Replies

To parse whether he was just re-enacting the German army, (which did have some noble folks in it, like Rommel, or Beck) instead of the Nazi Party perverts, is immaterial in the political realm.

While I will agree that the photo taken out of context can be used against a candidate politically. I will not concede that there is any substantial difference between performing as a WWII soldier on either side or as a War of 1860 soldier on either side. Especially when the bad guys get routed. In any event, it is not a disqualfying offense, especially when they run against those who are for the merciless slaughter of innocent babies in the womb.

It is a play. If Fred Thoimpson has a part in Das Boot, or played a Soviet in Hunt for Red October, it should not be held against him.

I live near a city (Rockford, IL) that does re-enactments of WW II, War of 1860, War for Independence, etc. The actors in these pieces often switch sides every year.

The only hint of any sympathy with the WWII Germans or Nazis is among some of the collectors of memorabilia and uniforms who necessarily provide same for the re-enactments. best I can gather, it is usually a macbre fascination, harmless in itself, rather than an actual endorsement. I doubt the pol in question is one of those.

Let me provide a direct quote to why, when asked he reinacted thw Wiking SS, which the Dems can easily use to totally smear Iott:

“I’ve always been fascinated by the fact that here was a relatively small country that ... accomplished incredible things. I mean, they took over most of Europe and Russia, ...that’s incredible.”

PERCEPTION IS KEY. If you knew little about the candidates (as most voters do), would you vote for someone photographed smiling in a Nazi SS uniform while calling them “incredible?”