At the Washington Post, Boot lays out the same case we heard for eight years during the Obama Administration. That is, everything is Trump's fault. In Obama's case, everything for the full eight years of the Obama presidency was Bush's fault. Now, everything for the foreseeable future will be Trump's fault.
It's' mostly about the Covid pandemic and policies surrounding it. The premise is based on the clear and obvious fact that the Covid vaccines are entirely efficacious and without blemish. They work. They simply work. Any problems must be the result of anything else. Therefore, because all Covid deaths were Trump's fault, it stands to reason anything wrong is still Trump's fault. It could be nothing other than that.
It's beyond parody and a signpost toward the totalitarianism we're all seeing. The piece by Boot is, of course, most concerned with supporting the Mandates. The Mandates are the key. Naturally it has poop to do with Covid or life or death. It has to do with the Mandates. That's why that big, bold news that a couple companies have found a possible Covid treatment have gone the way of 8-track tapes. My guess is that you can't mandate treatments. You can mandate vaccines.
And that's what this is about. I don't know if Boot believes this partisan bilge or not, but it isn't important. He's at The Washington Post. What do we expect? The problem is, many partisan hacks and fools will believe it, and will go a long way toward showing why our days as a free nation of life, liberty and equality are numbered.
Was this intentional, dave? ;)
ReplyDeleteShea's headline today was: "Max Boot on the Endless Republican Strategy of Creating Disaster and then Blaming Those They Hate for It"
His only contribution after a lengthy quote from the piece is: "The GOP strategy, like Satan’s, is accuse, accuse, accuse all while doing the evils they accuse everybody else of. For the People of the Lie, accusation is always a form of confession. And, as Jesus observed of the Father of lies, they too are murderers and don’t care if a million people die in the Pandemic just so long long as they can get their hands on raw, nihilist power."
Of course how exactly these awful people are supposed to be getting their hands on power when they're the ones taking steps to reduce state power and give people MORE freedom is something I'm sure Shea will explain any day now...
Yeah, I saw he had linked to that story. I didn't bother reading his post since I figured I wouldn't have to. I could guess what it would say. For a guy who once said the new media will cause your IQ to drop, he puts almost blind faith in what it says today.
DeleteIf anything his proves his old words right. His IQ has dropped quite a bit.
DeleteShea is a puzzle. Age is unkind to some people.
DeleteTime is cruel to us all.
DeleteBut I still say Shea is an object lesson about the mainstream media and social media's effects on people.
Shea began going under in 2005, when there was no such thing as social media. I've also been trying to think of a Catholic author who has lost his marbles to the degree Shea has. There were some peculiar people who wrote for The Remnant, but they were peculiar before social media existed; ditto Joseph Sobran and the pseudonymous 'From the Mail' columnist at The Wanderer.
DeleteAs ever you'll have to define your terms of "going under."
DeleteHe was quoted favorably by John C Wright in 2012. Even National Review would link to him.
Though I'll note he started at Patheos blog... well there's a couple of months in 2002, but it was apparently "formerly" recognized in 2009 (per this article). Whether we want to count Patheos as social media (it's academic I'll grant) it does seem to have a lot of overlap with his issues.
Also since I know how you are, Art - in 2005, Mark would have only been 47. Not quite in the bloom of youth, but hardly an age for much decline.
He set up a stand-alone blog in 2002, as did Amy Welborn. The late Gerard Serafin set up a directory of all the Catholic blogs he knew of at that time. IIRC, Shea and Amy had 3,000 unique visitors per day around then and were the most visited of Catholic blogs. Both had comment boxes. Not sure when he moved to Patheos. Patheos has always struck me as a lightly screened bushel basket. They do bounce people from time to time. I believe Shea was bounced, as was Warren Throckmorton. He was a contributor to Crisis as late as 2012.
DeleteI first noticed in 2004-05 that his edited writing was rather more temperate than his unfiltered views. It was in late 2005 I noticed his commentary seemed to be taking on the character of bursts of emotion and incorporated misrepresentations of what other people said and vitriolic attacks on their person. The first time was a discussion of Hurricane Katrina, then there was the ongoing and interminable debate over torture between Shea, Richard Comerford, and the late 'Zippy' on the one hand and Victor Morton, Tom McKenna, Christopher Fotos and 'Torquemada' on the other. One minor (unrelated) episode in that period was him taking the time to savage yours truly for offering an unapproved thought on someone else's site on a topic which gets little attention. (It was his stated view that I'm horrible for having a skeptical take on the use of psychotropics). That's not something anyone but me would remember, but it was indicative of motiveless hostility. It's just gotten worse every year since in regard to secular matters. In re the Church, he's been a cheerleader for Francis for 8 years and in a rage against anyone taking exception.
Not sure when he moved to Patheos. Patheos has always struck me as a lightly screened bushel basket.
DeleteI literally posted it above. You can also see signs of it on his patheos blog. The archive is very scattered in 2002 until 2009 when it then becomes steady, indicating that it's highly likely he started in 2009 (as the link claims) and probably imported some of his popular blog classics over.
I first noticed in 2004-05 that his edited writing was rather more temperate than his unfiltered views.
I've got news for you: that's just the rule of writers. It's why "editor" is a job.
It was in late 2005 I noticed his commentary seemed to be taking on the character of bursts of emotion and incorporated misrepresentations of what other people said and vitriolic attacks on their person.
Again that just seems to be his personality and temperament. So far I can't even locate combox involving him from before 2004 to even establish any kind of baseline. I believe your account of personal interaction, I've just run across examples of it across enough years that to me the evidence shows Shea has a regular problem with anger.
What strikes me as him getting worse is that his old replies would at least be in the same ballpark as the original comment. Nowadays if you correct him with something like, "No, I'm pretty sure 2+2 is 4" he will go off about you being a lying lair trump supporter using baby shields and who knows what else which has nothing to do with the math problem at hand. He would always use and go for the pithy slogans, but there was at least a variety of them. Nowadays it's like his brain has been replaced with the same 3 bumper stickers and he'll just repeat them ad nauseum.
I've got news for you: that's just the rule of writers. It's why "editor" is a job.
DeleteNo, editor is a job because people make errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and syntax; because they exceed the word count and lower priority material needs excising; because they phrase things infelicitously; because they make factual errors; because their arguments have lacunae in them; and because they've uttered something which might generate liability. It's very odd that someone has two distinct personalities manifest in their public writing. Amy Welborn also produced work for publication and blog posts and you saw nothing like this.
You know what's a quick way to sum up that entire paragraph? "Filter" But good job arguing my point.
DeleteAnd if you find two distinct personalities that odd, then you haven't gotten out enough. I mean this is a classic anime meme about two creators and how variant their work is from their personalities. Protection from editors is a freakin' trope. What used to be more common is that people (especially public writers) had people in their lives (agents, publishers, etc) to help keep up their image. Now with social media, all those filters are coming off. It's really not that odd.
FWIW, and my two cents being worth about two cents, I don't think we can pinpoint when Mark went off the rails. Just when might differ depending on the viewpoints of those watching. For me, even early writings - in hindsight - showed warning signs. But that's hindsight. With Mark isn't when he went off the rails as much as it is that he did. And the bigger problem is he still gets money and attention for being an official teacher of Catholic Social Teaching, when he's actually become a dangerous political partisan who gives anyone the idea that it's better to help destroy Mark's political opponents than worry all that much about God, Jesus, or the Catholic Church. But then, in Mark's defense, I can't say much more about the current pope, so there is that.
DeleteThis man had berths at The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, and National Review. You get the idea maybe that the Republican commentariat ca. 2014 was shot through with poseurs and the terminally superficial?
ReplyDeleteI wonder about a great many conservative voices from the last decade or so.
DeleteMax Boot was a war hawk, a breed that Shea once upon a time despised, All is forgotten in the fever of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
ReplyDeleteYep. Hatred of Trump takes away all sins it appears. I noted some time ago that more than one who Mark champions today is part of the former conservatives who Mark once blamed for pushing him out of the conservative fold to begin with. But they hate Trump and his followers, and that seems to be enough.
DeleteThat's not a 'classic meme'. That's your latest ass pull.
ReplyDeleteLoL yeah, I'm sure you're an adequate judge of anime memes. XD
DeleteAnyway that's not a rebuttal.