Goldberg and Guthrie

My girlfriend and I were just watching the ABC 7 local (Chicago) news report on Pope Benedict's installation. They interviewed some people at a mostly German church. The newscaster - a Rob Johnson - said the following (I paraphrase): "Many feel that the selection of a German Pope is the world's way of forgiving Germany for the atrocities committed there years ago."

I'm sure Germans everywhere appreciate this fine gesture of forgiveness that the Catholic church has made on behalf of the Jewish people.

On another note, it appears that back when he was "Johnny Ratz", the new Pope issued orders to keep the sex abuse investigation secret. (Via Atrios.) Perhaps some day, fifty years from now, the Catholic Church will be courageous enough to select an American Pope as a way of forgiving the United States.

There is quite the hullabaloo in the blogosphere about the Ann Coulter Time magazine cover. I haven't been able to find the actual article online, so I've refrained from commenting (demonstrating the strong journalistic intergrity and ethics Goldberg and Guthrie readers have come to expect).

But I read an interesting quote from the article today, as excerpted at The Daily Howler:

When I spoke with her friend Miguel Estrada, an attorney and onetime White House nominee for a judgeship...he said Coulter's appeal 15 years ago, when they met, was "the same as it is today. She was lively and funny and engaging and boisterous and outrageous and a little bit of a polemicist ... Most of the time, people miss her humor and satire and take her way too literally."

This shocks me. I actually thought that smart, reasonable, mainstream conservatives - if they exist - try to distance themselves from Ann Coulter - a woman who has repeatedly called for the conversion of all Muslims to Christianity and who, for the record, is an open and upapologetic bigot. Miguel Estrada was nominated by the Bush White House to be an appellate judge - that should qualify him for smart, mainstream conservative status. This is the equivalent of a Clinton nominee defending the substance of Ward Churchill's remarks.

I've often said to my conservative brethren that pointing out the errors in Ann Coulter's work is just fun - she says very stupid things but they are in no way representative of the way most Republicans actually think. I've had reservations about that when, for example, she speaks at prominent conservative gatherings. To see an important and, I had thought before today, intelligent conservative figure defending her just drives home the point at how far the conservative movement (and, to be fair, large portions of the American public) has morphed into something that is both very scary and very stupid.

(1) Over at The Corner, where it was very important that we allow the Swift Boat Veterans to exercise their free speech as they discussed John Kerry's actions during and after Vietnam, it apparently is but a hilarious side note that the Pope was a member of the Nazi youth.

Protesting Vietnam during war = serious business. Possible connection to Nazis = liberal bias!

(2) Apparently, Mr. Benedict or Ratzinger or whatever his name is now was one of the Catholics who said priests shouldn't give communion to pro choice politicians - specifically John Kerry. Any comment I make about this man could land me in hell, so I better stop. But this was one of the more reprehensible viewpoints I've seen taken in modern politics; I'm glad to see the Pope on board. And... I've typed several comments on this, all of them are inappropriate, and I admit I'm too chickenshit to publish them. Suffice to say, I don't like this guy.

You know, I can't really judge every person who lived in Germany and in some way aided the Nazi party - particularly those people who were children or teenagers at the time. I imagine that if I myself had grown up in that place and that time, I may not have had the moral courage to avoid compulsory Nazi youth activities and armed service. And I would think that any person who engaged in such service could repent and go on to become a great and moral man. However, if I was going to elect a moral and religious leader - a man who, if I understand it, will be the very voice of God himself, I might have selected someone who had no ties to the Nazis given that, you know, they're the most evil group of people who ever lived. But that's apparently not the way the Catholic Church sees things! Oh well, let's hope he's at least a bit more anti-raping little boys than the last Pope was.


(If you don't click on the link, it appears that Ratzinger was involved in Nazi youth activities for a short time, but left to study for the priesthood. At the very end of the war, when he was 18, he joined the German army, but never got past basic training. But you know what? An 18 year old - especially an educated one -probably should have known what was happening in Germany at the time, what with the slaughter of whole races of people going on. Again, is every German who was a teenager at the time and did nothing somehow a bad person? I don't think so - that's probably just an unfair burden to place on children. Are they disqualified from becoming the voice of God on earth? In my mind, yes. But then, I also think women are capable of giving speeches in Latin and blessing water and shit. So I guess me and the Catholic Church don't see eye to eye on a lot of things.)

UPDATE: On The Corner, there is some linkage that seems to suggest that Ratzinger actually deserted the German army - a move that could have resulted in execution. I think the argument still kind of stands, but obviously this should be taken into account. It is nice to see that KJL seems to think this is sort of a joke, with the title of the post being "Nazi!!". I leave it to our reader to decide the truth.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Re-reading that Corner post, it quotes a Wall Street Journal news e-mail that says: "[Ratzinger] claims to have opposed Hitler's Nazi regime in Germany, but said resistance would have been hopeless." Now, in fairness, that isn't a direct Ratzinger quote, but if he said anything like that, then I wouldn't let him teach Sunday school, let alone be Pope. Resisting the Nazis was "hopeless"? What in the fuck does that even mean? And who cares? And wasn't there an active resistance movement in Germany at this time? And if you are a Christian, isn't it better to be killed than to do something that is evil? Again, I'm not talking about standards for judging every day people, I'm talking about standards for judging the most important religious leader in the world. I truly hope for the sake of the world that he didn't say anything remotely like that.

UPDATE BY GOLDBERG: Via Kevin Drum, an excerpt from a Washington Post profile that makes me think that the new Pope indeed still harbors some, if not racist, then racialist, sentiments.

He publicly cautioned Europe against admitting Turkey to the European Union and wrote a letter to bishops around the world justifying that stand on the grounds that the continent is essentially Christian in nature.

There's also some talk in that profile about his opposition to "liberation theology," but I don't know what that is. Does anyone?

For some reason, I was inspired to fire off a defense of Catherine MacKinnon today to Jonah Goldberg. He posted it, complete with my errors. Of course, I call him "evil" in the nicest sense of the word.

Link.

The e-mail:

Mr. Goldberg-
I don't think Catherine MacKinnon needs me to defend her, but I think your remark that her most famous campaign was a failure is inaccurate. You focus your post on date rape and pornography and compare the success of those two efforts. But you ignore MacKinnon's most successful (and arguably most famous) campaign, which was against sexual harassment. Before MacKinnon, sexual harassment was not a term that most people had any familiarity with, let alone the basis for a civil or criminal prosecution. In large part thanks to her efforts, the term is now a part of every American's life and, for better or for worse, has drastically changed the way men and women interact in and out of the work place. (In fact, she has probably had more of an effect on American's lives than any almost any other lawyer in history.)

On one hand, you are right because she herself may be more widely noticed for her work on pornography. On the other hand, I think her efforts against sexual harassment are more famous (although fewer people may associate those efforts with her - if that makes sense) and are more important and worthwhile. She would probably disagree with me on that last part and say that pornography and sexual harassment are equal wrongs, although I won't put words into her mouth.

Full disclosure, MacKinnon was a law school professor of mine. Although I did not interact with her very much, I found her to be a very nice person. I also agree with her on many things, although I am too much of a radical on free speech issues to support her positions on pornography.

(Additionally, she allowed you to choose your own exam question from a list of about 20 that was given to you in advance, and one of those questions in essence allowed you to write your own question. Awesome.)

Thanks, I enjoy your posts.

Here is the Goldberg post I was responding to.

Good thing it is largely anonymous (except, now, to readers of this blog), because some of those sentences really seem like they were written by a five year old. Of course, so do most of my posts on this blog and most of the written product I am paid to produce.

I was watching a documentary about him. I can't find a link to this, so admittedly it may all be liable, but when he was visiting the United States a nun introduced him at a church in, I believe, Georgia. The nun deviated from her prepared remarks and, moved by the holy spirit, said that the Catholic church had to deal with the pain it was causing woman by not allowing them to participate in all levels of ministry. The Pope - who was nothing if not civilized and well mannered - kissed her when she bowed to him, but did not speak to her. She said in an interview that it was not until five years later that she learned how the Pope felt about her remarks. When she was visiting Rome and sought an audience with the Pope, she was refused.

Later in the day, I saw another documentary about the Pope. As you know, the Pope was shot and almost killed. Many people speculate that the KGB was involved, although nobody ever admitted this. A short time after the assassination attempt, the Pope visited his would-be assassin in prison. He said a prayer with him and forgave him.

A man who was either crazy or hired by the USSR shot the Pope and almost killed him. The Pope sought an audience with him and forgave him. A woman made a remark about the fact that half of earth's is deemed unworthy by the church to minister and possibly caused the Pope embarrassment or discomfort. She was not extended the courtesy of a visit when she traveled to Rome and requested one. The world is more fucked up than most people's simple minds - including my own - will ever be able to comprehend.

Back from sunny Florida, where it was sunny. I went to Reds spring training - fun, although I am not sure they look that good. Being on vacation, it turns out, is much better than working.

Maybe posting this will force me to think of something to write.