Ohio Candidate Dresses Up Like Nazi

[Kirk Freeman]

Holy cow, talk about bad political moves. Ohio Republican candidate for Congress dresses up like Nazi as part of reenactment.

I cannot image having photos of you dressed up as a Nazi or a Confederate about and expecting good political results.

The Associated Press: Ohio GOP candidate defends Nazi re-enactments

 

[PatriotPride]

I see nothing wrong with it. This nation is too PC. I used to do Civil War reenacting, and I was a member of a Richmond Battery (that's Confederate to those who don't know). It brought history to life for me, and I have great memories of time spent with my father. That doesn't mean that I condone slavery.

 

[Expat]

I see nothing wrong with it. This nation is too PC. I used to do Civil War reenacting, and I was a member of a Richmond Battery (that's Confederate to those who don't know). It brought history to life for me, and I have great memories of time spent with my father. That doesn't mean that I condone slavery.

I agree with you that there shouldn't be anything wrong with it. But Kirk is right, it is just a boneheaded thing for a Republican to do something like this and expect it to not hurt you in politics.

 

[Phil502]

Cantor should shut up, It's not like the guy was marching around in uniform at home in his neighborhood.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Sure, I understand, dress up like Nathan Bedford Forrest or Heinrich Himmler if you wish, but expect some political consequences.

If you parade around in the uniform of great evil like the 3rd Reich or the CSA, is it not legit politically to raise questions about a candidate's personal beliefs?

 

[mrjarrell]

Really a moment of "nothing to see here". He's just one of many thousands of re-enactors in this country. As long as he's not wearing a sheet and burning a cross or re-enacting the Seige of the Warsaw Ghetto, I really don't have an issue with him. Besides, he's Ohio's problem, not Indiana's.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

This is purely stupid. Reenacting as a Nazi does not mean someone supports Nazism; If he is punished it, then doom on America for not punishing the real threat, elitism.

I would advise people to ignore this low blow.

 

[PatriotPride]

Sure, I understand, dress up like Nathan Bedford Forrest or Heinrich Himmler if you wish, but expect some political consequences.

If you parade around in the uniform of great evil like the 3rd Reich or the CSA, is it not legit politically to raise questions about a candidate's personal beliefs?

Not to nitpick, but do you feel that the CSA was "evil"?

Honestly, I don't have an issue either way. There could be NO reenactments if one side didn't portray the loser or the less popular. Many times when reenactors appear at an event, they will have two sets of uniforms, so that if one side has a disproportianate number of reenactors, they can simply change uniforms and sides. He was a historical reenactor, and I applaud him for it.

Likewise, I wouldn't have an issue if a candidate chose to do Revolutionary War reenactments and chose the side of the British. It would raise absolutely no question (to me) regarding the candidates personal beliefs. If, however, the candidate was wearing the Nazi uniform around his home and was a white supremacist, then I would have cause to question their personal beliefs.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

But the British are not evil, the Nazis and the CSA were.

do you feel that the CSA was "evil"?

Is not one man owning another evil? The CSA fought and died to defend this practice.

 

[dross]

But the British are not evil, the Nazis and the CSA were.



Is not one man owning another evil? The CSA fought and died to defend this practice.

Did you really have to write that? Do you know what you just started?

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

Not to nitpick, but do you feel that the CSA was "evil"?

Honestly, I don't have an issue either way. There could be NO reenactments if one side didn't portray the loser or the less popular. Many times when reenactors appear at an event, they will have two sets of uniforms, so that if one side has a disproportianate number of reenactors, they can simply change uniforms and sides. He was a historical reenactor, and I applaud him for it.

Likewise, I wouldn't have an issue if a candidate chose to do Revolutionary War reenactments and chose the side of the British. It would raise absolutely no question (to me) regarding the candidates personal beliefs. If, however, the candidate was wearing the Nazi uniform around his home and was a white supremacist, then I would have cause to question their personal beliefs.

You know it....


And given the brainwashing of Liberalism into Public School, with historical inaccuracies, you already see young kids learning how "evil" it is to be an American, to be a Patriot, you can fully expect to see your greatest grandchildren equating the Founders to nazis, too; and who do we have to thanks for this?

My question is, why arent people up in arms about Communism infecting America? NeoCons? The Nazis are responsible for 6 million ethnic jewish deaths?

Well, Communist are responsible for over 60 Million ethnic Russian deaths, yet we allow the Communist inclined so much power, and elected the great puppet, Obama.

Americans have some priorities....

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Well, Communist are responsible for

Let's leave the Obama Administration out of this.

 

[rambone]

I'd say subjugating others to slavery and oppression in the name of your king's empire is patently pretty evil.

 

[DragonGunner]

Saw some (D) on Fox last night saying what he was doing was wrong an radical an the (R) said he agreed an condemned it....it was a re-inactment, I don't see anything wrong about it unless he came out an said he agreed with Nazi's. We have a greater concern here...we have curupt Politicians "dressing" up as Americans every election.

 

[PatriotPride]

But the British are not evil, the Nazis and the CSA were.



Is not one man owning another evil? The CSA fought and died to defend this practice.

I must respectfully disagree. Slavery WAS wrong and most certainly could be classified as "evil", but that was not the main issue for the CSA. The CSA championed States' Rights, and slavery was a side-issue...one that was affirmed and upheld by the SCOTUS at the time.

I'm not trying to open up an argument. It's just my opinion that both the Federals and the CSA had components within them that could be considered "evil". By the same token, the British government at the time of the Revolution could be considered to be "evil", as they held a pseudo-slavemaster/slave relationship with the Colonies before the Revolution.

The Nazis were evil, no disagreement there. I feel that we cannot simply state that the CSA (and British) were evil without examining the picture as a whole.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

Why is everyone putting the weight of slavery upon the Brits? There plenty of other peoples who had a much bigger hand in the influence of slavery in America than th Brits.


Slavery was not the reason for the split of the Union, as I see it, and it certainly was not, in the words of Lincoln himself, the reason he went to war.

The South, for the longest time wanted succession, Andrew Jackson knew this, I doubt slavery was the issue even then.

I still cant comprehend how some can attack someone for reenacting something on historical basis.
I guess Tom Cruise, and numerous other famous actors are Nazis, too? By this insane logic, that would effectively make Russel Crow a nazi, too, and who else?

Again, I cant even understand how this is even a point of interest, when we have communist running America for the past 20+ years.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The CSA championed States' Rights, and slavery was a side-issue

The CSA championed slavery above all else. Read the Confederate constitution or the Southern petitions to leave the Union--slavery was THE issue., as their leaders would say, slavery was the cornerstone of the CSA.

Slavery was not the reason for the split of the Union, as I see it, and it certainly was not, in the words of Lincoln himself, the reason he went to war.

Slavery was at the forefront of American politics--3/5 compromise, Missouri Compromise, Bloody Kansas, the Fugitive Slave Act, Dred Scott, Southern writers wrote about how important it was, Southern fiction writers wrote about how glorious slavery was and Northerners wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin, the book Lincoln said was responsible for the war (Uncle Tom's Cabin was not about states' rights), the very reason for a Republican party was slavery, not capital gains tax cuts.

we have curupt Politicians "dressing" up as Americans every election.

That's the worst dress up there is!
Slavery may not have been the reason Lincoln went to war but it was THE reason the South went to war. Slavery was all over their peitions to leave the Union, their speeches, the CSA Constituion, the reason for the Slave Patrols, and the reason the South heatedly declined emacipation in order to raise Black troops as it would destroy the reason the South went to war.

I have lots of book recommendation if anyone wants to read further.

Now, that said, you can dress up like a CSA soldier, but understand that there will be political consequences for showing such judgment.

 

[MTC]

Well, Communist are responsible for

Let's leave the Obama Administration out of this.

... the very reason for a Republican party was slavery, not capital gains tax cuts.

You're a riot!

 

[Prometheus]

I have lots of book recommendation if anyone wants to read further.

and subject (pun intended) ourselves to more of your ignorant lies? I think not.

The victor writes the history and the slavery was a side issue. I wouldn't expect someone like you to have any real clue about that though.

Lincoln did not want blacks to be free. He didn't support slavery but he was bigot in every sense of the word. That tyrannical nut job was planning on loading them all onto boats and shipping them back to Africa before he got shot.

What about the genocide not just condoned but encouraged by Lincoln and carried out by Sherman... I wouldn't expect you've heard much about that little march have you?

Honestly, you've made yourself look like a fool here tonight.

 

[PatriotPride]

Honestly, you've made yourself look like a fool here tonight.

No. We're just having a discussion on our opinions for the cause of the American Civil War. Opinion will vary. Some see slavery as THE endall reason that the CSA went to war. Others hold the opinion that the issue was States' Rights, and although slavery was a PROMINENT reason why the CSA went to war, it was not THE reason.

In my opinion, slavery was the straw that broke the CSA's back. The states were tired of being told what to do and how to do it by the Federal government. They drew their line in the sand with slavery. Lincoln's predecessor did nothing, and dumped the problem firmly in Lincoln's lap.

The CSA had black soldiers. Not as many as the Feds, but they still had them. Many prominent figures in the CSA did not own slaves, and they fought for what was simply known as "The Cause". They wanted the freedom to make their own choices, and they wanted to freedom to choose whether or not the states (not the government) allowed slavery within their borders.

Ultimately, the CSA was not happy with the way the Federal government was treating them, and they chose to secede. They were well within their rights to do so, and had Stonewall Jackson not been felled by friendly fire, they most likely would have succeeded at Gettysburg and won the war.