re-enactors. Can’t… STAND…. THEM!
Why? Because they buy up the old East German DDR uniforms and hack them up to make their Wermacht uniforms. THEY are the reason I have trouble finding an NVA uniform that fits when I do re-enactments.
They destroy actual history in their attempt to re-enact it.
Wow. I have to admit that I certainly hoped the Tea Party movement was a cry from Americans with morals to return to Christianity. But more recently, I beginning to realize that my hope and reality are two different things. I have long warned my family members (Protestants, proudly bearing the Republican Party banner as if it represents Christianity to the fullest) that it’s the backlash to Obama that we should worry about. The way the puppet masters have always run this country is through a successful propaganda campaign that keys off of a citizenry that has been reduced to stupidity from television saturation over the years. Like you said, they aren’t content merely with murdering innocents, they want us all to agree to it. One way is to create constant political chaos by offering up the least electable bunch for popular vote. In desperation, the nation votes from, what they perceive as, one extreme to the other. All the while, both apparent “extremes” actually have the same inevitable consequence… the destruction and enslavement of man. Modern America encapsulates the “dictatorship of relativism” to a T. Unfortunately, we have Catholics and non-Catholic Christians who place Caesar/Mammon before Christ (Vox Nova comes to mind, along with the several Catholic “Tea Party” sites). What you’ve raised by this and other posts is that both parties (including the recently hijacked Tea Party) are, in reality, the same party. Only those who are drunk on the Kool-Aid on either side of the aisle of illusion amazingly believe that they aren’t as they blindly stump for “their side” (both = Caesar/Mammon).
It’d be much better if our government just came out of the despot closet like the EU super-state has and admit to the fact that they are a dictatorship. I guess it’d be less fun that way, however. It’s much more interesting to play with your prey before you swallow it. I guess that’s the difference between the Oriental lodges and the Scottish rite.
One of the big problems today is that the conservative media and pundits are not attempting to screen out the clearly unqualified among the candidates and would-be candidates. They are, unfortunately, not that few nowadays. It seem to me that Mr Shea is trying to do a little of that. And more power to him. And yes, it is quite clearly an elitist position. I should think conservatives would want to be governed by people of good education (a little Latin and Greek (and a lot of history) would help) and sound views. Yours for more people like our first six presidents.
Mark,
A greater number of people die in communist countries compared to capitalist countries. Millions died on the communist purges of Stalin, Mao and Kemer Rouges just to name a few. Do you think that fewer babies are aborted in communist/socialist countries?
There is no co-relation between abortion and capitalism but the same can not be said about communist countries governed by a secular mindset. Abortion in our country is not driven by greed but rather in proportion to the number of people walking away from God. Greed is a product of abortion and not vice versa.
We catholics need to pray a lot of rosaries for the grace of making the right choices, spiritually first and for our brothers second.
The crucial point Mr. Shea is missing here: the Waffen SS were not involved in the pogroms or the Holocaust. They were an entirely different department of elite military units. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen_ss
They were not the same thing as the Totenkopf (“Deaths Head”) units who were the death squads. The Totenkopf units were undeniably evil, and what people most associate with the term “SS.” (There was actually a third division, as I recall, which only did administrative stuff - they could have been involved in the Holocaust as well.) The Waffen SS was no more evil or good than the regular German Army in World War II. Which was pretty much no more evil or good than most other armies, all of which committed atrocities. War is a terrible thing.
If you believe those who study war are evil and terrible too, I guess I’m in that group.
Newsflash, people… The Republicans repudiated the guy almost as soon as the photo was made public. (See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/10/eric-cantor-rich-iott_n_757235.html.) Mark, I really love reading your stuff, but I wish you would slow down a bit and make sure that you’ve got all the facts straight before you make these broad-brush analyses about “this thing that used to be conservatism.” You have a tendency to shoot from the hip.
Truth to tell, I’m not particularly elitist (unless, by “elitist” we are now lowering the bar to “not celebrating the Waffen SS” and “not suggesting armed insurrection might be on the table if you lose”). I’m with Buckley in thinking I’d be content to be rule by the first 200 people pulled at random from the phone book. But I would also do a little footwork and find out if any of those people are, you know, complete idiots. The problem with the Right is that lots and lots of people are coming to think that if you make the right noises about a few hot button issues (abortion, taxes, war) and are embraced by the Tea parties, then only a heretic, traitor, and secret Lefty can question a thing you do or say. Result: moral idiots like Iott make their way to the top of the heap and nobody ever dares to do a background check, because they fear the mob will denounce them.
Karen:
There are people defending Iott right here.
“I suspect that if you keep talking, Larry, you are going to make Iott’s defenders cringe. Please. Do tell. Are the Waffen SS freedom fighters and brave idealists whom we should ‘salute’?”
Yes, Shea, you would suspect that, because you know not whereof you speak. The “Wiking” division is a unit whose record is definitely worth re-enacting. Its battles against the Soviet murder machine were epic, and well worth studying from a military standpoint.
Your hyper-hyper-sensitivity about the Holocaust is enough to make me suspect that it is the true focus of your religious devotion. Did you know that your hero, Churchill, wrote his entire history of WWII without bothering to mention the “Big H?” He must have been a “denier!” <At this point Shea runs screaming from the room.>
Mr. Shea:
It would seem that you are selective in your criticisms. Why no mention of Allen Grayson of Florida. This man is despicable. He aired a video in which he completely lied and distorted what his opponent Daniel Webster stated in a speech. In fact what Grayson did was to leave the impression that Webster stated the exact opposite of what he actually stated.
I would argue that you don’t have to look far in the Democratic machine to find lies and distortions.
Mark, my point is this: The photo was published in the Atlantic on 10/8, Iott was scrubbed from the Republican Party website on 10/9, Cantor publicly repudiated him on 10/10, and this blog post appeared on 10/11. The (very strong) message of your concluding paragraphs is that _maybe_ the Republicans and Tea Partiers didn’t vet Iott thoroughly enough, but what you really suspect is that they didn’t really care. That latter doesn’t seem to be the case, and if you had slowed down by a day or two, you could have incorporated that information into this piece.
And if you’re going to cherrypick comboxes, you can find pretty much anything.
Sources, anyone? Is it possible that Mark S. is painting with a broad brush? Would it be the equivalent of saying that American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq are sinister because their commander-in-chief is Obama (and was Bush Jr.)? Are they to be lumped in with the horrible leaders who sent them on their questionable mission? Could that mean that 35 years ago, Shea would have been leading a march against “baby killers” on an American college campus somewhere? Is it possible that the particular German division of soldiers under discussion had nothing to do with Hilter’s desire to exterminate Jews and Catholics? If that is so, I suppose a retraction is in order. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s the best move to be part of a Nazi soldier re-enactment cast of actors.
This piece was necessary, Mark. Let the detractors continue to spout off. They are their own worst enemies.
I found this thanks to Naomi Young’s Facebook link. (Naomi rocks, BTW)
Thank you sir, for being a voice of reason.
Sincerely - A moderate (How can I tell? All my liberal friends think I’m conservative and all my conservative friends think I’m a liberal. It gets lonely out here).
Larry:
Yes. Well. Thanks for your input. I’m sure the rest of Iott’s defenders are wishing you’d shut up and go away.
Karen:
The piece was posted on Saturday afternoon. When I found out (courtesy of your helpful link) that GOP elders ditched this guy I updated the post to reflect that. I’m happy they got a clue. However, the behavior of a signficant percentage of people here makes my point: when the Tea Partiers anoint a favorite son, they don’t vet him; they treat critics as heretics and enemies. It’s an excellent way to get more candidates who blow up in your face (as anybody who expressed doubts about Angle or (God forbid!) Palin quickly discover. Inside the Bubble of the True Believers, these people are as above question or criticism as Obama was with his most devoted worshippers. Obama worshippers are currently figuring out who much they blinded themselves in their devotion (as are the Tea Partiers who didn’t question Iott. Next up: Angle and (God forbid!) Palin devotees should they win.
Joe: The sources are in the Atlantic article I linked. What Larry overlooks with his Jew-hating code language about the “true focus off my religious devotion” is that I think the murder of innocent Hungarian Jews is wrong, whereas he thinks of it as minor blemish (and who knows? maybe a mark of honor?) on the sterling heroism of the Wiking unit that only a fake Catholic Jew-lover could have the temerity to mention. These people were butchers, Joe, not brave idealists.
“Your hyper-hyper-sensitivity about the Holocaust is enough to make me suspect that it is the true focus of your religious devotion.”
One might say the same regarding your own sensitivity about the SS.
I have never read a series of blob posts full of such use of such logical fallacies. you have, I am afraid to say, become the very thing you purport to oppose.
Your argument used the stated premises:
1. She said that she hopes that we do not have to get to a “Revolution” to solve our problems.
2. She said that she hopes that the vote will fix the “Harry Reid” problem.
Therefore: If she loses the election we must revolt.
This is niether and inductive nor deductive logical conclusion to make. I count at least 16 logical fallacies including Ad Hominem, Ad Hominem tu Quoque, Appeal to Consequences of Believe, Appeal to Fear, Begging the Question, Circumstantial Ad Hominem, Composition, False Dilemma, Guilt by Association, Hasty Generalization, Poisioning the Well, Personal Attack, Red Herring, Slippery Slope, Genetic, Misleading Vividness, and Straw Man.
I have already stated why I believe that Mark has violated the Hasty Generalization and Misleading Vividness fallacies. Frankly, I have lost interest in dicussing this further. I will say, however, that I believe that Mark tends to spin things done by Conservatives way out of context. He has done this to the point where I have lost all respect for him. In fact, I feel that Mark’s lack of intellectual integrity and pompousness has become an embarrassment to me personally and somewhat of a scandal given the number of people who I have previously directed to Mark’s blob and columns who now use Mark’s post as (logically absurd) ammunition against Catholicism.
Write the truth, Mark, and stop making fallacious arguments. I hope that you can rebuild your credibility one day.
Once again I’m drawn to the observation of one Josef Cardinal Ratzinger in his evening homily the night before his own election to the papacy, effecting that ‘moral relativism is the greatest danger facing mankind.’ I believe he also amplified that moral relativism by its nature can posess no attribute of the political, which I believe is intrinsically related to your piece’s über-point, Mark?
Scott puts it well, after his genealogy of fallacies. I have observed Shea for some time and, despite his abilities as an apologist, he overestimates both his knowledge and objectivity to an extent that would be excusable only in an old grandmother.
Still knowing nothing about the saga of the W-SS in general and about the “Wiking” division in particular, he gleefully slaps the “butcher” label on the entire unit because of the actions of a very few. He can then mount his high horse and dismiss his political enemies (such as Iott) with a clear conscience. He can then go back to watching his Blu-ray version of “Yentl” for the 1000th time.
I’m sure that were Shea to find out that some of his neo-conservative heroes were apologists for the Soviet atrocities committed against Germans and others he would excuse them immediately, because they “suffered so much,” etc. Indeed, even the persecution of the Russian Church is probably only a blip on his severely warped radar screen.
Final note: I am not defending Iott…I know nothing of the man. I simply see that this attack by Monsignor Shea is highly unjust.
Mark, thank you for this piece. I have long had misgivings about the caliber of people who will attain power due to an anti-dem backlash. We need voices like yours, who will not back away from inconvenient truths. Jay and Larry don’t seem to understand what you’re saying, either, which is sad.
I’m registered Republican because I wanted to vote in the primary, but I am a libertarian at heart who derives my political leanings from the likes of Pope Leo, Pope JohnPaul II and Chesterton. I am Catholic first and last, and realize that political noises aimed at me are likely meant to get my vote without necessarily intending to follow through with promises. Also sad, but that’s how people get power here.
Larry:
Deep cleansing breaths. Nobody’s defending Stalin or his butchers. However, you are defending Hitler’s butchers (and making very clear your contempt for Jews in the process). If Scott wants guys like you, rather than me, standing next to him he’s welcome to you, fella.
Verily I say unto you, Mark: Had Iott been a re-enactor who wore Soviet regalia you would have batted not one eyelash. I did not defend the butchers; I defended the heroes who fought in the Wiking division.
And your sanctimonious defense of Jewish honor is ridiculous. I am Jewish; and my contempt is reserved only for those who cannot see past the puerile version of history sold by Hollywood. Oh, and you might look up “shabbos goy,” too
Awe, politics. Sorry to see the tea guys get co-opted by the neo-cons. It seems major powers have the dirty pictures on many of these candidates that are suddenly thrust into our beauty contest.
We hope for another one of the caliber of Ross Perot, but none are in sight yet.
Verily I say unto you, Mark: Had Iott been a re-enactor who wore Soviet regalia you would have batted not one eyelash.
You really need to give up the mind-reading act because you couldn’t be more wrong. Unlike you, I think both the major tyrannies on the Eastern front were monstrously evil.
I am Jewish.
Mhm. You may be ethnically Jewish for all I know. However, you read like other whacked out Jew-hating Traditionalists I’ve run into who use their (alleged, on the internet anyway) “Jewish background” as a way of establishing their credentials so that they can flail away at promoting the latest piece of swill from the Maurice Pinay blog. I don’t know from nothing about Jewish honor. I’m defending something more elementary here: the fifth commandment. Your celebration of Jew-killing butchers tells me all I need to know about you.
I think that the problem may lie in the misconception regarding the existence of Liberal and Conservative, Left and Right. This a Hegelian false paradigm. Catholics are neither. The Truth is neither. Unfortunately, we as Catholics have fallen into this false construct.
Mark, what I have always found so refreshing about you is your sanity. You have a great gift of detachment, allowing you to look at matters with a cool head and offer true insight. Love reading your work.
Sorry Mark, your smug arrogance really doesn’t hold water this time. The American founding fathers did not fight a revolution over gas chambers or the communist manifesto, but over improper taxation and the right to decentralized self-government. Today’s Federal government acts an aweful lot like the Britain that once upon a time we the people once could no longer stand. So for you I suggest a lesson in the spirit of America, and for every American I suggest that we exercise our right to a peaceful overthrow of the aristocratic spirit that now dominates our government and bring lasting reform to Washington.
That is, the peaceful overthrow that will soon have a chance to transpire at the polls. Oh the beauty of democracy… :)
If your contibution to this discussion so far was something like “Marks suptid lol,” but stretched into paragraph length, then maybe you need to let the brain run a bit longer before allowing the hands to engage the keyboard. Seriously though, we should take advantage of this: here is a politician who you can draw a Hitler mustache on and only be accused of making lame jokes instead of being labeled as bat-crap crazy. I mean, Bush, he wasn’t Hitler, or at least not a very good one. Obama isn’t shaping up to be that good at it either, whatever you think he wants to do. I mean, this guy is a candidate we can all unite behind as a guy not to vote for because, while he’d probably suck at being Hitler too, he’s VAGUELY ASSOCIATED WITH SOME PEOPLE THAT WORKED FOR HIM! What more could you want! Let’s have a bi-partisan-crappy-signs-with-dumb-pictures-of-bad-mustaches-on-them rally!
Or maybe we could just not vote for the guy because he’s nuts, and move on to more profitable things. That could work too.
I actually totally agree with Mark, but since the replies are mostly lunacy, I figured heck why not add alittle more disconnected logic to the mix…I dunno, just my weird sense of humor ;). But yea this is one person we certainly could get a bipartisan group to rally against… the likes of whom can’t stay anywhere near the tea party if is to retain any credibility. Glad to see they’re doing some distancing now…
Mark: You make the point I have tried unsuccessfully to make to many conservatives and a few independents.
The point I have used is what Nehru said to a gleeful Muslim leader during Gandhi’s “peaceful resistance” which had taken a turn into anarchical overturn of everything. This Muslim was cheered by the thought of such an outpouring of untamed energy. Gandhi on the other hand began his first fast, nearly causing his end for what he said was his part in causing such havoc; he wanted no part of it. The Muslim thought is was just what was needed, Nehru remarked to the Muslim “yes but what sort of leaders would it throw up? Would they be leaders which we would want for our nation?”
My point exactly w/some Palin’s Picks and/or candidates backed by the tea party. Although I am a R conservative, truly I could not vote for someone unqualified for office, regardless of whose candidate they were. For me that includes Palin herself. DeMint says he doesn’t care what sort of candidates they are as long as they are conservatives. I DO. This is my country which I love and I want the best for it. Truly that does not include the present regime. To may way of thinking w/some of these candidate picks is exactly the same as yours - we could do better and must. Some people have even said what’s the difference: “O” isn’t qualified or even vetted for POTUS. My answer - “So do we want more of the same, except simply a change faces.” Voting is a priceless gift in a free nation. Let’s use it responsibly. We are already way over our heads in economic terms, etc. Let’s keep our heads about candidates which will be seated in Congress of the US and WH.
The gentlemen, trying to school Mr. Shea on military history are right—they had little direct involvement with the Jewish Holocaust.
However, since they are students of history, I thought they’d might like to see what comes up when you Google “Waffen” “civilian” and “massacre”.
The sheer obliviousness of an American politician posing in anything Third Reichy, be it Waffen, Totenkopf, Lufwaffe, what have you, would seem grounds enough for disqualification.
I appreciate your column on this subject, as it illustrates the terrible chasm which has split the country in 3. There is no “fence” anymore. You are either far right, far left or apathetic. The peacemakers might last one term before they realize their idealism is not going to work in what is now our center of government. It does not matter who is in power now, it is a I, Me, Mine grab for all the money you can get. Period. “My constituents? Let me get back to you on that.” Peace and God bless.
That sounds like a populist and not an intellectual argument.
I think in fairness this character reference should be brought to the attention of your readers http://voteiott.com/2010/10/from-richard-gabai/
He certainly talks about a friend, business associate and supporter of Israel fully aware of his hobby of re-enactment. People such as General George Patton (my mother was in his army) studied the strategy of great armies. Iott was not parading in a KKK weekend parade, he was re-enacting. Would you have had the same reaction to a Civil War re-enactment because someone took the position of the South that supported slavery? What about people who play computer games of re-enactment-will that disqualify them? What about people who read about the battles and put themselves into both sides of the picture? Don’t we have to take people at their word regarding motivation? Are you participating in the vicious gotcha activities of a heated election? When did The Atlantic get this story and what about the timing? Do you really support these tactics? Why did they not bring it out in the primary?
As a lifelong Republican, I resent the constant insinuation that we are anti-female (never mind that I have been a Republican because I am concerned about the aborted females and the ability for the family to raise their own children) racist (forget that I am married to a person from India) intolerant ( I live and breathe in the Silicon Valley and love my neighbor) and out of touch (active in the community with leadership positions in church and taxpayer community)and not caring about the poor (don’t get me started).
No, the Tea Pary participants are not perfect people just like the rest of us, but they see things are not right. They talk about the Constitution because they see a class of people who think it is a suggestion, not the guiding documents that outline limited power and they have read the perspective of history where they understand the remedies they have. The founding fathers had the concept of the people rising up as they themselves did to give birth to the nation. Look at Prop.8 in California and the courts saying the people were wrong. Would you like to send your kids to school where they are taught kids can have two mommies and no daddy? Perhaps The Register would do better to present the gospel in the positive and true light without participating in the personal destruction bordering on calumny when we suggest we know the motives of the person better than they know themselves. Perhaps they could continue to talk about the non-negotiables and remind people they must still love their neighbor including the politicians running for office. We should judge people regarding whether their family comes first, what they publicly support and whether they are trustworthy.
A question - is participating in re-enactments inherently sinful?
Is playing the “bad guy” in re-enactments inherently sinful?
I tend to think not.
Here is another intersting discussion of this same issue:
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/10/exclusive-rich-iott-photos-demonstrate-dc-gops-spinelessness.html
Hank:
Please stop with the straw men. *Nobody* said re-enactments are inherently sinful. What *is* sinful is whitewashing the history of butchers, as I pointed out in the article. If you are going to do “purely historical re-enactment”, then when you are dealing with people who slaughtered innocent Hungarian Jews, you should probably not “salute” these butchers as brave idealists working for a better tomorrow. Is that really so hard to grasp?
Mark,
I think that it is our Christian duty to think well of others and to try to put the best possible “spin” on their statements snd actions, not to immediately suspect the worst of them.
In regards to the actions of Iott and the words of Angle: Do you think that these two recent articles of yours are the a charitable and generous expression of this Christian duty?
Is it possible that Iott’s actions were more innocent than you suspect and/or Angle’s off-the-cuff comments could be read more charitably?
Don’t we have to take people at their word regarding motivation? Are you participating in the vicious gotcha activities of a heated election? When did The Atlantic get this story and what about the timing? Do you really support these tactics? Why did they not bring it out in the primary?
Sure. His motivation was “father/son bonding”, which he thought was best accomplished by joining a group that “salutes” the butchers of Hungarian Jews and whitewashes the SS. It’s *because* I take him at his word, that I think him a moral idiot and his supporters and excusers to be fools. The rest of your rant consists of, “I prefer to blame the messenger who exposed his folly.” In the words of Tom Kreitzberg, “The argument, ‘He was just pretending to be a valiant Nazi,’ defeats itself.” The astounding thing is that I have to point this out to a Register reader and not to some skinhead on Stormfront.
I think that it is our Christian duty to think well of others and to try to put the best possible “spin” on their statements snd actions, not to immediately suspect the worst of them.
If that is so, then why did you put the worst possible spin on my article and attribute to me ideas which I not only never said, but specifically repudiated? Why do you endorse the highly uncharitable suggestion that the GOP pols who wisely distanced themselves from this fool are “spineless”? Get back to me when the plank is out of your eye.
Mark,
I’m sorry for angering you. That is not my intent
I don’t feel that I put any spin on your article, I just read it, thought you were being quite a bit hasty and uncharitable in your assessment and asked a couple of questions.
I have had this discussion with friends who are Civil War re-enactors and some of them do feel qualms about re-enacting as Confederate soldiers. They made the point that someone has to “play” the bad guy. Frankly this made me queasy and there is a part of me that thinks the whole re-enactment stuff is a bit creepy (when it involves issues wehre there is clearly so much evil - WWII & Civil War).
For the record I don’t endorse the link I sent - on the Iott issue, I agree with you, but thought that the link was a good “con” piece.
As for Angle, I do think you are twisting her words into something that she didn’t say, didn’t mean and would repudiate.
I’m not angry. But I have to ask: why did you ask those questions, Hank, when I specifically and clearly spelled out that the problem is *not* re-enactments, but the whitewash on history that the group is very clearly engaged in? What made you overlook my extremely clear point?
As to Angle, we must agree to disagree, I think her remarks were stunningly irresponsible.
I continue to wonder at Mr. Shea’s estimation of the level (as in grade level) of his target audience. As a Catholic, and a conservative one at that, I have my own skepticism of the Tea Party movement. I have been waiting for a reasoned discussion of the movement from a Catholic perspective. This article amounts to a childish and unworthy sideswipe using the vehicle of a “Tea Party darling”.
Mr. Shea’s astonishment at those who resist the obvious appeal of this “case” against the Tea Party assumes the reader is unable to be analytical. We are governed by a Chief Executive who says that the question of life is “above his pay grade”. That statement is a dis-qualifier. The senior Democratic Senator from West Va. now deceased was a former Grand Kleagle of the Clan, a dis-qualifier. We have a Senator from Mass. whose residence became a house of homosexual prostitution, a dis-qualifier. We had a Democratic President who engaged in, well you know, in the Oval Office, a dis-qualifier. Prominent members of the current occupant’s staff are identifying themselves variously as Communists, Socialists or in the least inspired by Chairman Mao, dis-qualifiers each and every one. In my lexicon, not one is fit for office. Not one.
Is identification with the Nazi Party a dis-qualifier? Yeah, I’m okay with that. And a person bereft of the intelligence to understand the appearance created by appearing in a Nazi uniform no matter his intent in doing so probably isn’t smart enough to conduct the public’s business. In that specific case, therefore, I would be denied a vote, unable in good conscious to vote either candidate. Fine, but don’t expect me to be shocked anymore, nor to condemn a tectonic shift in our politics based upon it.
The Tea Party has the effect of exposing the “otherness” of being Catholic. It is the same “otherness” a Catholic experienced when his child was instructed in the King James in school, or asked to pray without making the Sign of the Cross. They and we share a value system, a society and a Lord. Is that sufficient to merit the support or at least acquiescence of Catholics to the movement? That is the discussion I am waiting for, not this kind of childishness.
I’m sorry, Mr. Shea, but I agree you can do better. The spleen and the brain are two seperate organs.
Mark, maybe, just maybe, your comments about Angle and Iott were intended to push our right-wing, reactionary buttons? It’s one thing to be critical of political candidates, but quite another to demean and dismiss those who support them. But that was the tone of both your columns. Gauging from the reaction you got, I don’t think I’m wrong.
Mark,
Arguably, the most atrocious aspect of Nazism was their inherent disrespect for human life, as evidenced by their genocide.
Does this country not already engage in the “murder of millions of American citizens”?
You are forgetting those bodies that have been hidden from the public, quietly discarded, and occasionally (and brutally) experimented with.
We may not actually live in the marshmallow world some rhetoricians and blogophiles may believe that we do.
You are forgetting those bodies that have been hidden from the public, quietly discarded, and occasionally (and brutally) experimented with.
No, I’m not. Go to my Oct 11, 2010 2:08 PM (EST) entry.
Hey Mark,
I was completely with you when I read your article. But further reading makes this SS thing look more idiotic than evil. Apparently, a friend of the candidate, a business associate who is both a practicing Jew and a soft porn actor, has vouched for the guy. Wierd.
Herr Shea knows that there were no valiant Nazis, because Herr Shea watches TV.
Kurt/Larry no doubt has in mind the valiant Dr. Josef Mengele, who served with his storied and noble Wiking Unit. What a hero! What an idealist!
Thank you Mark. You reassure me that, no matter how sick Australian politics gets, we just never seem to top you guys.
*sigh* the tragedy is that there is bound to be a swing back to conservative now that the liberal experiment has almost run its course and the stinking fruits are evident, but the absolute worst thing that could happen is that idiots be allowed to hijack a genuinely good desire to conserve what is good in society in order to push right wing ideologies which specifically attack and destroy society in EXCTLY THE SAME AREAS AS THE LEFT does now.
Seriously guys, do you realise how moronic this makes Americans look to the outside world? Get yourself some decent conservatives so that we can pray for their success.
Apparently, a friend of the candidate, a business associate who is both a practicing Jew and a soft porn actor, has vouched for the guy.
Ah! A *practicing* Jew *and* a porn star vouches for him! Sort of like Jenna Jameson is a “devout Catholic”? Well then. That certainly seals the family values vote! I shut my mouth and repent in sack cloth and ashes.
This just gets better and better, don’t it? Yes, the moral here is clearly: “Question a Tea Party darling and you are a heretic and traitor. There’s no way you don’t want conservatives to stupidly circle the wagons around losers or anything. You’re just a secret Leftist.”
Actually, Mark, Mengele’s actions in Russia (pulling a tank crewman out of a burning tank) were heroic. Can you claim anything near that?
Sorry Mark, I don’t agree with you. And given the “Atlanta Monthly’s” reputation, I doubt that the article was on the up and up.
Harry Reid has had significant influence in the Democratic Party. He has backed the abortion money we send to other countries and is backing embryonic cell experimentation. I believe that he is not even adhering to the basic tenets of his Mormon faith.
Yes, I used to be a Democrat, but with the likes of Nancy Pelosi and some of our “so-called” Catholic democrats I see the country going bankrupt, people without jobs not to mention homes that was begun with the last administration’s Congress.
No, I will not listen to your ridiculous comments. It’s funny that you have never wrote a column defending Sarah Palin’s mudslinging from the liberal media, but I supposed that any misstatements about her or other Republican’s are fine. However, I vote for the man, Democrat or Republican that will stand up to Catholic ideas, and Harry Reid is not one of them. However we have one in Utah that is brave enough to go against the abortion crowd, and he certainly has my vote.
Don’t believe everything you read, and especially You Tube for heaven’s sake!
Wow! Josef Mengele the hero. And Rosemary and others think I’m the problem. Amazing.
Mark, Just saying that, yes, Mengele performed an heroic act (apparently). Then, of course, his later medical career was a bit, uh, chequered.
The point you are studiously missing is that the Wiking division was not a bunch of Orcs or Goblins. It was made of men, and it spent the war engaged in brutal combat against an equally brutal enemy. It is WELL WORTH studying and re-enacting, from a military standpoint. Period.
And if that was what was happening, from a military standpoint, I’d have no problem. But what these guys (and you) are doing is whitewashing the butchery and downplaying to the point of absurdity what the SS was and did. Yeah, they killed Commies and suffered as two great totalitarian states slugged it out to see who would be top tyranny. I think both were evil. You seem to have no big problems with the SS slaughter of innocents. All that gets transmuted in your mind into some sinister “the true focus of [my] religious devotion”. Why not just call me “Jew-lover” and get it off your chest since you seem to have such contempt for people who think murder of Jews is a bad thing.
Interesting, by the way, that when you assume a new identity, Larry, that it is SS-Unterscharführer Kurt Muller (Death Block Auschwitz). Wouldn’t you be happier over at the Maurice Pinay blog?
I think I’m done talking to you, you creep.
Mark, I found this article browsing blog reactions to the Iott situation and I just wanted to leave a word of appreciation and thanks. As an ex-Catholic, feminist socialist (yep, I’m buying out of blue team/red team as well, just probably on the other side of the spectrum from you) I have a great appreciation for the social justice history of Christianity and Catholicism in particular. Well reasoned essays like yours give me hope that the rank and file Catholics in America and elsewhere still keep the flame of doing Good in the world.
My above identification probably won’t win you any points with those so eager to write off your words as heresy against the conservative cause, for which I apologize. I do think, however, that its illustrative that there is common ground between both sides of the ideological spectrum - sure, agreeing that dressing up like a Wiking in your spare time and then doubling down with a defense of the unit itself isn’t a primo maneuver for someone trying to get elected to political office isn’t much, but its a start, right?
Kurt et al: I’m interested in hearing what arguments you’d provide to undecided voters to change their mind about Rich Iott’s hobby. Somehow I think a defense of Mengele’s medical career as “checkered” isn’t going to cut it.
Mark,
Looking at your response to David on the whole soft porn actor, practicing jew thing, his comment passed right over your head didn’t it?
Why don’t you reread it after you cool off a bit.
Mark,
I guess I can believe Jenna Jameson, Madonna, and Lady Gaga are all “devout Catholics” because Jack, Bobby, and Teddy Kennedy, were all “devout Catholics” too. Teddy had two, count’em TWO, Cardinals at his funeral (that’s showing there was a lot of respect in the Church for this man’s ideals), despite pushing abortion and the homosexual agenda on the American people. I always thought the Church was against abortion. Funny huh?
Yes, I always thought that the Church was against abortion, same sex marriage, embryonic cell experimentation yet I see the so-called Democratic Catholics in Congress and the Senate using the lame excuse of “following the law”.
Mark, I’d like for you to read and maybe do a column on St. Thomas More. He was a respected “politician” but knew his faith. All of our Catholic leaders should be following this man. I have NO respect for most of these Democrats, and that is why for the most part I will vote Republican in this election.
Military reenactments of the 2nd World War are distasteful at best, but trying to criminalize this man because of this is wrong. What about the friends of Obama such as the Chicago 4? Didn’t see you saying anything about not voting for this man because of his associates. I am 67 years old, and can well remember the hate and bombings they inspired. In fact, I would compare them to the Nazi’s you are implying in that photo.
Mark,
Well aren’t you going to call me a closet Nazi, or a closet KKK member? Or can you do better than that? What sinister evil membership can you infer from my comments?
“In Which I Again Signal My Secret Democrat Sympathies “
You don’t have signal, we know. After all, you helped give us Sotomayer and Kagan.
I understood David just fine thanks. Meanwhile, Michael, you, Rosemary and Jasper all seem to suffer from the reading disorder which imagines that criticism of one candidate must imply endorsement of his opponent. I won’t support a candidate who supports grave evil. So I didn’t vote for Obama and urged my readers not to do so either. I also wasn’t too happy with giving Teddy a Catholic funeral. But don’t let that stop you guys from circling wagons around your guy.
Mark,
The first time I heard of this guy was on YOUR site. He’s not MY guy.
You’re the one that’s trying to read minds, and failing spectacularly at it too I must add.
Come on, pick a different evil membership for me to below to, because closet Nazi won’t work.
Mark,
Here, I’ll help you with the little game you play. I’ll quote Scripture so you can call me a closet Fundamentalist.
“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.” 1 Cor 13:1
Well aren’t you going to call me a closet Nazi, or a closet KKK member?
Sigh. I’m done here. God help the Thing that Used to Be Conservatism.
Mark,
You don’t have to have TWO CARDINALS at a catholic funeral. Last time I looked all you needed was one priest. They didn’t give him just a Catholic funeral. Stop deluding yourself.
Mark,
You quit??? Don’t you want to play your game some more? Tired of pinning the racist/nazi/homophobe/bible-thumper/chauvanist-pig label on people that don’t slavishly lick up every word you write?
Maybe you’re sick. Better take your temperature. This is not like you, Mark. I’m worried.
Hey Mark,
You’re entitled to your opinions as everyone else. I myself mourn the death of the Democratic party as it once was. Back in the 40’s I agree Roosevelt was a great president, maybe the last great Democratic president we ever had. I lived in Cleveland and remember Kennedy coming there and I actually was there! He was a great president too, but it seemed afterwords the party embraced all of the sixties nonsense and elected people that didn’t even represent the people who voted for them.
When women’s lib came along and women who shared their convictions were elected I was disgusted.
This man that you’re throwing stones at is running against a woman who didn’t do anything for 25 years!
As for military re-enactments, there are plenty depicting the Civil War—-would you call this racist as the South wanted their slaves? Plenty of injustice there along with the shameful treatment of the Indians in this country.
As for some of the black leaders like Sharpton who call themselves Democrats, but who are racists through and through—-why don’t you highlight some of them? What about the so called Catholic priest in Chicago who was supporting Obama in his church! If you’re going to point fingers, lets not forget them. And I hope you stick to apologetics now, rather than commenting on politics.
So what Mark is saying that anyone dressing up as a ROMAN SOLDIER is perpetuating the memory of the Roman Legion’s Corrupt Government and of It’s Persecution of Christians for not 5 or 15 years, but of 300 years. That’s also to say that all you folks who have kids dressing up fort halloween… BE CAREFUL… You might be committing a very GRAVE SIN… Please.. Mark… wise up.
I can honestly say that discovering G.K. Chesteron’s writings seven years ago was the first thing that nudged me into RCIA last year. G.K. Chesteron’s lasting work had to do with refuting modernisim and warning of the looming post-modernisim, it had to do with reclaiming the centrality of Christ in history, it had to do with showing orthodoxy as something ever-young, etc.
G.K. Chesterton opposed the Boer war, and said so without apology. But he did not scribble on and on and on and on about it year after year, or about some other specific political issue or candidate. If he had his collected works would have been tossed out after he died like any other scrap paper.
Certainly one should avoid Uncle Screwtape’s Christianity-and. Christianity and liberalisim, Christianity and conservatisim, Christianity and vegetarianism, Christianity and fishing lure collecting, etc. Good point, but after the point is made, it is made and this seems to be the only point being made as of late.
Mark, question one: do you think that Iott wants the American government to become nazified? Question 2: is his association with this waffen-SS-lovers group your sole evidence that he wants the American gov’t to become nazified?
If you think he wants us to go-nazi, I think you need more evidence than his recreational activities.
If he makes the right noises about taxes and abortion, as you say, that is enough for me. If he wants to party with Castro or with the BNP in his spare time, I couldn’t care less. So long as he votes right.
Surely you don’t think this man is planning or capable of planning a coup d’etat. Let him have has fun [which is admittedly in poor taste to say the least]. If he is such a person as votes to make abortion more difficult in any way, he will have my vote.
If he were a genuine danger, you might have a point. But from what you have showed here, his associations are harmless, whatever you may think of them.
The fact that the TP’ers seem to like him, is to me prima facie evidence sufficient to support the belief that any tendencies towards fascistic admiration the man may harbor are tempered or even overbalanced by sympathy with anti-central governmentalism.
However if he moves to abolish Congress and declare himself Fuhrer for life I will gladly eat my hat in your presence.
My first point being that if there is no real reason to fear that Iott is a true closet nazi, then the world of politics demands things like ‘contextualizing’ away such activities, and ‘closing ranks’, if in the determination of your prudential judgment, he will turn out to be a better rep. than the alternative.
Your argument for better vetting is well-taken, but, once he is on the ticket, you have to go all in, or give up. There is no half-way anymore. Obviously, electing imperfect people is by nature a messy business and one which is going to come dangerously close at times to violating morals such as, um, the obligation to tell the whole truth. ‘Contextualizing’, for example…I’m not accusing the guy of lying. But obviously, he is tailoring the story in order to put out of the popular mind the notion that he is a nazi, since this would not exactly make him more electable.
My second point is that you have to have some tolerance of divergent views. If he is even a nazi-sympathizer to a certain extent, I don’t care, as long as he can’t do any of the nazi-like things which are evil. But if he confusedly thinks that Hitler was against abortion [for Aryans] and was therefore not a bad guy in the mold of Stalin and therefore admirable, I don’t care. He likes Hitler for a good reason in that case. Maybe he is able to appreciate him only for that fact, but hold him as a murderer in other respects. I don’t know.
If someone is a closet or open admirer of Mao should this be enough information to keep him from running for, or being appointed to, public office? One might hope so but the reality is otherwise. If we are going to get more conservatives involved, not all of them are going to have the same ideas in every detail that we might hope for. Ideas are one thing; actions another. The Congress or any lawmaking body in America can survive a Hitler lover that votes for lower taxes, abortion restrictions, less spending, and so on. If he votes right, I don’t care who he loves. He may say he loves Hitler but if he tries to limit the size and scope of gov’t then he is not a good emulator of Hitler, and that is what is most important in a representative.
My third point is that it is not fair to attribute everything on the waffen-lovers website as being representative of the personal views of Iott without knowing more.
You may scoff at this guy but if he is going to vote better than the other one, that is the bottom line.
Marc, I can back you big time on the Iott example. It is obvious and unambiguous. But the Sharron Angle example is still a bit of a reach.
I’d give you all the credit in the world if you said she was idiotic for so glibly speaking of “second amendment remedies.” To speak of such a catastrophic outcome without what I would consider morally obligatory caveats upon caveats upon caveats is highly irresponsible, more than a little off the wall.
But it is still a reach to say she is truly advocating “Vote for me or somebody could get shot.” I’m all for hyperbole and a strong advocacy of peaceful action, but you did in fact reach. I think you can admit that.
But you are right. All is not right in Right Wing Populist world. Right Wing Populist world is (nearly) as selfish and uncharitable as the left and susceptible to great violence. Most “conservatives” have bought into the anti-life society as much as liberals, but for different reasons.
So I get where you are coming from, but a bit of moderation is in order.
Why does your link on Proverbs 27:6 take us to a Protestant Bible site? Other than that, I think your article is excellent, and it works for both Republicans and Democrats. Most rush to embrace anyone who talks their “talking points”. Thanks, too, for the update.
Because it was easy and convenient and there’s nothing wrong with the translation of that passage.
Well Mark, your comment on the Tea Party applies more to the Democratic candidates than the Republlicans. Remember Joe the Plumber?
Any Republican candidates that speak to Democratic audiences, particularly on College Campuses are booed down because they don’t agree with the current thought on abortion, same sex marriage (especially) or even worse run off the campus.
And what about the pro lifers that were arrested when Obama was speaking at Notre Dame? They are presently being prosecuted.
So, one or two incidents at a tea party do not equal all of the times that Free Speech was denied in other settings.
Rosemary:
You would have a real point—if I had not condemned Leftist suppression of Free Speech. But since I have—multiple times—I don’t see your point. Unless it is “It’s okay when our side does it”.
Perhaps you have condemned the leftist speeches, but my point again is that this goes on far more times, including the media (leftist) anti Catholic trash (which you WILL NEVER HEAR IN A A TEA PARTY RALLY), where racist statements are always alluded to in Democratic rallies if you don’t agree with the speaker, that is IF they let you speak.
Regarding the use of a Protestant site for your link on Proverbs 27:6, you said you used it, “Because it was easy and convenient and there’s nothing wrong with the translation of that passage.” I say, “Wrong”. Is the Protestant Bible site more convenient than the USCCB site? I would have to say, “No”. The New American Bible available on the USCCB site also has excellent footnotes. There are also sites that have the Douay-Rheims Bible, are they not as convenient as the Protestant site you listed? Again, “No”. Also, the site you linked to made a great many translations available, none of which are Church approved texts. I would point out that there are differences between the Revised Standard Version the Protestants use and that of the Catholic Bible. When making Bible references for Catholics, I think it always best to use a Catholic site so there is no confusion to the reader . . . and no distorted texts as there are with several Protestant translations. And really, isn’t a correct Catholic translation more important than your alleged convenience?
Sigh. I was looking for a quick site that would allow me to zero in on that one verse. The USCCB site doesn’t do that. This site did. So I used it. Convenience.
Relax. There’s nothing about this particular passage or the translation that is contrary to our Catholic faith. Chill.
bo_leggs,
Remember Mark can do no wrong. He will never admit a mistake. He is the All-Holy!
Sigh. It is a pity that convenience takes precedence over Catholicity. I do point out, however, the USCCB site will take you directly to Proverbs 27, and verse 6 shows on the page. There is also a site for the Douay Rheims Bible online at http://drbo.org/, and for Proverbs 27: http://drbo.org/chapter/22027.htm. However, since convenience seems to be your chief criteria, next time use this link: http://bible.cc/proverbs/27-6.htm. It at least shows the Douay Rheims translation, which I believe reads a lot better than the New International which your preferred site reads.
I read the comments here and have to scrape my jaw off the floor….Hats off to Mark for maintaining his composure and patience throughout this thread…Holy Moonbats, Lucy…!
@Jesse
Sorry, you get no support from me. Mark Shea is orthodox and represents the faith exceptionally well. I say this having read a great many of his blogs and after having heard him several times on various Catholic talk shows. Nothing he has ever said can be construed contrary to the Faith. The fact that he so handily cuts down ill informed people who try to challenge him is why people like you post things like the website in your post, which is best likened to what I find on the ground in my cattle lot. Get my drift? Good.
No Bo, he handily cuts down only those arguments which he ALLOWS to remain on his blog…The ones he can’t handle he hides, by deleting them.
How about it, Mark? Do you delete the comments you can’t handle? What is/would be your guide for deleting someone? I’ve seen you handle some pretty tough comments. These naysayers like Hegel and Jesse won’t back up their claims with names, but I’d still like to know.
Bo:
Just FYI, Hegel and Jesse are the same person, a troll named Larry who keeps horning into threads because he’s angry and wishes to abuse me.
I generally delete comments if, like Larry/Hegel/Jesse, they are filled with personal abuse and invective and contribute little to the discussion. So, for instance, Michael has been banned since I didn’t see much point to being called a liar, an asshole and so forth. Likewise, another reader is now banned because playground insults about how much somebody weighs are not worth my time. General rule of thumb, if people talk in a way I would not stand for in my living room, I usually get rid of them in comboxes too. But, as you can see from a perusal of the comments here, I also leave room for a lot of disagreement. I do have my limits, of course, about content apart from personal abuse. So, like you, I have no particular interest in giving a forum to nutjobs who want to plead for the good name of Josef Mengele or engage in passionate defenses of the brave men of the SS. For similar reasons, on other blogs I have deleted some of the more raving spittle-flecked defenses of the Child Free Movements hatred of children and “breeders”. I don’t owe nuts a forum. But I try to make room for a wide amount of variety.
Nifty troll names, though!
Shea, you’re still telling lies: I NEVER said Mengele had a “good name,” though I did say that there were SOME brave men in the Waffen-SS (which was separate from the Allgemeine-SS). Of course, since you have deleted my comments, I cannot prove this any more. Also, your last post contains language which SHOULD be banned from this blog. Your hypocrisy is, apparently, as boundless as your ego. Love, ==Larry
PS: I use other names because you have set the blog to REJECT everything from me. If you didn’t RUN, we wouldn’t have to CHASE you!
Folks: Count the derogatory names Shea uses in his last post. The guy cannot write a sentence without parroting some stupid label like “troll” or “nuts.”
Mark,
I understand fully. I do want you to know that I have ordered your new book on the Church Fathers. I have read the one by Mike Aquilina, and hope yours measures up.
Ed.
Thanks, Bo. I appreciate the encouragement. It’s been a tough week.
FWIW, I think you have me confused with somebody else, because I haven’t written anything on the Church Fathers. My most recent effort was Mary, Mother of the Son. Mike Aquilina is terrific, though.
On the bright side, I will have a book on the corporal and spiritual works of mercy coming out (next spring, I reckon) from St. Anthony Messenger.l
Yes. It was Jimmy Akin. You two do have many similarities, both physical and spiritual. I will look for your new book next spring. Keep up the good work.
Ed.
Since you have brought our attention to the “worst” within the Tea Party movement, Mark, how about bringing the same attention to the “worst” in
your estimation within the Democratic party offerings? Or are you not into the fair and balanced thing? From your current and past posts it would seem it never enters your mind. The Tea Party movement is a reaction by the grass roots against the huge slip down the slippery slope that the current Administration has shoved us towards socialism and insolvency! The vast number are ordinary Americans with families making do on less and less while watching the traditional values of this once great country dis-appear under the auspices of HUGE government take-overs…with more in the offing if this Administration is allowed to continue to destroy our way of life ...perhaps forever! Wake up Mark and realize that your political brand is ruining whatever good you intended when you started writing for NCRegister…you are sounding more like the counterfeit (NCReporter)with each and every article you write. Let’s stir the folks up with thoughts of our responsibilities re the Faith…we are not of this world should be a
good place to start!
Since you have brought our attention to the “worst” within the Tea Party movement, Mark, how about bringing the same attention to the “worst” in
your estimation within the Democratic party offerings?
You mean like this? Or this? Or this? Or this?
Or this?
I have focused attention several times on both the Dems and the Culture of death in this space. But all that is immediately forgotten when I commit the blasphemy of suggesting that the Thing That Used to be Conservatism is not identical to and co-terminous with Sacred Tradition or the Kingdom of Heaven and that there are, in fact, places where conservatives are advocating ideas that are out of harmony with and even directly contrary to Catholic teaching.
Wake up Mark and realize that your political brand is ruining whatever good you intended when you started writing for NCRegister…you are sounding more like the counterfeit (NCReporter)with each and every article you write.
What is my political “brand” given that I will never vote for any candidate, left or right, who supports grave intrinsic evil? As to my supposed counterfeit: the Reporter routinely urges its readers to ignore the teaching of the Magisterium. Name a single time I have ever done that. Just one. In fact, the reason I write is to urge *greater* fidelity to the Magisterium, not only with respect to pelvic issues, but with respect to the full teaching of the Church. This includes the Church’s teaching on matters like just war and prisoner abuse, which the right generally holds in contempt as “liberal”. If you believe that it is somehow a sacred obligation of our Catholic faith not to question candidates who align themselves with groups that celebrate the glories of the brave idealists of the Waffen SS, or who suggest that we need to violently overthrow our government, then I can only say that I’m skeptical the Catechism or the bishops will agree that armed revolt really meets the criteria for Just War in the present hour.
So: unless you are seriously suggesting that “questioning the rhetoric of some conservatives” is tantamount to rejecting the clear teaching of the Magisterium (which is what the Reporter routinely does), then I have to say that, once again, you are a living illustration of my point that a lot of conservatives confuse their party’s human doctrines with Sacred Tradition. That’s bad. You should stop that.
Otlichno mne nravitsy.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.