Hegseth Appreciates Pastor Wilson Is All
The takeaway of Hegseth’s video and the Pentagon’s clarification is meant to be obvious.
You’re likely familiar with a chin-scratch-worthy video that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth posted lately. It featured his pastor, Doug Wilson, waxing theological on the appropriate role of women in leadership. (TL;DW: pretty much nada.) Hegseth’s own helpful tagline is “All of Christ for All of Life.” It also showcased Wilson calling for the recriminalization of LGBTQ+ behavior and explaining that every government is, in essence, a theocracy. The U.S. must turn away from our current “Theo,” the people, and claim Christ as our Head.
Nothing weird or alarming here at all.
Yet I dare to call this video “head-scratching” for two reasons. First, it prompts the question of what exactly is Hegseth’s stance here? Is this a quasi-official endorsement of its content, or is Hegseth just tossing it out for our contemplation, like a bulked-up modern-day Socrates innocently engaging in philosophical conversation? Second, it prompts the question: what in the flippin’ heck-fire is going on in D.C., in the Republican Party, and in the country at large?
Aside from those questions, Hegseth’s intent in posting the video is pretty clear.
Molly Olmstead of Slate took the old-fashioned journalistic approach and tried to nail Hegseth’s position down, particularly with regard to women voting. As she put it:
“Slate reached out to the Pentagon. In calls and an email, we made it clear that we were asking specifically for clarification on Hegseth’s view on women’s voting rights. We asked directly, and in the final line of a very brief email: ‘Does Secretary Hegseth believe women should have the right to vote?’”
Here’s the Pentagon’s full reply, via Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell:
“Hello. Thanks for your note. Here is our statement: ‘The Secretary is a proud member of a church affiliated with the Congregation of Reformed Evangelical Churches, which was founded by Pastor Doug Wilson. The Secretary very much appreciates many of Mr. Wilson’s writings and teachings.’”
Olmstead’s take is professional and admirably measured. She calls it a kind of non-answer and poses the logical follow-up: Why won’t Hegseth answer the question directly? She refrains from jumping to conclusions, though she acknowledges the obvious possibility that he’s opposed to female suffrage.
I think she’s being remarkably generous. As I read the statement, Hegseth’s answer is actually pretty clear: the dude just prefers to deliver it with plausible deniability. This is, after all, a man who worked at Fox News, where the “some people say” trope has been honed to an art form. The gambit, which we’re all familiar with, goes like this: advance a shocking claim, give it implicit endorsement, then deny ownership. “Hey, I’m just sharing what others are saying.” It’s a step away from throwing your hands up in pretended innocence and proclaiming, “I’m just saying…” No evidence needed. No follow-up intended. But the point is made.
I think the takeaway of Hegseth’s video and the Pentagon’s clarification is meant to be obvious. Not only is the meaning obvious, but it’s obvious that it’s obvious. Obviously so. But also obviously plausibly deniable.
Therefore in the spirit of our times, it’s crucial to note that some people are saying that Pete Hegseth absolutely opposes women’s right to vote. Indeed, some of these same people are also saying he’s a flat-out misogynist and bigot. Of course, I’m withholding judgment myself. I just think it’s worth mentioning, wholly in the name of fairness, that this is something others are saying.
Note: Edited this on 8/13. I originally mistakenly asserted that there were two videos when, in reality, a shorter video was excerpted from an extended CNN interview video.
I wonder what the range of answers would be if the following question was asked of the “republic, not a democracy” folks:
What percentage of the adult population would need to be disenfranchised before America is no longer a republic?
@Kurtz:
Everyone who is not a rich white male who owns land, just like the founding fathers set it up
Hegseth, as I understand it, has been married three times. He had multiple affairs during each marriage. His third wife was pregnant with his child while he was still married to #2. He was accused of rape while #3 was pregnant.
His own mother called him an abuser of women but apparently apologized for that wild ass claim.
My WAG is that the man has no respect for women. But I could be way off base, here.
@Daryl:
But he’s a Christian, so he’s forgiven! Rinse, repeat! See? It’s easy!
In government acquisitions processes there’s a meeting where participants can ask questions of the agency, and they all have to be answered. A point in the law states the participant asking a question has to be satisfied they received a clear answer (even if an unfavorable one). We’ve won a couple of appeals when an agency failed to do this. Of course, one has to point this out at the meeting, and exercise the right to have remarks like that added to the minutes.
An answer like Hegsesth would be grounds for annulling the process, and would likely trigger a review by the agency’s internal inspector, or even by the Public Functions Department that oversees federal government acquisitions.
TL;DR: it’s a particularly disingenuous non-sequitur.
@Kurtz:
Define “percentage.”
@Ol’ Nat:
Religion is like duct tape. Ain’t nothing it can’t fix.
Unless you really want it fixed.
The problem is that Trump’s Sec. of Defense is wife-beating drunk who is not qualified for the position. Incompetence and “head-scratching moments” were inevitable with this inept clown Hegseth, because he a) is not smart or experienced enough for this job and b) he lacks the basic character traits needed to lead the Dept. of Defense with minimum competence.
Of course Hegseth doesn’t think women should be able to vote. He’s a freak in a MAGA movement of anti-American criminals, perverts, and crackpots. Led of course by the incompetent whackjob-in-chief himself, Trump.
@Mimai:
Haha. Fair enough.
However we choose to parse Hegseth’s words here, we’ve known since he was up for confirmation that he was/is a Christian nationalist who (to put it very mildly) does not approve of modern women in positions of leadership, nor as co-equals in contemporary society.
So, of course senator Joni Ernst, while expressing a Susan Collins Level of concern, caved in and voted to confirm the least qualified and most incompetent Secretary of Defense in the post WW2 era.
@al Ameda:
Don’t you mean least qualified and most incompetent Secretary of Defense ever?
@Rick DeMent: Technically, you are both right since the DoD was formed after WII (1947).
😉
I think the strategic thing to do would be to go forward assuming Sec. Hegseth does not think women should vote. Include that in how we discuss him. Bake in that assumption.
Let him deny it if it isn’t true. You’ve given us more than adequate reason to believe it.
I would love to see Donald Trump asked if he thinks women should have the vote. And Vance as well.
@al Ameda: While I agree with the reproach for Joni Ernst, I don’t agree with letting another 50 Senators, who also voted to confirm Hegseth, off the hook.
The man thinks women should not be allowed to vote. He showed up to work drunk, and his career record did not remotely qualify him to run the world’s largest bureaucracy.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Oh yeah they changed it from Secretary of War. Well I would count that too lol.
@Jay L. Gischer:
I agree with you on those 50, who would no doubt vote to confirm Lauren Boebert to that post.
Also, I should have stated that I specifically called out Senator Joni Ernst because she served in our military, had concerns about Hegseth vis-a-vis women in service, and still gave Trump exactly what he wanted – a FoxNews alpha male sycophant.