Patrick McIlheran has been bemoaning some crude writing about Catholicism penned by a blogger, Amanda Marcotte, who currently works for the Edwards campaign. He took it on here and then attacked Folkbum for defending her here.
In his last epistle, Paddy had this to say:
As for Bullock's final graf, where he presumes I'm calling for some purge of presidential campaigns: Good heavens, no. In fact, I'm glad Edwards is hanging on to Marcotte. It makes clearer what kind of voter the man is trying to woo. He's free to hire and keep anyone he wants. If the leading populist lefty in the race wants to signal faithful Catholics he regards them with vulgar contempt, that's a useful political signal.
There's nothing like Paddy Mack in high dudgeon. Oh, how is faith is offended!
Yet, the Brawler is willing to bet that McIlheran voted not once but twice for President Bush. The same George Bush who spoke at Bob Jones University -- a fine institution of learning that not only thought badly of Catholics but also discriminated against them.
Some might construe Bush legitimizing such an institution as a sign of "vulgar contempt" for Catholics. The Brawler cannot speak for McIlheran.Nor can he say whether McIlheran views actual discrimination as being of more import than mere words from a lass of a blogger.
Moreover, one suspects that Paddy Mack will vote for Rudy Giuliani should he land the Repub nomination. Even though Rudy's been married three times, has spoken out in favor of gay rights and is pro-Choice. (or was, based on his recantations in his drive for power. One might expect Charlie Sykes to support such a candidate -- Married three times?What's not to like? -- but one might expect something different from Paddy.
Indeed, why haven't we heard Paddy speak out against Rudy, an embarrassment to the Catholic faith? Paddy envisioned the fight against gay marriage as nothing less than a battle for civilization. You might suspect he had a thought or two about heterosexuals who abuse the sacred institution in the manner of Giuliani. Does he really want such a man representing his party?
Then again, we've never heard Paddy complain much about St. Ronald Reagan. The same Reagan whose administration backed right wing fascists in Central America who killed nuns and priests and archbishops.
Of course, Paddy has been an avid supporter of our invasion and occupation of Iraq -- a move condemned by the Vatican. And he's never exactly taken up the Vatican's case in support of the Palestinians either, has he?
And nor has McIlheran -- so concerned about defending the people of the book -- ever come to the defense of Islam as it's been maligned, has he? Has he ever criticized Jessica McBride for sneering at Islam as the "religion of peace" or her derision for even attempting to understand a religion with 1 billion adherents around the globe? (Would Jessica consider Roman Catholicism a religion of hate based on the fact the Roman Catholic Croats have killed tens of thousands of people under the auspices of the explicitly Catholic Ustashe (Nazi collaborators) in World War 2 and the civil war of the 90s? Would Patrick?)
No. Weirdly, Patrick only gets upset about some words -- stupid words, yes. But only words.
The Brawler's a Catholic boy. He found Marcotte's words repulsive and frankly would not have been bothered had Edwards fired her. But Edwards has come out reprimanding her and Marcotte has apologized.
The most obscene display really has been with McIlheran. Really Paddy: If you're going to rise in defense of the one true mother church, don't be partisan about it.
It really cheapens it, don't you think?
There is really one word to describe Paddy -- immature.
He should be writing in the Weekly Reader rather than in a major daily metro newspaper. What is wrong with O. Richardo?
Posted by: kr | February 11, 2007 at 07:21 AM