A More Balanced Take on Mike Austin

... aka the blogger who (used to?) blog at The Return of Scipio. His blog has been shut down, so linking to it is a waste of time, but suffice it to say that he and I agreed on much. He was always a bit more forceful than I, but I was happy to consider him a friend on the blogs. I'd love to have a beer with him some time.

Over at Esquire, John Richardson wrote a profile of Mike, wondering if he might be the next Timothy McVeigh. Here's the essence of what John learned about Mike.

Mike is Catholic. Very Catholic. He has taken the teachings of the Church to heart, even the parts about Satan. Satan is scary and Mike feels the need to alert his readers about what he believes Satan is up to these days.

Mike owns guns.

Mike has studied history.

Mike has studied economics and asserts that President Obama is a fascist because, well, in an economic sense, he is a fascist along the lines of Juan Peron. To review: the economics of fascism are that you get to keep private propery, but only so long as you do what the government tells you. The purchase of GM and Chrysler, the absorption of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the attempted takeover of health care, the cap and trade bill are all inherently fascist because of the overwhelming power it gives the government over the parts of the economy connected to these. To object to the assertion that Obama is a fascist is to not understand fascism.

Most surprisingly to John, Mike is polite and well-mannered. Upon reading John's article, my reaction is that John needs to get out more. More to the point, John needs to socialize with people who don't read Esquire. Mike is polite and chivalrous. Esquire is not. Esquire regularly posts articles like this which are little more than grade school prose surrounding soft core porn.

I admit I don't read the magazine, but having perused a few articles, it looks like a pseudo-intellectual magazine for swine. The thoughtful piece about Mike Austin illustrates the author's ignorance of about half of America and the "article" on Abbie Cornish is more sexist and misogynistic than a thousand episodes of Father Knows Best.

I'm glad John wrote the piece. I think he did a good job profiling Mike and tried to be as fair as possible given John's apparently limited social circle. I learned a bit more about Mike because of it.

Now I'm hoping Mike returns to blogging.

Update: I just reread the article. It drips with condescension and is filled with ignorance. I get the sense that John wrote it as fast as he could so he could get back to the office and help pick out which porn pictures of Abbie Cornish to post. He shows no real understanding of Mike at all. John links to posts over at The Return of Scipio to illustrate points he makes. My bet is that Mike took down the blog to deprive John of those examples.

Update 2: Of considerable interest is something left unremarked in the article. Mike used to be a wild-eyed liberal, much like what John seems to be now. John shows no significant curiosity about Mike's evolution away from John's current position.

Second, what is it with the Sermon on the Mount and liberals? It's like the Bible begins and ends with the Sermon on the Mount for them.