RIP Bob Uecker

He was America's favorite underachiever.  An athlete who embodied the joys of being lost in the team, but with a grin.  A professional baseball player who made a lasting impact by perpetually mocking his own career legacy and himself.  A man who taught the world the value of laughing louder at yourself than anyone else. 

When I was in high school, he was a legend, more than you'd think from those crazy, hazy days of the 1980s.  I don't know how many millions of times, when we would shift around in an auditorium or on the gym bleachers or move around in a classroom, you'd invariably hear someone say 'I must be in the Front Row!'  Even as young and foolish teens, we saw the value in a man who had that sense of self deprecation, but not in a passive aggressive way of avoiding confrontation.  

Truth be told, he was better than he suggested.  Sometimes the better ones are able to be silly with their own reputations because they know the truth.  He was with St. Louis when the won the World Series,  and would also play with the Braves and Phillies.  

Adopting the moniker 'Mr. Baseball', his career as an announcer for the Brewers, and as a comedian (the "Comic Bard of Baseball") surpassed anything he did on the diamond.  But it was his lampooning of himself - and by extension, most professional athletes or celebrities with an inflated opinion of themselves - that I remember the best. And that endeared him to a generation of young Americans sometimes given the choice by our modern society of greatness or nothingness.  

May he receive from God a portion of the blessings, and a little of the laughter, that he gave to so many of us. 

"When I came up to bat with three men on and two outs in the ninth, I looked in the other team's dugout and they were already in street clothes."

"How do you catch a knuckleball?  You wait until it stops rolling, then go pick it up."

"Sporting goods companies pay me not to endorse their products."

"I spent three of the best years of my life in 10th grade."

"I didn't get a lot of awards as a player.  But they did have a Bob Uecker Day Off for me once in Philly."

Bob Uecker, RIP.   

What I don't trust

People who go off emotionally half cocked over a bad experience and become the biggest cheerleaders against what they once embraced.  I give you:

I knew little of Steve Skojec, except the occasional online references.  And those were often from folks on the Left railing against him for his supposed frothing at the mouth zealotry on behalf of traditional Catholicism.  

Then something happened.  I've never gotten exactly what, though it seems to revolve around the ill treatment of one of his children at the hands of a Catholic Traditionalist leaning priest.  Which isn't hard to believe.  I don't think Traditional Catholics are immune to bad behavior any more than any other group.

But what has happened since has been a complete 180 reversal as Mr. Skojec has become everything anyone who hates Catholic Traditionalism ever hoped for.   For non-Catholics, non-Christians, and those Catholics who have cheered Pope Francis's assault on Traditional Catholicism, Mr. Skojec has become as quoted as Shakespeare.    

It puts me in mind of Rod Dreher, another who I see like a Thomas Paine character.  A man who makes good points, but can't be counted on to keep things in perspective over the long haul or when the going gets tough.  

So for years Dreher raged against the growing assault on religious liberty by the Left.  Fair call.  But when Covid hit, he embraced the mass hysteria, all but calling on any and all jack-booted thugs possible to kick down doors and drag away those reprobates gathering to worship God when our expert class strictly forbad such affronts to our wellbeing.  Yes, he later conceded that there were serious problems with how Covid was handled.  But as far as I know, he never came out and fully apologized and owned up to the part he played in that same oppression and persecution of dissenters. 

Folks like this never quite settle for me.  With Mr. S, how do I know that something else won't set him off with the latest group he now identifies with, only to see him turn on them?  And with Dreher, who knows?   He's too wild in his deviations far too often to rely on him beyond acknowledging when he makes a valid point.  When ISIS managed to down a plane some years ago, Dreher came off as almost giddy because he insisted it proved Trump hadn't 'eradicated ISIS', the multiple deaths being an additional lament tacked on to his triumphant slam against Trump.  A little loss of priority there, IMHO. 

I know.  Some might say 'But Dave, if someone was a Nazi or a porn star or a terrorist cultist, you would celebrate them leaving it and renouncing everything to do with it.'  That is true.  Because I consider those objectively evil things that are born of Hell and any who can escape their grasp are to be celebrated and prayed for and helped.  

I don't, however, put people gathering to worship God or preferring the Latin Mass in that category.  Something in other days, both Dreher and Skojec would have agreed with and fought bitterly against any suggestion otherwise.  But then, something happened and they snapped, and became everything they once condemned in order to attack the very things they once cherished.  And for me, that's just too unstable and fickle for my likes.  They might, and do, make good points sometimes, but I'll look to others to ultimately stand up for the cause of Good when the time is ripe. 

Trump is going for his five bonus armies

 Heh:

Yep.  As any RISK player knows, N. America is the easiest continent to hold once you get it (at least that gives you more than two bonus armies a turn).  And if you start with America, then you need Canada, Greenland and Central America to make it a full continent and get those five extra armies a turn. 

My sons noted that, and joked that Trump must have been playing RISK recently.  A much saner appraisal than the bat nuts psycho hysterics around the world and across the media and leftwing punditry we're seeing.  Sometimes I think Trump does these things just to watch people make him look calm, reasonable and sane by comparison. 

Personally I think it's how he operates.  Throw a verbal grenade into the conference, create chaos, and then while your opponents are beating themselves senseless with lunacy and being distracted by their own nuttiness, he goes about getting done what he wants to do.  

It reminds me of what one of my sons said back during Trump's first term.  The only thing that makes Donald Trump seem grounded and sensible by comparison is his opponents. 

If your best defense is that you were only joking about someone losing their home in the LA fires

 You might want to reconsider where you've ended up in life:

Yep.  Lewis is one of the contributors over at Where Peter Is.  Mostly that site exists to remind us that only reprobates dare question the singular orthodox awesomeness of Pope Francis, with not infrequent reminders that the Left's appraisal of anyone or anything right of center is a reliable witness.

Nonetheless, Lewis's apparent defense of his dig is a good remedy for those who labor under the delusion that somehow one side of the ideological divide is where the beautiful people are, and the other side are the meanies.  An argument not a few former conservatives have used over the years to justify their alliance with advocates of what those conservatives once so strongly condemned. 

Despite those who try to insist that is why they have aligned the way they have, however, Mr. Lewis does yeoman's work showing why appeals to the better behavior on one side or the other as justification for taking a stand is generally a fool's argument.  I suppose that's something. 

BTW, we won't even get into the irony that, once again, those on the modern Left today sound more and more like the old fundamentalist stereotypes of yesterday - "they're suffering because God decreed it!"  We'll leave it with Lewis's defense that he was only joking about Gibson losing his home in the LA fires.

UPDATE:  So already I need to clarify.  I'm not saying that this only happens to the left of center.  Of course not.  I'm pointing out that 1) those former conservatives who cling to the idea that history shows progressives are the good guys as opposed to those nasty rightwing types have reality against them and, 2) increasingly the modern Left acts very much like all the things it warned us about ages ago with its stereotypes of what conservatives and fundamentalists were all about. With that extra twist being that this is demonstrated here by none other than a former conservative. 

The staggering intolerance of the modern Left

 A white Jewish liberal guy tries to shout down and keep a black man from talking:

The look you get when a white man tells a black man to shut up on national TV in 2024

Here is a link if you wish to see the video, from shortly after last year's election.  

So in  the midst of the crazy last year, we did something I haven't done in a long, long time.  We started watching a currently running TV show.  It's called Blue Bloods.  It stars Tom Selleck as the patriarch of an Irish Catholic family that works within law enforcement.  

I was aware of it only by reputation, that it was a show of rightwing bigotry, racism, and all manner of typical charges being phobia prejudice, right wing nationalist supremacy and what have you. This became a loud complaint when Selleck announced a couple years ago he wouldn't tarnish the police in accordance to BLM doctrine.  So we thought we would watch it to see. 

After watching a few seasons, I've concluded there is nothing in recent history more self-righteously judgmental, intolerant, or close minded than the modern Left, with a big helping of hypocrisy and mendacity thrown in for yeast.  

I mean, what about Blue Bloods is rightwing?  It openly supports the LGTBQ community and movement.  It is clearly left leaning in terms of America and its history.  One of its uber-storylines is that there was a time when law enforcement (if not the US in general) was everything BLM says - but those were the 'bad old days' (a phrase frequently used).  When the conflict is between men and women, the women win every time, especially if gender is the topic.  It has stories about racist cops, abusive cops, American racism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, Western imperialism and its legacy.  It takes for granted that sleeping around outside of marriage is fine - even for a good Irish Catholic family.  It comes out and says that the Church needs to change and get with the times where things like homosexuality and religious tolerance are concerned, and that includes Drag Queens (who had their own episode) and virtually anything not from the historical values of the Christian West. 

Could someone tell me how this is some rightwing conservative show?  My sons had their ideas.  First, the main family is a white, heterosexual, Christian family.  Right there.  As far as Hollywood and Madison Avenue are concerned, white families don't exist in America. Spend a day watching commercials on televisions during the game and take a shot of whisky every time you see a white family.  Stone cold sober would be the result. 

Second, it does follow all of the leftwing narratives about racism, sexism, bigotry, every phobia in existence.  But - and this is crucial - sometimes it shows those aren't true.  Sometimes it isn't sexism, or racism, or bigotry.  And what is more - and this is even more crucial - sometimes those in various leftwing protected groups are the baddies.  And sometimes there are good things in America's history, society, police and institutions - even among white, heterosexual Christians!  

More than that, on rare occasion there is the race hustling black pastor exploiting an incident for his own purposes.  Sometimes the homosexual is the bad guy, though never due to his homosexuality.  Or the admission that at times Muslims can be terrorists, or Hispanic criminals.  With the exception of women as the feminine symbol of perfection, in which case feminism always shines bright, it does admit that the white, Anglo-American Christian White guy can not only be the good guy, but a victim of those in such minority groups. 

And that, likely more than anything, is how it got its 'rightwing racist propaganda show' label.  Not that it is.  In fact, most episodes pander to leftwing narratives and activism, full stop.  If Muslims are the bad guys, the main guest character will be a Muslim who is a good guy, who still shows us racism in America.  If the homosexual is bad, it will only be framed as part of larger homophobic bigotry exploiting such realities because of course gays are the oppressed group.  If the Hispanic immigrant here illegally is the villain, we're reminded that most immigrants are put-upon and oppressed by the racist structures of our society, whether illegal or not.  

Yet that's not good enough.  As the good white man in the above discussion demonstrates to that vile black guy who dares question the leftwing narrative, you will 100% conform to the Left.  Period.  100%.   Not 99.99%. Not 93%.  Not 97.1%.  100% or you're a transphobic bigot full stop.  Period.  Or a racist, period.  Or Nazi, period.  Or sexist, period.  Or whatever, period.  And that includes never, ever pointing out anything negative about what the Left says is good, or good about what the Left says is bad.  Period.  

The good news is that most Americans appear to at least ignore this level of self-deification among the Left. Perhaps they were voting against it in November.  But one thing is for sure, despite this being the dominant view disproportionately held by most of our nation's institutions and leaders, the masses appeared to at least break from the pens and corrals and took their own stand this time around.  Whether it lasts or points to greater trends we'll have to see.  Based on the last few weeks, it looks like the left/press hasn't learned anything, that's for sure.  

Someone fixed it

 Heh:

I think the point was moving 'Board Games' up a few notches.  But I had to chuckle at the other categories.  I especially liked 'Shoving a stick in a crocodile's mouth to wedge it open.'  That made me laugh. 

The Babylon Bee looks deep into the hearts of men

 And learns the truth:

Heh.  I'm not a big BB fan. It sets out to mock and lampoon the modern Left, and that's a pretty tall order.  Most often the absurdity of our World today far exceeds what comedic writers could concoct.  Nonetheless, it tries.  And once in a while, it does kick one through the uprights.  In this case I confess guilty as charged. 

Kudos for it being the old Fortress America game I mentioned here.  When a satirical piece can bring a smile and some memories, I'd call that a win. 

Just don't

 This:

As seen on the Stumbling Toward Heaven blog

The thing hurting the proclamation of the Gospel most, at least in the dying West, is that up and coming youngsters just don't believe it.  Oh, they've heard the story most of their lives.  At least in the vaguest sense, filtered through the opinions and research of critics, skeptics and people hostile to the Faith.  Shocking no one, they just don't believe it.  Our atheist culture has told them the Christian Faith is worth no more than a Grimm's Fairy Tale at best, and the Marxist inspired Liberation Theology tradition can't get enough of pointing out how wretched and evil and racist and phobic sexist those old pages of "Holy" Scripture are.  The constant drumbeat among believers and leaders today of repenting for the first 2000 years of the Faith, and willingness to change on a dime when the World snaps its fingers, only plays into this. 

Plus, as has been said for years, many youngsters just don't believe anyone believes it anymore.  I've quoted many times that youth from ages ago who I first saw mentioned at Catholic and Enjoying It.  Why are youth formally rejecting belief in God and the Gospel and Jesus Christ?  Because they don't see anyone acting like they believe it's true.  Oh, on Sundays you get angels and demons and miracles and God and all.  But come Monday, and light can barely shine through the gap between the Christian and the Atheist in how life in this world is approached.  As someone quipped in a discussion some time back, the big difference between atheists and Christians today is that atheists can sleep in on Sunday. 

So there are few things worse in this hot mess context than admitting our faith and prayers and even God are utterly worthless unless they align with the actual solutions to our problems in the form of our political activism for the real world.  That tells these young people all they need to know to conclude that yes, Virginia, religion is dead.  Or at least pointless.  Politics and the state are all that matter.  The here and now counts, since there is nothing else.  And obviously material solutions are the only ones of consequence.  Why, you have plenty of good churchgoers who admit it.  See Mark's bold claims above.  When the guy who drags himself out of bed to show up to church on Sunday is willing to admit just how useless all this God and prayer garbage is next to our real world solutions, do you really think what goes on in that church is worth anything to our increasingly secularized youth?  I don't think so. 

And it's not just Mark and the godless secularists who claim that the efficacy of our prayers to God is contingent upon their adherence to proper political activism.  A staggering number of Christians and leaders, not just Catholic, have jumped on this 'God as a bad joke' bandwagon, even if they don't realize it.  And not just with gun control.  Sadly, nothing appears to help secular evangelism today more than modern Christianity.  More's the pity. 

Oh, and we won't delve into Mark attributing those turning to prayer's fruitfulness and God's sovereignty to the designs of the devil since it doesn't align with his political opinions.  That makes me think of no other passage in Scripture than this:

But when the Pharisees heard it they said, “It is only by Beel′zebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.” Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand; and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beel′zebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore, they shall be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house. He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. Therefore, I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I realize there is a lot of theology in that passage, but sometimes a superficial reading is enough to jar our senses.  Don't attribute appeals to God's providence to Satan. Unless Pope Francis and others are correct when they allude to the possibility that, like almost anything else in the history of the Faith, the whole 'eternal separation from God' is a bunch of bunk, you might want to slow down associating the working of God and his children with the Devil for any reason, much less political ones.  Prayers for his soul being in order in this case.

Merry Christmas

 

“NOEL” by J.R.R. Tolkien

 Grim was the world and grey last night:

The moon and stars were fled,

The hall was dark without song or light,

The fires were fallen dead.

The wind in the trees was like to the sea,

And over the mountains’ teeth

It whistled bitter-cold and free,

As a sword leapt from its sheath.

 

The lord of snows upreared his head;

His mantle long and pale

Upon the bitter blast was spread

And hung o’er hill and dale.

The world was blind,

the boughs were bent,

All ways and paths were wild:

Then the veil of cloud apart was rent,

And here was born a Child.

 

The ancient dome of heaven sheer

Was pricked with distant light;

A star came shining white and clear

Alone above the night.

In the dale of dark in that hour of birth

One voice on a sudden sang:

Then all the bells in Heaven and Earth

Together at midnight rang.

 

Mary sang in this world below:

They heard her song arise

O’er mist and over mountain snow

To the walls of Paradise,

And the tongue of many bells was stirred

in Heaven’s towers to ring

When the voice of mortal maid was heard,

That was mother of Heaven’s King.

 

Glad is the world and fair this night

With stars about its head,

And the hall is filled with laughter and light,

And fires are burning red.

The bells of Paradise now ring

With bells of Christendom,

And Gloria, Gloria we will sing

That God on earth is come.

 

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.  Isaiah 9.6

A Christmas Eve thought

Those are Christmas packages that were mailed to soldiers on the front lines in 1944.  They are the ones whose recipients were either MIA or KIA.  Now they sit in NYC, waiting for Return stickers, to be sent back to the grieving senders.  

I don't know who's to blame for the state of our society today.  Perhaps even the soldiers then played a part.  I don't know.  But it seems we could do better than we've been doing for the sake of those Christmases missed.

From the spectacular miniseries Band of Brothers.  The point:  The laundry not picked up largely belonged to men Sgt. Malarkey knows were killed in Normandy.  I think Christmas works best when we ditch our 'Nothing to kill or die for' mentality and go back to a 'Greater love hath no man than this' way of thinking.   It certainly makes more sense. 

Seems like old times

It was a cold, rainy spring day in 1977.  Most likely March, or possibly early April.  I lived about a mile away from our school, so I walked back and forth most days.  Since my mom was, like most moms back then, a stay at home mom, she would sometimes take me or get me if the weather was too bad.  

This particular afternoon, however, she was nowhere to be seen  after school let out.  There was heavy rain, it was cold, and a battalion of cars arrived as other parents showed up to pick up their kids who normally walked.  But no mom.  Finally, I saw a kid walking by who was in another homeroom class than mine.  It was fourth grade after all.  We each had our own home classrooms apart from the other ones. Even in a small town you didn't know everyone.  

But I recognized him because his mom and my neighbors' mom were friends, and he had been there a couple times when they visited.  I suppose they knew each other from being Catholic.  Catholics were not a majority group in our village by a long shot.  Plus his mom was Lithuanian, and our neighbor Dutch.  So there was probably a bit of the non-native bond, too. 

I didn't know him otherwise, except I was aware he went by my house on his way home.  It wasn't hard to notice.  His dad drove an old, black pre-60s pickup truck with wooden slats, and a big Donald Duck painted on the passenger door.  So noticing him walking to his truck that afternoon, I asked if he could give me a ride home.  Knowing little more about me than I knew of him, he nonetheless agreed and asked his dad if I could get a ride. 

And the rest, as they say, is history.  After a rocky start, he would end up being my all time best friend I've ever had.  More a surrogate brother actually.  He was an only child, and I had one surviving sibling, a sister almost nine  years my senior. Which is sort of like being an only child, but without the advantages. 

I've mentioned him many times over on the old blog. We had many grand adventures over the years, some when we were young and some when we were not so young.  My wife and I still raise a glass of beer as we undertake some annual traditions in memory of the times he and I had, even before I ever met my wife. 

As I said, we were more brothers, and brothers who often had little in common. He loved cars, I cared enough that they worked and got me where I was going.  I preferred to stay home and read and listen to my dad's classical, crooner and soft jazz records.  He loved to party with the popular set and was up on the latest MTV rock group and heavy metal tour.  He was also one of the premier football jocks in a setting that elevated football to Trinitarian levels.  I wasn't.  I ran some track and cross country, and played baseball for a few years in my younger days.  But athletics and I were always distant relatives.  

He, on the other hand, was competitive, athletic, and very cosmopolitan for our rural community.  Partly because his godfather worked in Hollywood and often helped them travel and gave him a heads up on coming trends, like Space Invaders, a host of video games, the latest music news, and of course the upcoming release of some new space movie we might like called Star Wars.  And he was very, very popular.  

Nonetheless, he never cut ties with me.  In fact, apart from 'members only' social gatherings for his various sports teams, he often invited me along with the rest of his team friends when they were out and about.  It would be them with their varsity jackets and me in my customary sports coat and jeans. But the gang and I got on well enough, and he and I would always be there for one another no matter what.  

In college if I needed him at 3:00 AM, he would be there.  Even if he belonged to a fraternity and I  didn't. As can be guessed, he was my best man when I married the love of my life.  And of course I paid back the favor of being there in my own ways over the years.  Even when he lived in California, working in third party companies that rent out to the music world, and we went decades not seeing each other, I knew if I needed him he would be there. 

Over those many years of adventures, we developed certain traditions and traditional pastimes together.  One was always going to each other's home on Christmas Day.  Another was visiting him at least once in the Fall in college when he lived on Columbus campus, before I began attending the main campus as well.  And yet another was, in keeping with the MTV spirit of the age, attending rock concerts. 

Like many things, I was a Johnny-come-lately in that department.  But in the 80s, almost everyone seemed to be attending concerts.  Contrary to some fears in the music world that MTV would cause a drop in desire to attend such events, it seemed to do the opposite.  But not for me.  Again, my tastes had been informed by listening to my dad's music, and I can assure you that did not - usually - include the latest on American Top 40 or MTV playlist.  

But in the summer of 84, several of the gang got tickets for a group that hit it big at that time called RATT. A throwaway group to be sure. And not to my preferences in the least.  But everyone in our cadre was going, and I didn't want to be left out.  So I went, too.  

Despite my low expectations, I was still disappointed.  I can see why they didn't last.  They seemed less invested in the concert than I was.  Though the opening act was impressive. I hadn't heard of that group, but after the concert I told the others that the opening act would probably go places.  They were energetic, enthusiastic, filled with an obvious love of what they were doing, and the lead singer possessed that important trait great entertainers have of making us think we were the only ones in the arena that they were performing for. That opening act's name was Bon Jovi. 

I ended up attending dozens and dozens of concerts over the years, usually with my friend.  The only one we didn't see was Van Halen in 1984, since those tickets were like gold.  But we did see the group and singer after the breakup a couple years later.  Despite it all, I was never a big fan of this, not only because a lot of the music wasn't my cup of tea, but I've never cared for large crowds or loud music.  

Nonetheless, my friend was all into it, and eventually would work in the industry - stage design and setup.  So I went and went again.  In later college and after, he worked for companies that the tours would hire in local areas to set up the bulk of the lighting and stage sets that you see.  It was working in such a setting, BTW, that my friend was able to get some choice goodies for me.  This included a stage hand T-Shirt for Paul McCartney's 1989 world tour and, the biggest of all, tickets for excellent seats for my parents and me to see none other than the legendary Frank Sinatra in one of his last concert tours.  We sat in the center in the first row behind the VIP limo section.  Not bad at all.  A memory I cherish. 

But that was long ago. This year has been a rough year for him.  His mother, who was like a second mom to me, died back in January.  And this November, his dad - the one who agreed to take me home on that cold, wet spring day all those years ago - passed away.  Because of their health concerns, he moved back a few years ago during the Covid lockdowns, living in the same house he lived in when we were kids. Having never married, and with most of his family gone or in distant countries far away, it's pretty much him at this point.  Still in that old house in which I spent many an evening playing games, watching movies, or just crashing after long weekends. 

I met with him after the passing of both parents a month ago.  We chit chatted as always.  Though it's amazing how talk runs dry when you have distant memories to recall, but decades apart otherwise. Still, shortly after our dinner he texted me.  He invited me to see the Trans Siberian Orchestra the day after Christmas when they play at Columbus. 

Now, the Day after Christmas (in some places, Boxing Day) has long been our real Big Day of the holidays.  First, in my ministry days, people sometimes invited us to a Christmas dinner or such things on Christmas Day proper.  Plus, Christmas Day is busy.  That's why, as a pastor, I always took my Christmas vacation starting on Christmas, not before (since unless Christmas fell on a Sunday, no church).

That was something I also did in the secular workplace.  In fact, most people oddly like to get the weeks leading up to Christmas off for vacation.  That left me, even when I had scant seniority, open to get the week after when I wanted it.  So for most of our lives, we usually had the whole week after Christmas off together - at least until the boys grew up and got jobs and their own schedules.

But the day after has always been our big 'kick back, relax, enjoy the fruits of the day before, and chill' day.  So much so that there have been times when the boys said they were prepared to work Christmas Day itself at long as they could get the day after off.  

Which is to say, it is on the precious Family Day of the Year, the day after Christmas, that the concert is taking place.  I wasn't sure about saying yes, and first checked it with the family.  But we concluded he probably could use a little bit of an outlet this year, and some company.  A concert with me, like the olden days, might be the ticket.  So breaking a thirty year plus tradition, I agreed to take our big Day After and go with him to the concert this year.  Christmastime, the two of us hanging together, going to a concert - it will be like old times.  Hopefully it will give him a bit of a boost after the year he's had.

Oh, and I'm still not a fan of loud music or big crowds.  But you do for family. 

Heh

 

And no, I'm not a fan. 

Where are all those New Prolife Seamless Garment Catholics?

Coming out against that not small number of individuals, often decidedly left of center, cheering the cold blooded murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson?   

Now, I'm the last person to defend insurance companies. I worked for them at one time, and like most people I've been shellacked by them over the years.  But the problems, like most problems, are complex and wide reaching and there are many things at play - including the media's general lack of being worth anything when it comes to zeroing in on such troubles today.  Really.  I told my sons, journalism is basically AWOL nowadays. I remember back when the press went after the Tobacco industry.  Whew.  

Where is that today, unless it is something to do with Republicans or Trump or someone challenging leftwing narratives? If you want to kick around a conspiracy theory, you could be forgiven for imagining that the press obsesses over Trump and company in order to deflect attention from things that might not be advantageous for the press's pet agendas.  But that's for another time.

Fact is, there are many problems intertwined today that are behind the legitimate issues people are pointing at.  But as is usual in the postmodern era, our most educated generation in history wants things reduced to a simplistic caveman level 'My group is too good for God, and group B is Hitler because of Issue X' framework. Thus: 

Helping more minorities vote GOP as 20% of black voters learn they are white nationalists

And if our esteemed institutions of information and learning have anything to do with it, we'll keep Issue X simple enough to fit on a lapel pin and no more. 

Nonetheless, what is shocking in all of this is the stunning silence from the bold and brash New Prolife Catholics out there. You know, the ones who condemn the use of any violence ever. When people celebrated the death of Osama bin Laden, the reaction across St. Blogs was swift and fierce.  That's what Seamless Garment Catholicism is all about Charlie Brown - it's comprehensive support for the dignity of all life with no exception.  Violence is wrong, full stop.  Any killing is to be condemned.  To celebrate or even justify death and violence is to sniff around the doorpost of the Antichrist. 

Yet during the 2020 protests and riots, most such Catholics were strangely silent.  Some even defended the violence, and even the killing.  That leftwing Catholic troll over on Mark Brumley's Facebook page, one of the few I've ever blocked, wrote a lengthy post explaining why, though we shed a tear for innocents killed in 2020, it was for the greater and just good. 

Same with the October 7th massacre.  Most NP Catholics did offer prayers and even decry the slaughter of a thousand Jews, but generally wrapped it up with some variation of 'however...'.  

And now we have this. Not only the cold blooded murder of a human being, but a large number of people (including one of the alleged shooter's professors) celebrating him as a hero and cheering for what he is said to have done. Some are even calling for more of the same, while bringing out the customary religious icons with the alleged killer's face on them.  

So where are those New Prolife Seamless Garment Catholics in all of this?  With the ones I know (and can access), I've not seen any mention of it at all.  Period.  I mean, it's only one of the biggest stories right now, so they can't possibly invoke 'never heard of it', since clearly they keep up with the news in other cases. Granted, I've been blocked by several such Catholics, so perhaps on those sites they're all over this. 

Fun note.  With the exception of the Huffington Post, the only people who have blocked or banned me over all these years are left leaning Catholics.  Secular, Orthodox and non-Catholic Christian leftwing sites might lock horns with me, but none have blocked me.  Even the ironically titled, and  hyper to the left, Friendly Atheist never blocked me or threated to do so (I voluntarily stopped going there it should be mentioned).  And on top of it, most leftist Catholics who have blocked me (or threatened) are Catholic converts.  Mostly former Protestants.  Go figure. It probably means something, but I'll kick it around somewhere down the road. 

Anyway, assuming not all of those sites are different from the ones I can access, why the silence - yet again?  When at the beginning of the year the Democrats said if there is no other reason to vote for them and Biden, vote because of abortion, abortion, abortion, those same NP individuals were silent as feathers.  And now, we have the latest example of those on the left saying, yet again, that what they once condemned is now just fine, and what they once condoned is a grave evil.  So you heard postwar liberalism say violence is never the answer?  Well the Left now says violence can be a damn good answer for a growing number of reasons. 

At some point we have to admit the obvious when it comes to our New Prolife Seamless Garment brethren.  As much as it pains us to do so.  Remember this. 

UPDATE:  To his credit, Shea has stepped into the mix and condemned the shooting - sort of (See Nate's comment below).  In a way that has come to define a common leftwing Christian tactic with the Left, he basically repeats why the shooter did what he did.  The Left's opponents are genocide Nazi Hitlers all.  Including Musk.  Fun exercise: go to leftwing Catholic sites and Google Elon Musk and see how few even mentioned him until the Press declared war on him for doing what he did.  Which was exposing their collusion with the White House to censor and oppress dissenting and politically opposed views.  It's like the press whipping a donkey and hearing those bloggers bray.  Anyhoo, so many leftwing Christians will do what Mark does, and basically accept the premises of the Left about such things as abortion or killing Israeli Jews or just about anything, and then add a technical caveat that it is still wrong, but everything else is spot on right.  Abortion is technically bad, but everything the pro-abortion movement says (oppressed women, economic injustice, misogyny, the patriarchy) is gospel truth.  And so we have Mark do the same thing here.  Every reason that boy murdered Brian Thompson is completely sensical (the same could be said about those who tried to murder Trump). But technically cold blooded murder is still wrong.  Count me as one who doesn't see that as more than a Vichy approach to morality.  Like I said, 'My Group is God's Group, Group B is Hitler, and all because of X'.  As long as Mark, other believers, the press, our educators and politicians push such simplistic templates, they might as well hand out guns at the next radicals' convention. 

An odd observation from Pope Francis

So apparently Pope Francis came out and warned against religion that stokes divisions.  Mr. Divisions himself.  But then, he is the postmodern pope.  And with postmodernity, our 'yes' is forever 'maybe', and our 'no' is 'it depends'. 

It's true.  Pope Francis seems to have no problem saying that it's a sin to apply adjectives to people - like those rigid types over there.  He condemns those who are too rigid while being about the most rigid person  I know when it comes to promoting his own views.  So it shouldn't be surprising that a pope who has more than once invoked the 'me vs. them' template is suddenly bothered by religious leaders who cause divisions.  

And as for those who have felt marginalized by Pope Francis and targeted by Pope Francis and villainized by Pope Francis, I have seen the following Bible verse quoted time and time and time again: 

Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household.

Yep.  Because apparently our Faith is all about dividing the sheep from the greatest of all time, all about bringing a sword, all about speaking in parables for the expressed purpose of the inner circle enlightened Catholics who always get it.  Yet now, it turns out religion shouldn't do what his supporters have more than cheered him for doing, which he himself seems to have had no problems doing time and again.  

I fear Pope Francis, while having made some good points over the years, has nurtured two very, very bad developments in modern thinking: 

    1. That Christianity is entirely optional as opposed to the importance of fealty to worldly narratives and     agendas.  Oh it's nice to have and Jesus and all, but one can happily reject the Gospel as long as you are     in line with the proper activism and political advocacy.  And

    2. Words definitely speak louder than actions, which is why 'do as I say and not as I do' is a perfectly         appropriate approach to ministry in the postmodern global spotlight.  Something that almost defines, I      should add, those Catholics who proudly hang on every word of Pope Francis unless he criticizes             something left of center. 

The master of games

Or Gamemaster.  As in the Gamemaster Series.  In the mid-1980s, Milton Bradley, that Standard Oil of game companies, produced a series of games called the Gamemaster Series.  The flagship of this series was the game Axis & Allies.  Turns out, MB obtained the idea of Axis and Allies from an old, and rather crude, chit style wargame centered broadly around WW2.  I was happy when I discovered the game was purchased from one first published in the late 1970s.  In high school (c. 1981), I had the idea of a WW2 version of RISK, but never pursued it. When I discovered A&A, I was a bit bummed and wondered if I missed out.  Glad to see I didn't.  The idea was already there. 

Anyhoo, Axis & Allies is the main game, and I believe the most successful by far, spawning an endless stream of expansions, special editions, and micro-versions based on the original (my oldest recently received the latest, an A&A version of the North African Campaign from WWII).  Nonetheless, it wasn't the only one, as the name 'Series' suggests.   Over the years I managed to find all but one.  And even in the day, I managed to play all but one.  Several friends and acquaintances back then had at least one of the games.  Below are the games that made up the series.  Not in any order, just for fun and trivial things during these crazy, hazy days of the tale end of Bidenomics.  

Axis & Allies (1984)

I've written enough on this before, such as here.  Suffice to say it's still a favorite among the boys.  Naturally, we don't play it much now.  But in the day, it was a goto when game time was available but not so much as to stretch over endless days.  As I said, I believe it spawned the most variants, and we own several of those from back in the day.  

Conquest of the Empire  (1984)

This was the Ancient Rome variant.  I bought this some years ago, and our boardgame guru son warmed up to it nicely.  Unfortunately, the others didn't express much interest.  It's a shame, because just in our little tutorial session, it appeared fun, if not a bit predictable.  It was a game that seemed more interested in developing a skill for the game than sweating any thing close to a simulation of ancient Roman politics and military maneuvering.  Still, every game has to give and take. 

Fortress America (1986)

My best friend, who didn't mind D&D flavored video games but wouldn't be caught dead playing D&D, was the same way with board games.  He was like that with anything to be honest.  As a bona fide jock in high school, he was always sensitive about how any pastimes might appear to others around him.  He and I used to play RISK, but he kept it hush-hush.  Until a friend he knew, who was in some big local metal band in Columbus, came by one afternoon.  I was there and had brought the RISK game.  My friend was visibly aghast at me having a RISK game there and his cool big hair metal guitarist friend showing up.  Until his friend saw my game and brightened up immediately, singing the game's praises, and asked if we could play a round.  After that my friend practically had RISK tournaments in his house going late into the night with any and all friends available.  For some reason, piggybacking on this openness with RISK, he felt Fortress America was acceptable.  When I bought A&A a year or so into college, he purchased this on the same shopping trip.  I think it was an old Service Merchandise, but don't quote me on that.  The premise is basically Red Dawn in board game form, with a little sci-fi tech to add flavor.  Problem is, it seemed rather slanted toward America against its three invaders.  My friend chose the invaders. I simply hunkered down in Denver and let the super-lasers do their work.  After four rounds of trying to take Denver and losing everything, my friend took the game board with pieces still on it and heaved it out the door.  That was that.  But it was fun for those minutes we played.  Years later I got a copy and played it with our three older sons.  I was America, they were the invaders.  When it was over, they sympathized with my friend.    

Shogun (1986)

Perhaps the second favorite among my sons.  Shogun, as the name suggests, loosely (and I mean loosely) runs with the feudal period of Japanese history.  Truth be told, it's Axis & Allies, just scratch out 'Tank' and add 'Samurai.'  Or more honestly, it's really just RISK at the next level.  There is some secret investing in various items, and a ninja - because you have to have ninjas - you can hire for the odd assassination.  It has a little bit of a 'fog of war' mechanic, with entire armies peopled by so many of the plastic playing pieces, but only a single marker on the game board to show its location.  The idea being the others can't tell how large your armies are.  But they can.  All you do is count the pieces on the army board on the other side of the table.  But it adds flavor. And let's face it, any game that allows finely crafted miniature models of the celebrated Osaka castle is going to be pretty awesome. 

Broadsides and Boarding Parties (1984)

Never owned it.  Never saw it.  Never met a person who did.  You can almost see the desperate stretching of the concept to include the age of buccaneers into the series.  From what I've read, it didn't work.  Hence there's a reason I've never met a person who owned it.

Best billboard advertisement I ever saw

Here:

Heh. My son and I were traveling through a city in northcentral Ohio when we noticed this while stopped at a traffic light.  It took a second to sink in, then we both laughed out loud.  My son said whoever came up with that needs a raise.  The more you think on it, it does a great job making its point. 

Only sixteen left

That is the number of survivors of the attack on Pearl Harbor who are left alive.  Sad to think, but thus is the passage of time.  There comes a time 

The last survivor of the USS Arizona passed away earlier this year.  In this story, we have a focus on a survivor from one of the many ships that saw action that day, but are often overshadowed by the more referenced targets on that most famous of all naval anchorages - Battleship Row.  

It was the the USS Curtiss, the first purpose built seaplane tender in the US Navy (that is, not another type ship converted to a seaplane tender).  A seaplane tender, as can be guessed, was used to support the use of seaplanes that played an important role in the war.  Like many things, most probably don't know of it unless WW2, or Pearl Harbor, are your subjects of preference. 

Nonetheless, like anything in history, there were more stories from that one event than people.  Now is the time to get their tales, since there are so few left to tell them. 

All things must pass - remains of the USS Arizona

Wo ist das blogging?

As is obvious, I'm just not blogging the way I used to.  Long and short, it's been a pivot year.  A tough one, but also a blessed one. Mixing lots of running ahead of the boulder with events and developments that have been pure joy.  But all of it means time just isn't what it has been in the past.  Sure, Social Media has changed, blogs aren't what they were, things have gone a million miles in different directions since I first stopped by St. Blogs almost two decades ago.  

And again, blogs have changed, and for some reason, Catholics left of center have made blocking and banning people who disagree with their politics their new favorite pastime.  Which means actual discourse over disagreements, especially over the troubling developments left of center, is left for people who agree that they are troubling.  Which does change the nature of blogs from what they were, if you think on it. 

But through it all, it's just tough to say 'I have a thought - quick, to the Bat Blog!'  I've even thought of doing what I suggested in the past, and making it more about reflections, faith things, fun things, hobby things, like blogs in the old days often did.  Leaving all but the occasional hefty topic for others to dissect.  But again, time.  That commodity more precious than gold and rarer than diamonds.  

I'll still put together things when I can.  Who knows, maybe I will post more frivolous things, the days of weighty commentary seeming to fade at this point.  To be honest, my thoughts tend to lean that way, preferring old days of blogs when various hobbies and interests or whimsical musings were as common to see as any take down of the latest political developments or church scandals.  We'll see.  But if it seems things have slowed down, they have. And I doubt they'll pick up again the way it used to be.  

An observation

So I've noticed several articles mention that Ben Stiller, when discussing his critically acclaimed comedy Tropic Thunder, says he doubts if it could be made today.  Owing to the character Robert Downy, Jr. played.  Even if at the time it was passed by and supported by various members of the African American community before production.  

This is hardly new.  In recent years it has become an almost regular topic of conversation - just what in the past couldn't be made today?  What comedians of the past wouldn't work today?  What television shows couldn't be produced today?  What cartoons of old wouldn't get off the drawing board today? 

The funny thing?  When I was young and growing up, 1970s and 1980s even into the 90s, it was just the opposite.  I remember entertainers and journalists and professors and English teachers and just folks in general often saying how the latest movie or television show couldn't have been made in the past.  Sometimes owing to technology.  But often owing to changes in morals and an emphasis on the sacredness of free speech and artistic expression; an open mindedness to differing views and beliefs and lifestyles and such.  The emergence of our truly diverse and inclusive society that post-war liberalism was building.  Not that they always liked the results, but they conceded the tidal surge of emphasis on complete openness to all views and expressions was having an effect.  

But today, it's how many things in the past - including from that age of endless tolerance and diversity and inclusion - would never be allowed today?  Often because of activism by the same ones who once cheered how we were so able to push the boundaries and produce the unproducible from days gone by.  Think real hard on that, and you begin to realize that, in the immortal words of Foghorn Leghorn, we've been flimflammed.  

Thanksgiving and why conservatives lose

So it was that time of year again.  Not the time when we're told how racist Thanksgiving is and how the holiday should be abolished while we put our emphasis on Indigenous Peoples Month. Nope.  Truth  be told, I heard and saw little of that this year.  The year 2021 seems to have been the high water mark of the Left's America hate, when that sort of thing was everywhere and around everything American.  This year it's been references to the strategically placed 'Native American Heritage and Indigenous Peoples Day', but not much else.  Which is like those atheists who post 'There is no God' around Christmas.  No clue if the election had anything to do with the dialed down level of such rhetoric this year.

No, I mean from the conservative side.  When I first became Catholic and was frequenting many a Catholic blog, most of which were right of center, I was rather taken by the posting around the first Thanksgiving.  As we went through RCIA, I remember one of the instructors saying that we Americans don't know the real first Thanksgiving, owing to our Protestant bias. Eh.  I though OK, fair call, but the holiday received is the one we received, and that's part of our shared heritage as Americans, so I don't feel I'll make any changes any time soon.  Plus, if most don't know the specifics, they are aware that Spain and Catholicism was here, it's just we became an Anglo-American society owing to the influence of Enlightenment era Protestant England and the victories and accomplishments thereof, so the traditional approach makes sense.

But that first year I realized this is not some off the cuff remark in an RCIA class.  That same approach was - everywhere on St. Blogs.  I lost track of how many blogs that year posted variations on 'The REAL First Thanksgiving' was Catholic.  And it still happens.  I don't think a year has passed that I haven't seen it on at least a couple Catholic blogs  Which, you know, is nothing other than a variant on 'It should really be Indigenous Peoples Day!'  If you think on it.

Oh, quibble all you want about leftwing agendas and the differences here, but ultimately what is being said is that the heritage we have in the Thanksgiving Holiday is flawed, and should be reframed, or rethought, or rebranded.  Which is all the Left is saying, just to other extremes.  

And that's why conservatives lose.  I've often said that at any time of the year, the Left can count on 1/3 of conservatives and those on the right jumping on board and siding with whatever the Left is pushing.  This goes way back.  One of my pet hypotheses is that America began its formal decline when we became convinced that America had no right to have a cultural and ethnic identity. That is, we could not be a WASP nation.  No matter how the nation attempted to allow others in and push equality and make sure everyone is given the same fair shake, we simply could not be a WASP nation by identity and culture and social majority.  

That was driven into me in elementary school, when I first hear the term WASP, and was taught how glorious is was that we were putting that identity behind us.  And first up on the list was not the Civil Rights legislation, or anything to do with Jim Crow.  It was Kennedy becoming the first Catholic president.  That was the wonderful chink in the WASP armor that signaled we were not longer merely a Protestant nation, we were a Christian one.  Much to the delight of Catholics then and now. 

Learning about that in fourth grade was, I'll admit, ironic, because by then we were already tossing not only our Christian ideals, but religious ideals in general, into the outer darkness and becoming a secularized, atheist state in all but church attendance.  Yet Catholics then as now cheered the idea of getting rid of that WASP, at least insofar as it meant Protestant, identity. The problem now is clear.  As I said, it didn't stop with erasing the Protestant. Nor did it stop with anything else.

Yet every year, on the Catholic internet, Catholics will join the Left in saying why Thanksgiving as we have it is at least flawed in our understanding. Most, of course, don't go so far as to say throw down the holiday and burn it in the turkey friers.  And there are those least those who are more conservative, who still celebrate and give credit to the traditional holiday and its more Protestant origins.    

But it's there nonetheless.  An 'us v. them' approach to the holiday that I've noticed the Left will always and forever condone and encourage and be grateful for, especially when done among those who otherwise oppose the Left.  Something you never see happen anywhere left of center I might add.  Which is why the Left wins.  Even amidst temporary setbacks.  Because whatever the Left doesn't learn, it will always know that in the future, conservatives will forever be bickering and dividing themselves, and if nothing else, the Left will be able to call that a win. 

Oh, and we won't even get into that odd 'the real lesson of Thanksgiving is that socialism never works.'  Not saying it does or doesn't, but the real lesson I grew up with until the rise of multi-cultural anti-Western dribble was that the Pilgrims put it all on the line and risked everything, even their lives, in this new land all because of their beliefs and convictions.  And when against hope they survived, they joined with the natives of the land and gave glory and thanks to God as the reason they survived.  Even in elementary school, we learned that.  So please stop with the 'enough of the God stuff Dave, it's about the economy stupid.'  Again, the first step in defeating an opponent is to stop helping the opponent.  Because anything that cuts through our side is always a boon for theirs.