What else can be said of a nation that so needs to be coddled that even as we send our young men and women off to kill and be killed in yet another war over a piece of dirt that does not concern our vital interest at all, the President of the United States must carefully schedule his press conference regarding said war (think about that! WAR!) so that it does not conflict with “Dancing with the Stars”!:
President Obama had a message for the American people Monday night, an explanation of the government’s intentions in Libya, one that he believed was important enough to request air time from the broadcast networks as well as the cable news networks.
But the administration also recognized that some networks, like ABC, had important priorities of their own: the programs they had scheduled for prime time Monday — like “Dancing with the Stars,” the second most-watched show on television.
After some friendly negotiations, all parties agreed to a mutually acceptable time: 7:30 Eastern, which meant the speech on the military situation in Libya could be delivered — and analyzed — in time for the fans of “Dancing,” as well as other scheduled network shows, to see the shows they expected to see at their regularly scheduled times.
It’s like something out of one of those weird Cecil B. DeMille biblical epics of days gone by, where decadent Romans lounge about lasciviously while scantily clad slaves pop grapes in their mouths. The herald rushes in and announces that war is imminent and the half-drunken king and his courtiers laugh and ask for more music and wine. It’s hard to take in. These are our sons and daughters we are talking about here. You know? War? Where people get killed and the fate of nations is decided and bad things can happen?
And our top priority is “Dancing with the Stars”?
Imagine the headline 70 years ago:
DAY OF INFAMY! ROOSEVELT SPEECH PRE-EMPTS MAJOR BOWES AMATEUR HOUR
December 8, Washington - The American radio public was outraged yesterday when President Roosevelt’s speech on some sort of military engagement in the Pacific crowded the nation’s most popular amateur talent show off the air. Network phone lines were paralyzed with protest as the listening public called to register its outrage.
One listener said, “Look, if the President wants to send our troops into harm’s way, well, that’s what they signed up for. But *I* signed up to hear the Glick Sisters harmonize on “Don’t Fence Me In,” and I don’t want to be bored with a lot of stuff about war with a bunch of people I don’t know or care about. Just send our boys wherever they need to go and let them get on with it. I just want to get back to my regular programming.”
President Roosevelt urged the country to press on until we gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God, but listeners appeared to be more in the mood to gain some better channel where the listening public did not have to hear more details about troop movements, battles or projected death and injury tolls.
“Sure, I support the troops, I guess,” said Mr. John Schlub of Cincinnati, “and I guess our cause is just or something. Hey! I don’t really know much about it. But if they want to send those people to shoot and get shot at, better them than me. I just want my radio programming the way it was.”
The radio networks apologized to their audience and assured them that no more troubling talk about the so-called “war” would be aired again and that the upcoming “Bread and Circuses” marathon of non-stop entertainment would be broadcast this weekend without further interruptions.
Now, of course, Libya is not WWII. But it is, nonetheless, war, something we have been permanently engaged in for 10 years now. People, including ours, will be killed. We are, once again, demanding that our over-extended and exhausted men and women under arms go fight, kill, and die for, well, something—maybe our new friends, Al Qaeda (it’s hard to tell). And while they do this for an indeterminate amount of time (ten more years?), we will be watching “Dancing with the Stars” and expending our energies clicking on the latest dish on Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. Oh, and supporting the troops—if they don’t mess up prime time.
One of the great weirdnesses of our time has been the attempt by our nation to say, ever since 9/11, “We are locked in an existential struggle against a mortal foe who desires our annihilation and we must expend all of the resources of our civilization to defeat this foe—and everybody should just relax and go shopping and watch ‘Dancing with the Stars.’” Sooner or later, an all-volunteer military sent to man an empire with a presence in well over a hundred countries will get the impression that “Dancing with the Stars” means more to us back home than their sacrifices do. It will only be natural on that day for them to wonder, “Why then should I go on sacrificing my life, my family, my health and my emotional well-being for a nation that can’t be bothered to look up from its TV long enough to wonder why I am being sent off yet again to suffer and die for it?”
Paris Hilton will not be able to protect us, should our voluntary troops decide the sacrifice is not worth it and simply fail to re-up and go pay for our fat, dumb and happy country with their blood, sweat and tears. Unlike the inconvenient unborn babies we have killed to the tune of 50 million, when we put these inconvenient people out of our minds, they have the power to create consequences for our choice to neglect them and ignore their pain and death. So before we take Obama’s word for it and then sag back on to the sofa to watch “Dancing with the Bread and Circuses,” let’s ask whether this latest war actually meets Just War criteria. I’m with Fr. Robert Barron and don’t think it does.
Comments
Post a Comment
Amen. I have friends who are in the military, and it’s so sad to me that the vast majority of Americans can’t be bothered to ask “why?” we are going to war yet again. Even more so, they can’t be bothered to think for ten seconds about the sacrifices that these people (and their families) are making; some of these men and women are going back for 3 and 4 tours of duty. It’s completely insane. And then we wonder why so many returning soldiers have traumatic brain injuries, depression, or end up committing suicide. God help us!
I agree in part with the sentiments of the post but there is I believe about half of the country that does not believe they will hear any truth when our leaders speak. They would rather be entertained than listen to political rhetoric and double speak that neither entertains nor enlightens.
Now now, the peace prize winning Obama wouldn’t really involve us in another war now would he? Doesn’t “kinetic military action” sound so much more palatable? Just rolls off the tongue doesn’t it? And didn’t you know - our soldiers don’t get killed anymore. Nope, they only get killed when Republicans are in the oval office. I’m sure if they were still getting killed we would be hearing the body count, right? Don’t you know that the world loves us now? So no worries.
Mr. Shea, thank you for writing this. I also thank you for linking back to Fr. Barron on Just War. Having recently read George Weigel’s Against the Grain: Christianity, Democracy, War and Peace, this is a conversation we need to be having, which for the past forty or so years, we’ve essentially forgotten how to have. About values, virtue, and freedom, and how war is sometimes necessary to protect these things, as is the moral duty of a nation state. We also need to have a discussion about the nature of political economy—something that plagued our Founding Fathers, but which we largely ignore, because we assume that economics are merely “amoral” (much like we assume war is). When we can have those kinds of discussions, it stands to reason to ask whether a life dominated by convenience, Paris Hilton and Dancing with the Stars is worth fighting for. Like other people have said here, God help us if the soldiers we ignore so conveniently decide that no, it ain’t.
I completely agree with you.
But calling Libya “a piece of dirt” is still really offensive.
One small way to give back to those making these sacrifices is to get involved in a soldiers’ program like Soldiers’ Angels. It’s a great way to give back to those who are giving everything and show them that something does take priority over the bread and circuses.
Have to say, never watched Dancing with the Stars. Is it any good when it isn’t getting in the way of the grown-up talk?
Amen, Amen, Amen!!
God and Nationalism does not go well together.
Choose one or the other.
Pardon me; but, I did not even know he was speaking on the war. He speaks so often that I tuned him out long ago. I have great respect for our Military Men and Women and I understand that we are now involved in three wars. That is something I don’t believe has ever happened before. Ironic for man who ran on a peace period platform. No I did not watch Dancing with anybody. I make it a point to watch EWTN almost exclusively in the evening.
I am a former Marine Sgt, a VietNam veteran, and an educasted Catholic. I hate war, for I have seen it first hand. I have seen lives snuffed out, bodies permanently mangled, etc., and this is true of every war. There is no such thing as a good war.
But war is sometimes the only recourse for a government when it’s citizens’ lives (or those of a country with whom a mutual defence pact exists) are put at risk. If someone can show me why our military should be put in danger when no threat to our nation or any ally exists, I should like to see such a case. We are not authorized by either God or the Constitution of the United States to play policeman to the world.
It may well be that our leader believes that this endeavor has only as much importance as a TV show, but I trust that most of our citizens are just fed up with our continuing to send our youth on yet one more hazardous mission to permit more posturing as defender of “freedom” when we have no idea who the people involved (radicals?) really are.
Your article is so sadly true. One point that needs to be clarified. We have actually been in an almost constant state of war since WWll. Before Pearl Harbor we refused to go to war even as England and France fought. Since WWll we have been duped by an increasingly evil government to sacrifice our young people and our wealth for any cause they see fit to con us into. This as accomplished with a Congress that has never declared war since WWll, and the lie of “nice warfare” with “smart bombs” that only hurt the bad guys. If these asinine wars are so necessary let Congress declare war, and lets approach these wars with the necessary brutality to be victorious and to accomplish real goals.
Yup. And the president had his priorities straight when he made sure he made his March Madness picks on ESPN days before talking to the people about Libya.
I agre rantingcatholicmom. It is all about priorities.
Let us reflect on the word of Apocalypse : the Greek word for revellation , used in reference of the revelation of John
The definition of apocalyptic ( Adjective) relating to or resembling the destruction of the world , derivatives a-poc-a-lip-to-cal-ly( Oxford American dictionary thesaurus)
The Chambers Dictionary of Etmyology ” revelation of future upheaval , ect. middle English apocalips a vision or hallucination , about 1384 , in the Wycliffe Bible, developed in English from earlier Apikalypsis ( Name of the kart book of the new testament , usually called revelation ) probably about 1200 , in the Ormulum .The name of the biblical text in Middle English was borrowed through Anglo - French apocalypse, from Old French apocalypse , from Late Atin apocalypsis revelation , from Greek Apikalypsis , literally meaning ” uncovering” from spikalyptein uncover , apocalyptic ( adjective) from Greek apokalyptikos , from spikalyptein uncover, fr suffix see -IC
Peace to all during this Holy Week
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.