Prominent Democrats once quick to criticize now-Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for his tattoos with ties to crusader symbolism are notably silent when it comes to addressing the controversial ink of Graham Platner, a Senate candidate from Maine. This inconsistency raises eyebrows.
Pete Hegseth faced backlash from Senators Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Duckworth, who expressed concerns over Hegseth’s tattoos, including a Jerusalem cross and the phrase “Deus Vult”—terms linked to the crusades and Christian symbolism. Warren, in particular, pointed out that such tattoos could indicate a potential threat, questioning Hegseth’s fitness for his role as Defense Secretary. She referenced how Hegseth was even removed from President Biden’s inauguration due to concerns over his tattoo.
Despite those strong remarks aimed at Hegseth, Warren and Duckworth have been noticeably quiet regarding the tattoo of Graham Platner, who sports a “Totenkopf” symbol—a Nazi “death’s head”—on his chest. This double standard raises critical questions about the Democrats’ approach to symbolism and their selected preferences for political candidates.
When reached for their thoughts on Platner’s tattoo and whether they believe he should step down from his candidacy, both senators did not respond to inquiries from Fox News Digital. This silence contrasts sharply with their vocal criticisms of Hegseth.
Platner himself is a Marine veteran with a progressive platform bolstered by endorsements from figures like Senator Bernie Sanders. In addressing the uproar over his tattoo, Platner explained that the design was chosen during a night of drinking while stationed in Croatia, and he claimed ignorance of its historical implications at the time. He emphasized he has since dedicated his life to anti-fascism and anti-racism, stating, “I was appalled to learn it resembled a hate symbol.”
In response to the criticism, Sanders downplayed the media’s focus on the tattoo, implying that other issues deserve more attention. He called Platner an “excellent candidate” and pledged his support for the Senate hopeful.
This unfolding narrative highlights a stark contrast in how the Left addresses issues of symbolism within their ranks. While Hegseth’s tattoos drew fire, the same scrutiny has not applied to Platner. This inconsistency offers a window into the complexities of modern political discourse, where historical associations and personal choices collide with public perception and party loyalty.
Ultimately, the situation presents a broader commentary on how candidates are judged based on their past decisions and the symbols they choose to embrace. It also underscores the challenges political figures face in navigating their personal stories amid the demands of public office and representation.
"*" indicates required fields
