Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Hitler Compares With No One

"The real distinction is between those who adapt their purposes to reality and those who seek to mold reality in the light of their purposes." ~ Henry Kissinger

In a previous post, I discussed Jay Bennish, the Colorado High School teacher who was caught on tape in an anti-Bush rant in his Geography class. My point was that it's perfectly ok, in my opinion, for a high school teacher to present his own opinion on any political issue in class as long as the opposing viewpoint is also presented. It's only fair.

One of my commentators, Mary, from Freedom Eden, pointed out this obvious fact:

"No teacher should compare Bush to Hitler. Period."

To which another commentator responded:

"No president's action should cause Hitler to come to mind. Period."

While that statement is absolutely true on it's own, taken in context, and knowing the author of the statement, it is obviously a reference to President George W. Bush, which I find highly offensive.

Comparing ANY American President to Hitler is just wrong and shows an ignorance of history unparalleled. I am not saying that particular commentator is ignorant. Quite the contrary, he most definitely is not ignorant. But that's what makes his statement all the more objectional.

If any President could be compared in any way with Hitler, there are two that come to mind, and both of them don't really compare. FDR, with his internment camps, and Clinton, whose path to the White House was strewn with the bodies of his political enemies, both literally and figuratively.

In FDR's case, his motive in moving Japanese Americans into internment camps was to protect America against attacks from within, by Japanese Americans sympathetic to Japan in a time of war. The ethics of this internment has been argued and questioned ever since. But at least he wasn't herding them into showers and then gassing them, thousands at a time.

Hitler's concentration camps were designed and built for one purpose only, that being the eventual total extermination of the Jews. Period. He literally murdered millions of people.

A far cry from just interning them to protect the citizenry.

Clinton has been accused of having people killed who he perceived to threaten him or his presidency. I am not one of those conspiracy theorists, and I don't believe even Clinton would have murdered to protect his legacy, however, there are many people who were at one time or another associated with Clinton who ended up dead. And not from old age. So many, in fact, that it does indeed appear to be more than just coincidence.

But, as I said, I don't believe he had anyone kiilled. Not literally. But it is well known that he ordered IRS audits of many who he considered to be political enemies, and otherwise intimidated and coerced them. One could make the case that he figuratively killed them. Or politically. And still, there is no comparison between Clinton and Hitler.

Hitler had his perceived enemies executed, assassinated, and just plain murdered. Literally.

Obviously, neither of these two former Presidents compare to Adolph Hitler in terms of ruthlessness, callousness, and pathological viciousness.

And none of the others do, either. Especially not George W. Bush. I would go so far as to say, if anything, he isn't strong enough in protecting the people of the United States.

If I were President, I would attempt to close off the borders, profile all middle eastern appearing men 18-35 in airports, train stations, and seaports, wiretap anyone who is even the least bit suspected of being affiliated with al-Qaida, and send a couple of hundred thousand extra men into Afghanistan to find Osama bin Laden and his cohorts.

I do not care about our enemy's civil rights. They certainly don't care about ours. The way I see it, they give up their rights when they attempt to take ours away, and that especially means our right to life.

And damned be he who cries foul!

And after all that, I still wouldn't be as bad as Hitler. There would still be no comparison.

So stop comparing President Bush to Hitler. It is not appropriate. PERIOD.

28 comments:

Goat said...

Mark, good post, as I have long asked of the left, are we neo-nazis or Zionists, hardly compatible and often used in the same sentence by those on the left wishing to reinvent history. I am conservative and despise, socialism, communism, fascism, islamism and PC idiotarianism. I challenge any of your lefty posters to define whether we are fascists or Zionists and to honestly distinguish between the two.

iAmerican said...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

Any true American who watches the above, free video will recognize the fact that Bush committed 9/11 the same as his grandfather's client, Adolf Hitler(Google "Prescott Thyssen Auschwitz"), committed the Reichstag Fire.

Inarguably, Bush is Hitler-redux. Those near him, or serving him - other than truly innocent dupes(?) - are transparently part of the "real anti-Christ" identified by Thomas Jefferson in his unsent letter to Samuel Kercheval.

Schoolteacher Jay Bennish is simply putting forward thoughts that any who claim spiritual descent from the Jeffersonian Whig Founders of the United States of America should have been realizing right after they heard GHW Bush's public, "mystically" claimed "inability" to recall his whereabouts upon hearing of President Kennedy's assassination: W's only "qualification" for office.

Death for Treason

Lone Ranger said...

People who invoke the name of Hitler simply have an undeveloped intellect. They have absolutely no idea of the horrors of the Third Reich.

It is said that time heals all. That is not necessarily a good thing. It's too bad how mealy-mouthed liberals have cheapened the evil of the Nazi regime by using the word to disparage anyone who disagrees with them.

When I was a kid, Nazis were still very real. I remember an army captain who was an investigator at the Neuremburg trials coming in to tell us fifth graders about Nazi atrocities. It was 1960 and the war had ended just 15 years earlier. There were still war criminals being hunted all over the world. NOBODY called someone else a Nazi, not even in jest. It was no laughing matter. It was the absolute worst insult one could use.

And today we see liberals and even high-level Democrats tripping the word off their tongue as casually as though they were calling someone a rogue or a villain.

Shame on them. Just shame on them.

h said...

I understand why you're offended, but it just doesn't bother me. Anybody who use the the words "Hitler" or "Nazi" to try to win an argument might as well just wear a sandwich board saying "I'm a moron." It's a great way to distinguish Libs who are at least trying to make sense from from those, like Dick Durban, who can be safely ignored.

Etchen said...

Mark for President!

To Jim O'Sullivan--I completely feel the same way--once that comparison comes out of someone's mouth, I just stop listening.

Little Miss Chatterbox said...

I posted on this exact topic last week. I am so sick of W being compared to Hitler. I was talking to my friend when writing the post and even her husband who is a liberal agreed that even the worst American president isn't even in the same league as Hitler.

jgf said...

I cannot fathom how anyone who has studied history can find anything similar between Hitler and GWB. If you think so, let me introduce you to someone I know who lived through Hitler's regieme.

Poison Pero said...

I like it when they compare Bush to Hitler.......Because it throws all their credibility out the window, and shows them for the nutters the are.

Erudite Redneck said...

Yeah, yeah, "Hitler" is overstating it.

Hmmm.

Try this:

"There are as many tendencies toward fascism in the Bush administration as there were tendencies toward socialism in FDR's administration."

Not many in either case. But enough to note.

I guess if y'all on the far right hadn't been calling libs names for so long, it wouldn't be so easy for us to retaliate with the F-word -- I mean, "fascist."

JIAL

Mark said...

Has anyonwe besides ER noticed the conspiracy theorist whack job named iamerican that commented on here yet? What say you?

ELAshley said...

Amen!

To all but iamerican, who sees devils in every doorknob.

Erudite Redneck said...

Oh, it's worth considering. That's all I'm sayin'.

The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth said...

Amen, Amen, Amen. It is an insult to the President, the nation, all true Americans, our military and everyone who fought to end Hitler's tyranny. Great post Mark!

Ken

The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth said...

By the way, "iamerican," is the type of liberal nut case that believes anything that makes Bush and America look evil and the cause of the worlds problems. I'll bet he doesn't like his own life either and thinks the President has caused it all!

Ken, (again)

Lone Ranger said...

To all those who accuse the Bush administration of facism, just what rights did you have five years ago that you don't have now? Again, pampered Americans don't have the slightest idea what facism is all about. It's all irresponsible drama queenery.

Lone Ranger said...

iamerican is just nuts. He's babbling. And am I wrong or did he just say he wanted the President dead? He might make a good candidate to replace Howard Dean.

tugboatcapn said...

iamerican?

I totally agree with him..

All except for the part about Bush and Hitler...

And the part about Bush committing 9/11...

And the Jefferson stuff...

And the Jay Bennish stuff...

And the Kennedy assasination stuff...

Death for Treason!!

Goat said...

I have held the belief the person who brings Hitlerite fascism up in debate automatically loses when they compare Nazi Germany to America. I am sure that same moonbat would say that Bush committed 9/11 because he was influenced by the Zionists and neo-cons(Jews) in his administration. I see the moonbats failed my challenge as I knew they would.

Sheila said...

So goat, I'm not sure where the challenge to show our knowledge of defnititions has come from but let me indulge you.

From the Oxford Dictionary of Current English.
Fascism; (1)A right wing system of government charactorized by extreme nationalistic beliefs and strict obedience to a leader or the state. (2)Extreme right-wing or intolerant views or behavior.

Zionism; A movement for the development and protection of the Jewish Nation in Israel.

Is that satisfactory?


I've heard Fascitst and Theocracy in the same sentance, but never Zionism.

Mary said...

I completely agree with what others here have already stated.

As soon as Bush critics draw parallels between the President and Hitler, I stop listening.

Clearly, those individuals lack an understanding of the past, the present, and reality.

Dan Trabue said...

Comparisons can always be drawn. History does repeat itself. Lessons aren't learned.

I usually avoid making Hitler comparisons exactly because it turns so many people off that it's hard to have a discussion, but it's not because comparisons can't be drawn.

Hitler was a man who committed horrifyingly evil actions, and it makes us all more comfortable to think that such evil actions come from something other than another human - a monster with only evil intentions.

But Hitler was a human just like any of the rest of us - with the capacity for good and evil. With what he considered reasonable cause for his actions.

He was wrong, of course, and his actions were evil, but I'm sure he didn't think so at the time.

Jim said...

The means by which Hitler attained supreme power in Germany is an extremely interesting history lesson. If intelligent people could possibly separate the atrocities committed by Hitler from the study of the means by which he gained and maintained his power, there could be legitimate comparisons between the rise of Hitler and Naziism and other events in history. Comparing Hitler's rise to power to another's rise does not have to imply that the target of the comparison has or intends to commit similar atrocities.

Unfortunately, any legitimate use of the example of Hitler is met with "he's equating Bush with Hitler."

Those who do not learn the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

Goat said...

Shiela, your definition of fascism fits Islam perfectly. Now is our current administration run by Hitlerite neo-fascists or the neo-cons(Jews)? You don't visit the Daily Kos very often I gather or Atrios or the DU, they are so mixed up it is funny, perhaps you should paste your definitions there. I'll put it this way, if some schoolyard dolt keeps attacking me because he wants to rule me I will eventually pound him into the dirt in my defense and then help him up and send him home to mommy.

Goat said...

Hitler was one of the most powerful orators of modern times and his message hit deeply in the German psyche of the time. Now if Bush is such an idiot and stupid how could he influence a much more knowledgable people to support him, the hippocracy shines through? He has simply rallied a defense against islamo-fascism in the name of freedom and liberty. If you wish to live under Sharia law move to Iran, and you call american conservatives intolerant, wait till you get a dose of Islamic tolerance. The cartoon riots are a perfect example.

Dan Trabue said...

"If you wish to live under Sharia law move to Iran"

I'd rather live under a Republic where I have a voice and representation, but I'm still waiting on that...

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

If intelligent people could possibly separate the atrocities committed by Hitler from the study of the means by which he gained and maintained his power, there could be legitimate comparisons between the rise of Hitler and Naziism and other events in history. Comparing Hitler's rise to power to another's rise does not have to imply that the target of the comparison has or intends to commit similar atrocities.

Even given that, I fathom to see any similiarities. The implication then, is that President Bush is seizing unbridled power that no president has ever had before. I don't see it. I still have yet to see the proof that President Bush has gone outside the bounds of his inherent, Constitutional authority as President of the U.S.

Jim said...

There may not yet be proof. But there is a strong possibility. Of course we won't know as long as the Republic-controlled Congress refuses to do its Constitutional and legal duty of oversight and holds the president accountable to PROVE that his actions, thought by many to be illegal, are in fact not illegal.

Anonymous said...

I may not go so far as to say that GWB is the same as Hitler, however our country does seem to be going out of it's way to try to make other countries conform to our cultural views. Yes, in my opinion it was wrong of us to go into Iraq, because it was Afghanistan that was responsible for the attacks on the Twin Towers not Iraq. We captured SADDAM who was proven to not be involved, and it seems we have completely forgotten about the real enemy OSAMA BIN LADEN. And who are we to go into other countries and tell them they have to follow our societies culture. That in my opinion is like Hitler in a way. The Jews did not conform to his way of thinking, and did not go by his rules, or look the way he thought people should look so he got rid of them. GWB is doing the same telling another group of people we don't like your religion, we don't like your culture, we don't like how you run your country so lets get rid of you. Kinda simular don't ya think?

Now about history, the US has been just as brutal to its natives as Hitler was. Didn't we try to exterminate the Native Americans? Didn't we intentionally give them blankets that had the small pox virus to try to kill them. Send them to reservations to get rid of them, and give them little to no food. While we are on the subject, what about our treatment of the slaves? Don't tell me that we don't have our own skeletons in our closet, because we do.