Does this sort of thing help anyone?

Voris attacks Barron, Shea attacks Voris, a combox war erupts in which everyone attacks everyone else. Is anyone better for any of this?

Update:  Still haven't seen the Voris video, but perusing Shea's post I found this line:

2. Lemme ask you, Gentle Reader, if you are wringing you hands over a public response to a public attack on an innocent man, have you gone to Michael Voris and asked him if he took this smear to Fr. Barron before recklessly launching this video today or whether he took his smears of Keating, Akin, Kresta et al to them to verify that there was, in fact, anything wrong with their personal incomes before broadcasting them to the universe with the suggestion that they are money-grubbing whores and gutless cowards in the pay of the Church of Nice?

 I don't know if Voris' video is unchristian in the way he deals with Fr. Barron (from what I have read, opinion is divided) but this is definitely so.  Shea claims that he did take his concerns to Voris directly at the argument of the month club a week ago, which is fine as it is what we are supposed to do, but this, justifying his actions by pointing to the actions of another, is not.  It is a logical fallacy known as Tu Quoque.  Do as you would be done by is the rule for polite society.  Do as you have been done by is the rule for barbarians.  Do as others do is a rule fit only for children in need of correction and unworthy of any culture, barbaric or otherwise.  Shea is better than this.