Thursday, July 21, 2011

Dougy Boy Phillips' Misreading of D-Day

I am most definitely not an historian.  I won't ever pretend to be.  But I have read a lot about many subjects, especially World War 2.  During elementary, middle, and high school, I ate up every book on the subject I could get my hands on.  I love to talk about it too due to the innocence of the weaponry and the huge advances in technology that happened in those few short years.  The soldiers, part of the so-called "Greatest Generation", who fought in the war, are very inspiring.

But, they inspire me for different reasons than Dougy Boy.

Recently, Doug has been so very excited, which is not an unusual occurrence for him, about his D-Day Series.  Doug is especially pumped about Episode 3 of 7 where they examine, as he states, the "biblical leadership qualities" and awesome character of seven men and crappy qualities and horrid character of Hitler.  Of course, we can only assume that he will think highly of the Allied peeps and low of Hitler (I don't dig his mustache either).

I have no issue with viewing Hitler as evil.  He was evil to the core and murderous to boot.  A scourge on our human history. 

Frankly, I think the man became drunk with power, morphing into an overconfidence that caused him to err in the battle of D-Day.  History shows he didn't wake up until very late in the day and nobody wanted to risk their neck to go in and do the job.  No Panzer divisions could move without his say-so, so the Allied forces were victorious before the hierarchical Germans got their act together against the semi-hierarchical opponent which succeeded mainly on the backs of individual heroic decisions.

But, Doug Phillips and his ilk don't see a victorious battle without the need to spiritualize it.   Their favorite hierarchical structure is the military because people cannot question authority while wearing the uniform.  They look at Vietnam and say it was lost because the military authority structure crumbled and the populace did not give their leaders a rubber stamp which doomed the war to failure.  Then, they look at World War 2 and say things like, "World War 2 was the most theologically important war in the history of mankind, where the battle of D-Day was chief."

I'm not sure why they skip battles like Peter cutting off the ear of the soldier where Jesus showed us how to love our enemies and heal their wounds.  Or even the battle of Jericho where we learn that walking around something seven times (God's number, remember?) chanting, and then blowing trumpets and yelling at the end will guarantee us victory.  Or the Revolutionary War where God's chosen people, the Americans, became a free nation.  Or the Civil War where a stupid South dared to question the authority of God's ordained government and was summarily squashed.  And many more....

But, let's examine the character of the leaders that they are going to worship in this series.  You will see that Doug Phillips and his organization revise real history to prove that all great men were godly men and had awesome character when in reality, they don't fit the Vision Forum mold.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt:  
  • Born into a very rich family who made their fortune in opium.
  • A Freemason.
  • Married Eleanor even though his mother vehemently opposed the wedding.
  • Had numerous affairs
  • Was offered a divorce by Eleanor so he could be with his mistress, but his mistress, being Catholic (gasp!), declined
  • Lived apart from his wife for much of his marriage and only used her for political expediency
  • Said "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself", but left out the fear of God.
  • Expanded government exponentially (Doug Phillips' father is the founder of the Constitution Party which believes in VERY limited government.)
  • Ordered FBI and IRS investigations of his opponents

Dwight D. Eisenhower:
  • Stated that his greatest disappointment in life was not making the West Point baseball team rather than listing a sin or two.
  • Stated about himself that he was the most religious man he knew which was not humble.
  • Joined West Point even though his parents were against war.
  • Designed tank warfare that was heavily discouraged by his superiors
  • Expanded all of FDR's government programs as well as creating even more government
  • Made many foreign policy blunders in the middle east ("Eisenhower Doctrine")
  • Was a chain smoker
  • Castigated our military by warning against its undue influence in policy decisions
  • Was a moderate politically, eschewing the right wing of the Republican Party

Omar Bradley:
  • A Freemason
  • Was not homeschooled
  • Failed to properly coordinate battle plans with bombing forces, causing many casualties
  • Made serious mistakes in the Battle of Hurtgen Forest that cost tens of thousands of lives
  • Yelled at his superior, Eisenhower, when he was sidelined before the Battle of the Bulge, blaspheming the name of God
  • Relieved numerous lesser generals based solely on the fact that their command style disagreed with his

George S. Patton: 
  • Had a foul mouth
  • Was physically abusive to soldiers when they didn't meet his standards

(Note:  Sorry.  George S. Patton is my idol.  I have his mouth and his wit.  Though I don't mind humor directed at myself, as he most definitely did not!)

Etc., etc....

After reading over some of the character of the men listed in the VF series, you see that the victory in the war had nothing to do with men of great character,  It had everything to do with men who knew their job and knew their job well. 

In other words, Doug Phillips needs to refocus his views on World War 2, D-Day, and the men involved.  He needs to look at it practically instead of mystically, as he tries to make everything seem.  While he worships the very ground these generals and leaders walk on, they would be the very men where, if the chance to invite them to dinner ever presented itself, Dougy Boy would smugly turn them away based on his superior character and spiritual positioning.

All in all, more fluff with great scores from this loon and his ilk.  A new twist on old history to bring his subjects in line with his revisionist ideas. 

When will people wake up and call him on it?


  1. I've never quite agreed with VF way of introducing history subjects. It's unappealing to me, I guess that's because I have always hated history (grins). But you make some good points. It's making my head buzz (the "whining mosquito"). Do you remember him? (grins)

  2. Patton, when asked if he read the Bible responded with, "Every G@& D@#^ Day!"

    But he did talk to the chaplin and asked for a war prayer so he could blow his foes to smitherines. What a saint. ;)

  3. I didn't know you tracked VF. I've seen this thing coming down the pipes and have had equal misgivings. Nice one: "wasn't homeschooled." Heh.

  4. Doug's followers won't wake up and call him on it because they take everything he says as gospel truth. They don't question and they certainly don't look things up for themselves.

  5. Violet. Dougy Boy's winning smile, crooked lips when he speaks, smooth talk, and overenthusiastic demeanor is what turns me off. Oh wait! That describes me! Except I'll replace the crooked mouth with crooked i-tooth.

    Anyway...I'm not familiar with much of VF's historical re-writings, but when I do become aware of them, they are always set to the light of great men. According to VF, great men can do no wrong.

    One thing I enjoy about the Bible is that we see great men for who they really are - normal human beings with faults and failings like us. We shouldn't, and yet people still do, put those great men on a pedestal. It was never meant to be.

    On the other hand, I bet you will never find a great woman list out of VF, unless of course they are giving an award for highest number of squirts in a delivery room.

  6. Mara Reid. Patton is my favorite general EVER! In fact, those two quotes from him only endear him more to my heart. I know. I'm weird. But, I don't like the uptight general with standards and a quiet mouth.

    Look at Omar Bradley. The guy was soft-spoken and very standard oriented and he was a loser in battle. He made so many mistakes that he lost thousands of American and Allied lives.

    I think I would rather a crass, off-the-cuff guy in charge of anything. Success would be guaranteed but the ride to that end would be exciting as all get-out.

  7. Erika. Agreed. I actually know, first-hand, that that is most definitely true.

  8. Ted. Thanks. His blog is in my Google Reader. I track the good, the bad, and the amoral.

  9. Did you think by my comment that I didn't like Patton?
    Perish the thought!
    We own the movie with George C. Scott.
    My dad's scout master was part of Patton's 5th tank Division. And so was my father-in-law's brother.
    I laughed out loud at the scene in the movie where he said, "Every G*& D@%^ day!" and when the guys in the tank were looking at the maps and realized that they had gone past the edge of the maps.
    I preached a message on Patton's war prayer and how, even though he couldn't be counted as a saint, when push came to shove and he couldn't advance due to fog and no air cover, he knew where to turn, like the centurian in the Bible. He turned to a Higher Authority than general, president, or prime minister. He turned to God.

  10. Absolutely not, Mara Reid. I saw your comment as a continuation of my post's point. I just wanted to clarify my worship of Patton a bit more.

    Have you ever checked out his family ancestry? Wow!

    It's like a garbage man tracking his lineage, working for Waste Management, all the way back to the days when they yelled "Bring out your dead!!!" in Monty Python.

    What a solid history of relatives in the military. Why wouldn't he want to be a general?

  11. As a historian (plugging away at my PhD as we speak!), I have to say, your analysis is spot on. Bravo!

  12. Really, Libby Anne? *turns red.

    You and my wife should get together. She's just starting out on her BA or BS in History. What is your career goal?

  13. My career goal? Once I get my PhD I want to write books. I also want to be involved in activism of some sort, probably involving feminism, socialism, or poverty. What is your wife's goal? Also, if your wife wants to contact me, my email is on my blog! And if she has questions, I'm open.

  14. 2 war subjects that get a lot of people riled up is:

    Hitler was a freaking military GENIUS! If we had his brains, Iraq and Afghanistan would be done with.

    Abraham Lincoln didn't care for slaves.

    2 things I follow pertaining to war: War between the States and Naval history.

    There is a few things that I have read from VF, and seem to contradict or twist what really happened...

    Which battle is your favorite?

  15. It would have to be the Battle of the Bulge or the Battle of Midway.

  16. Hitler was indeed brilliant militarily. His mistake was attacking Russia. See, this is another point Doug Philips and his ilk ignore - Russia won WWII. Russia broke Germany. VF and their look alikes ignore Russia and act as though the U.S. was the only hero. It's fairly obvious why they do that. I mean, you can't possibly admit that a godless communist country did something good now, can you!

  17. Libby Anne;
    be fair. WINTER in Rus won WWII.

    just sayin'...

    IC: logistics is where it's at. you want to talk about unsung heros? the people who make sure the people on the front have WATER and FOOD and AMMO [and maybe not in that order] - not to mention dry socks and boots that FIT and anti-fungal cream and and and and and...

    i'm a military brat, and a hardcore fan of military sci-fi [which often GRAVELY disappoints me by calling logistics people REMFs, or by going on and on about the peculation and outright theft that used to be common in logistics - before people realized how IMPORTANT logistics are. so, before Napoleon. now, it almost never happens, at least in the GOOD militaries, and if it DOES happen, the logistic officer [and it has to be an officer to really steal... enlisted and NCOs just don't have the access] better pray that s/he's shot for treason... because what the UNIT will do will make being shot look NICE. anyway, i ramble] and my sub-major [not my minor. i had a double major, so no minor - but when a major is political science, one is encouraged to specialize] was "military politics". which, sadly, didn't have NEARLY enough historical analysis for me. and most of what we covered has been in the past 30 years. but i read...

    why did Sweden "lose" the 30 years war? lack of logistics [Gustav Adolphis' death didn't HELP - but it was the logistics that "lost" that bloody mess] for that matter, going back to WWII and Russia['s Winter] winning it, why did invading Russia cause Germany to lose? because they couldn't handle the freaking logistics! [seriously - proper logistics would have had every man on that front in PROPER gear for the time and place - had more in the way of engineers to help the tanks traverse the area, for that matter MORE TANKS where they were actually needed...]

    don't mind me - i adore logistics. i like planning things. i like figuring out what's needed, where, and adding 10%. 15% if it's a bit murkey.
    but i HATE shopping. heh.

    i've never read anything BY vision forum [i refuse to give them any money] and i don't know anyone IRL who has had anything do with them - how bad is the revisionism? i know what's left out of public-school history, but that's a sin of omission, so to speak, whereas actually revising history is a sin of comission. if that follows...
    and i wonder and i worry. i mentor teens - and while i haven't yet been handed a teen who's been raised with VF and/or Gothard and/or similar, i keep expecting to have one fall in my lap. and i'd kind of like to know where to start digging, ya know?
    so... do you know of anyplace that actually lays out VF, that doesn't end up with my money supporting VF?

    [and either way - thanks for reading this REALLY LONG comment - sorry about that :) ]

  18. Wow, Denelian! I love you! What a great missive.

    The beauty of and amazon is that the used format of VF materials can be purchased without giving that organization a dime.

    And the revisionism:

    Basically, Dougy Boy and his ilk see everything good in the light of the perfectly "biblical" family - the authority structure being the chief. They see life through that lens and that lens alone.

    Everything good is either American or old. They see history as some mystical representation of God's hand on this earth, rather than really history.

    Check out their "mission":

  19. i don't know if "great" is the best adjective, there. "rambling" seems a bit more accurate, lol.
    but i'll take the love - everyone needs love!

    you know - it never occured to me that VF stuff might be available on amazon or - i just assummed they [the owners of VF] wouldn't allow it. that's what i get for assuming, sigh.
    at least now i know to look! thanks :) i'll be doing that. [and if it rots my brain and turns me into a zombie... well, it's ALL YOUR FAULT. hehe]

    "8.Teaching History as the Providence of God" - uh, what? History is the providence of HISTORIANS. or rather, it's the providence of everyone who cares about it. the thing with history, is if you don't know it [accurately] you WILL repeat it. and if they're revising history even a tenth as much as you're implying...
    that SCARES ME.

    i could write something about each of their "goals" ["Hebrew Discipleship" - isn't that why Jesus DIED?! so that people didn't have to DO THAT anymore???!] but... that would take forever, and clutter your comments section even MORE than i already did.

    the more i learn about the P/QF movement, the more they scare me.

    do they even notice that their so-called "Perfect Biblical family" has very little in common with the "nuclear" family?
    they run around screaming "the Bible says marriage is ONLY between one-man-and-one-woman" - except... again, it's NOT TRUE!
    a Biblical family was generally a Patriach [but sometimes a Matriarch - rare but not unknown] said Patriarch's wiveS [plural. again, not always, but often enough] his grown sons and THEIR wives and THEIR children, his unmarried daughters. daughters LEFT THE FAMILY when they got married. sons often did NOT leave the family, at least not until the Patriarch died - at which point each son became Patriarch of his own family...

    but that's NOT what they're doing. at all.

    of course, the Bible also advocates infantcide, and at one point even gives the recipe for an abortifacant. the whole "don't spill seed" story has been taken *SO* out of context - the whole point wasn't that he "spilled his seed", but that he was required, by God, to give his brother's widow a child that he would have to raise, but that would be considered his BROTHER'S son - and he didn't WANT to raise a child that wouldn't be "his" - so he "spilled his seed". this wasn't an anti-birth control issue, this was at best an anti-adoption issue. or, at the very least, a breaking-of-the-LAW issue. [as it, it was required by law that he give his sister-in-law the child he brother couldn't, because his brother was dead. and he would be required to PAY for the child, but it wasn't HIS CHILD, and he was selfish and didn't WANT to pay for a child that wasn't HIS]

    like almost everything from the P/QF people, it's twisted and confused and NOT RIGHT. i have to wonder, i REALLY do - *DO* they actually READ the Bible? if they ARE reading it, how do they completely and totally miss the CONTEXT?!?

    i just don't understand them. at ALL!