BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Hitler = Hitler

76 comments on Hitler = Hitler

Hitler = Hitler
: Daniel Drezner, channeling Andrew Sullivan, lobbies for an award for dumb/offensive/insensitive Hitler analogies.

He missed one. Jackie got it: The MoveOn Bush in 30 Seconds commercial that links Bush quotes on Iraq with Hitler’s on taking over the world.

Jackie’s upset; see her reasons.

I’m upset because this indicates the utter bankruptcy of my fellow liberals regarding any humanitarian cause these days.

Obviously, Hitler equals only Hitler.

But if you’re going to play this stupid game in this context, then the only correct analogy can be to say that Hitler equals Saddam. Mass murderer equals mass murderer. Tyrant equals tyrant. Fascist equals fascist.

These brain-dead, heart-dead, soul-dead fools create a moral equation in which Hitler is still at the bottom (I think) and Bush is next and we don’t see Saddam.

What horrid, evil thinking that is.

76 responses to “Hitler = Hitler”

  1. Lisa Williams Avatar
    Lisa Williams

    I’m going to go out on a limb here: in terms of the quality of what Saddam did, Saddam imagined things that even Hitler couldn’t dream up. Imagine, for instance, if Hitler had said, I think there’s one of Those People in that village, and so I’m going to pour poison gas over the whole place. This is essentially what Saddam did. Hitler at least made some attempt to discriminate between people he liked and people he didn’t, rather than decimating whole towns because he couldn’t be bothered to separate out the people he didn’t like from the four-year-olds who died covered with chemical burns face down in a muddy puddle.
    What makes Hitler worse is scale, not intention. Saddam couldn’t challenge Hitler because he didn’t have either a large domestic population to work with nor the military might to get some lebensraum over in Iran.
    That said, I still want our administration to tell the truth and be right when they make the case for war. Even we can’t knock off every kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet.

  2. Mike G Avatar
    Mike G

    What’s so pathetic (apart from what’s so offensive) about MoveOn’s ad is that it is only convincing to the utterly convinced:
    MOVEON: Bush– he’s Hitler.
    NORMAL PERSON: Oh come on.
    MOVEON: No! He’s HITLER! HITLER I TELL YOU! A HITLER FROM TEXAS, BUT HITLER HITLER HITLER HITLER!
    NORMAL PERSON: Excuse me, I have to go change my party registration now.
    There’s absolutely nothing in it to move someone who thinks Bush is a little too repressive, or dishonest, or whatever a step closer to thinking he’s really repressive, or dishonest, or whatever. Just HITLER HITLER HITLER HITLER!
    I think Karl Rove will be able to feel that George Soros’ money is very well spent.

  3. KMK Avatar
    KMK

    Wierdo liberals, not liberals.

  4. Susan Avatar
    Susan

    I will go out on a limb by asking the question, if ridding the earth of “every kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet” is not the right reason for ALL free nations to wage war, what is?
    Seems we still live in a world in which the justification to wage war is for a purely selfish endeavor, that being, everyone out for themselves and their own needs.
    Yet the irony is, we in the free world promote our idea of humanitarianism by simply sending money, believing that our goodness will make everything peaceful and prosperous for those living under kleptocratic sociopath dictators. We send the money in order for us to ease our guilt from having ignored the problem.
    Humanitarians have simply become enablers of oppression.
    The sociopath dictator who we waged war against was the weapon of mass destruction of whom our government spoke.

  5. Charlie Avatar
    Charlie

    Don’t hold back, Jeff. Get it off your chest.
    ;-)
    You’re absolutely right, by the way. (Which is to say, you agree with me.) The thing I find amazing is that, after the USSR fell and the Stazi methods were revealed and the Verona intercepts became available and we found out that Alger Hiss really was a Soviet spy, and Ron Rosen found out that the Rosenbergs really were guilty, and South Viet Nam fell (followed like dominos by Laos and Cambodia), and the “killing fields” and the Hmong massacres, and now the Katyn Forest is well known and well documented — is that people can hold opinions like that without blushing.

  6. billg Avatar
    billg

    You are right on target, Susan.
    It is comforting and romantic to imagine that the victims of modern totalitarian regimes will rise up in popular revolution and create their own George Washingtons and draft their own constitutions.
    In truth, functioning totalitarian regimes can eliminate the possibility of internal revolt. They cannot be removed without external intervention.
    Totalitarian regimes also sustain themselves with massive military and security establishments. While the real purpose of these institutions is to control the population, the regime justifies their existence by conjuring false external enemies. Unfortunately, technology allows these regimes to add credibility to their own mythology by supporting, fostering, or directing the kind of “blows against the empire” we know as terrorism.
    Unless democracies are blind to these two realities, they will realize the threat posed by totalitarian regimes and actively set out to eliminate them.

  7. lk Avatar
    lk

    Everybody seems to have found religion regarding Hussein. In August 2001 he was just one of many evil leaders in the world. But because of 9-11 he became our target. A conspiracy nut would say that Osama and Saudis planned this all along. 9-11, US will rid Iraq of Hussein, then when US leaves Iraq (and we will), there will be discord, and opportunity.
    Maybe some Africans will be the next terrorists to attack US, and we will look there for evil. There will not be a shortage. And everybody will jump on the bandwagon, as they have on the Hussein bandwagon since 9-11.
    Some seem to feel righteous indignation toward Hussein, NOW, when his worst atrocities were before 9-11.

  8. Mithras Avatar
    Mithras

    my fellow liberals …
    That’s very funny. Liberal, my ass.
    And the humanitarian/anti-totalitarian reason for going to war would be a great one, but it’s not the reason we invaded Iraq. It’s simply a bogus excuse to rationalize the decision to invade – which was motivated by a number of things, none of which had to do with battling totalitarianism. If the fabled WMD had actually turned up, this holier-than-thou talk wouldn’t even be a close second. And if we actually were opposed to tyranny, we wouldn’t be doing business with people like the Saudis and the Uzbecks, we’d be lobbing missiles at them.

  9. Mike G Avatar
    Mike G

    No, lk, you just imagine you were the only one who cared about Saddam before 9-11. In fact many people who urged his removal now have been doing so all along. (What was the point of the ineffectual sanctions, after all, if not to destabilize him or get some officer to overthrow him?) However, there is nothing illogical about having stepped up the pressure after 9-11. Before that demonstration of terror, we could have been more blase about the inevitable weakening of the sanctions, the eventual rearming of Saddam. After 9-11 it was more obvious that he needed to be kept from rising again, as he always had before.
    You’re right, what you suggest would be conspiracy nuttiness, and it makes several rather large assumptive leaps along the way (ie, that Osama and the Saudi govt are working hand in hand– maybe, but you don’t know that for sure and neither do I, assuming there even is a monolithic thing known as “the Saudi government” as opposed to various factions with various degrees of sympathy for al-Qaeda).

  10. Mike G Avatar
    Mike G

    “And the humanitarian/anti-totalitarian reason for going to war would be a great one, but it’s not the reason we invaded Iraq…”
    The dictator who is assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.
    Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained: by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape.
    If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning.
    (APPLAUSE)
    And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country, your enemy is ruling your country.
    (APPLAUSE)
    And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation.
    — State of the Union address. Sounds like a humanitarian justification to me.

  11. lk Avatar
    lk

    I did not care about Hussein before 9-11, I hardly do now. After 9-11, I want Osama and his group eliminated. I am not sure Hussein would have re-armed, and if he did, he would have taken the fight elsewhere (marked disagreement here). I worry about the countries with nukes.

  12. dian Avatar
    dian

    I’m going to go out on a limb here: in terms of the quality of what Saddam did, Saddam imagined things that even Hitler couldn’t dream up.
    Lisa, you went out on a limb and sawed it right off.
    I don’t think I ever read such horsesh** in my life.
    Hitler at least made some attempt to discriminate between people he liked and people he didn’t…
    Nice guy, that Hitler.
    Lisa, you could also say that Hitler was a man of his word. He promised to kill every Jew in Europe and he did his best. But since they were people he didn’t like, and he made an attempt to discriminate between those he liked and those he didn’t, that somehow makes him morally superior to Saddam.
    With friends like you, I suddenly feel no need to defend against enemies.
    I also would love to date the beginning of Saddam’s overwhelming evil. Was it when, in 1988, he gassed Kurdish villagers and we continued to sell him weapons, the better to prolong the Iran/Iraq war?

  13. chastain Avatar
    chastain

    This is is the genius work of a 13 yr old. Don’t insult Hitler by saying GW is similar. GW is the patsy, Cheney and Rice pull his strings.

  14. lk Avatar
    lk

    Lisa said “Even we can’t knock off every kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet.” There you go with them negative waves.

  15. Samuel Avatar
    Samuel

    lk,
    You Said:
    1) Everybody seems to have found religion regarding Hussein.
    In judging by the totality of your comments I assume some of us have shame in retrospect, shame on you for you sarcasm. I have always been a Democratic voting liberal from Carter to Gore, no more, the party is bankrupt. Since you give sarcasm I will respond in kind.
    2) Maybe some Africans will be the next terrorists to attack US, and we will look there for evil. There will not be a shortage.
    Silly red herring argument… You

  16. lk Avatar
    lk

    Thanks Samuel. I am ashamed of my sarcasm. My New Years resolution is to give up sarcasm when WMD’s are located in Iraq.

  17. Samuel Avatar
    Samuel

    lk
    Maybe they (WMD) will be found in Syria after we invade there.

  18. Michael J. Totten Avatar
    Michael J. Totten

    Mithras: And the humanitarian/anti-totalitarian reason for going to war would be a great one, but it’s not the reason we invaded Iraq.
    Actually, it was one of the reasons. Every supporter of the war from Bush on down said so, including me, long before the war ever began. And you know it, too, when you aren’t lying to yourself.

  19. Steve Rhodes Avatar
    Steve Rhodes

    Drudge and others who have picked this up don’t point out this is not a moveon.org ad. It was one of a thousand ads submitted to a contest. The ads are currently being rated, served up on a random basis. I’m surprised there weren’t more ads that were stupid and offensive.
    http://www.bushin30seconds.org
    The top 15 rated ads are being announced today.
    They will then be judged by a panel and moveon will buy time for the ad they think is best the week of Bush’s state of the union
    I don’t even expect Drudge to put something like this in context anymore, but the contest has gotten a fair ammount of media coverage, so I’d expect that others might. Or at least they’d go to moveon’s website and do a bit of research.

  20. Steve Rhodes Avatar
    Steve Rhodes

    Sorry, the voting is closed so the ads aren’t being served up anymore.
    The winning ad will be announced in NYC on January 12th.

  21. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    “Even we can’t knock off every kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet”
    Why not?
    “And the humanitarian/anti-totalitarian reason for going to war would be a great one, but it’s not the reason we invaded Iraq.”
    If you see a good reason to support the war, why do you feel it is necesary that the case should be made to you by others first?

  22. dc Avatar
    dc

    I browsed through a few of the ads when they were online and they were for the most part pathetic; think DemocraticUnderground in video. I saw one that was literally just an illegible barchart with someone’s nasal monotone ranting in the background about various topics for 60 seconds.
    Even the slickly-produced ones were a bit dumb. For example the clip titled “Seriously” which seemed to be highly regarded in the blogosphere had a soccer mom delivering a punchline that went something like “I hate Bush because he’s a stupid f** a**. Seriously.” While this doubtless gives massive yucks to the Bushitler crowd, who is it going to win over?

  23. Diana Avatar
    Diana

    BTW, I’m the “dian” above…clicked too fast. I stand by those words.
    Regarding humanitarian reasons for going to war, I would suggest Michael Totten read this:
    http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/1010res.htm
    Which is the text of the House Resolution authorizing force. It focuses entirely on the WMDs (in other words, the degraded remains of what the West sold Saddam Hussein; where are they?), and the fictitious link to 9/11.
    The only mention of civilian repression is in connection with threats to international peace:
    “thereby threatening international peace and security in the region….”
    complete baloney; no one ever said that before Saddam invaded Kuwait and presumably he was every bit as repressive to his people then.
    In fact, the gassing of the Kurds happened in 1988–why didn’t we authorize a resolution to use force against him then??
    Stop accusing people who disagree with you of lying. I don’t think you are lying, Michael, I think you are sincerely deluded.

  24. Jackie D Avatar
    Jackie D

    Drudge and others who have picked this up don’t point out this is not a moveon.org ad. It was one of a thousand ads submitted to a contest. The ads are currently being rated, served up on a random basis.
    The contest is being conducted by moveon.org and the ads are being served up by moveon.org. Thus, full responsibility for its broadcast under their name goes to…moveon.org.
    Moveon.org’s ineptitude in planning its marketing events does not exempt moveon.org from culpability when those marketing events end up featuring such offensive trash.

  25. Jackie D Avatar
    Jackie D

    Oh, and moveon.org have featured yet another Bush = Hitler ad on their site. I’ve linked to it on my blog.

  26. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    –Even we can’t knock off every kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet.–
    We don’t have to knock off EVERY kleptocratic sociopath dictator on the planet—
    Just enough of them. Seems Libya got it. One at a time, people, one at a time. Who would have thought India and Pakistan would be discussing a free-trade agreement amongst other things????
    BTW, True German Ally at rantburg translated for us:
    “#1 Incredible. And apart from being ignominous, it’s absolutely idiotic. Did they actually understand what Hitler says in German? He talks about a new rise of Germany blabla, achieved with its own work blabla etc. It has absolutely no relation with the words of Bush.
    I’m not familiar with the exact status of moveon.org. But if it is endorsed by the Democratic Party they should act fast.
    And of course AC, it can never hurt to state the obvious. Because there are always people who don’t understand the obvious.”

  27. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    Diana –
    “In fact, the gassing of the Kurds happened in 1988–why didn’t we authorize a resolution to use force against him then??”
    We made a mistake. Now we have rectified that mistake. Shouldn’t that make you happy?

  28. Diana Avatar
    Diana

    We rectified the mistake during the years of sanctions in which we destroyed Iraq’s economy, and Saddam to the level of a tinpot dictator with a degraded weapons system. Which, I repeat, were the moldy remains of what we sold him (see Kenneth Timmerman’s THE DEATH LOBBY).
    I’m waiting for somebody else to respond to Lisa’s inane and insane and vile remarks, favorably comparing Hitler to Saddam. But no, I guess it’s more fun to jump on me instead.

  29. lk Avatar
    lk

    Diana – that’s how they get exercise. They JUMP on people, and JUMP to conlusions. Thanks for the House Resolution cite.

  30. anaid Avatar
    anaid

    The Russian mafia sold most of the weapons to Saddam.

  31. stubby Avatar
    stubby

    Why are Lisa’s remarks about Hussein vs. Hitler so vile, so inane, so insane? Is Saddam so much better than Hitler? Is what Hitler did so much worse? Hitler achieved his atrocities on a much larger scale than did Hussein, but it wasn’t for Hussein’s lack of trying; if Saddam had had Hitler’s resources, there would be millions more corpses waiting for us to dig them up. Hitler subscribed to a crazy and evil racial superiority myth, Hussein killed lots of people in order to maintain absolute power through absolute terror. Do intentions and beliefs really matter when we’re talking about mass murder on this kind of scale? No, they don’t. And to get so worked up over someone suggesting Hussein might be worse than Hitler is indeed straining at gnats.

  32. Diana Avatar
    Diana

    Is what Hitler did so much worse?
    Yes, by an order of magnitude that it would take a full-frontal lobotomy to get you to understand it.
    Where is Jeff in this discussion?

  33. stubby Avatar
    stubby

    I’m pretty strong on world history, and I’m pretty sure I don’t require a lobotomy to “understand” your outrage, whatever its cause. Suggesting that someone needs a lobotomy when they ask you a question is a bit of an overreaction, don’t you think?
    Hitler’s campaign of extermination against an entire people is unequalled in history. I certainly don’t mean to deny the magnitude or the singularity of the Holocaust and I kind of resent even having to state that disclaimer. I was not talking about his paranoid psycho race theories, or his demonization of the Jews – I was talking about the murder of millions. Stalin killed more people than Hitler – we’re talking bodies here, not reasons. Saddam could’ve killed more people than Hitler, eventually, if he’d been left alone. Hitler did not seem to enjoy bloodletting like Saddam did. Hitler’s depravity was more clinical than Saddam’s and Hitler did not seem inclined to slaughter his own people (“pure” Aryans, as he defined them). Saddam ran Iraq as his own private slaughterhouse.
    I still say that by describing Saddam, or whatever mass murdering tyrant you don’t think requires removal today, as “not as bad as Hitler” is to excuse them after a manner. Must a mass murdering tyrant achieve Hitler levels of blood before it becomes permissible to take action? (And if so, what on earth were we doing in Kosovo?) And if you don’t take action until they reach Hitler proportions, then you kind of guarantee that eventually you’re going to get another Hitler.
    And that’s as far down this particular rabbit hole I’m inclined to go.

  34. John Irving Avatar
    John Irving

    Woops, just noted blaring lefty lie or misunderstanding, diana, and need to correct it.
    Saddam used primarily Soviet-era weaponry, not American. In the twenty years prior to the Gulf War, we sold Iraq $5 million in military equipment, of which approximately $200,000 was actual weaponry. Over twenty years I could provide that out of my middle-management salary. During that same time period France sold $9 BILLION dollars worth of military equipment, and the USSR sold $31 billion. He did not fight with the moldy remains of US weaponry, he fought with the still-maintained and updated weaponry sold to him by France and Russia, who contiuned to supply him in defiance of their all-holy UN’s wishes.
    But at the least, you two (diana and lk) have reminded me of my favorite Voltaire quote:”In my life, I have prayed but one prayer: oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it.”

  35. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “I’m waiting for somebody else to respond to Lisa’s inane and insane and vile remarks, favorably comparing Hitler to Saddam. But no, I guess it’s more fun to jump on me instead.”
    It’s a conspiracy.

  36. A.W. Avatar
    A.W.

    Lisa,
    sorry, but Hitler had dreams much worse than hussien’s even. You claim that Hussien was worse than hitler is wrong. I think Hussien was evil, yes, but to say “worse than Hitler” is a bit much.
    For the rest of you,
    you might be interested in my commentarty. Here:
    http://www.freespeech.com/archives/001656.html

  37. lk Avatar
    lk

    John Irving – why did you admit to being “middle management”? Couldn’t you have given yourself a promotion? Nobody would out you.
    You can argue about where Hussein got weapons – I like the comment that they came from the Russian mafia. Fact is there were no WMD’s there, despite the pictures Powell waved at the UN. None, nada, zip. Maybe they went to Syria? Let’s go there now!
    And quoting Voltaire as to “enemies”? Priceless. Enemies are Osama and his band. Fellow Americans who disagree with you are … not enemies.

  38. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    Umm, Diana, didn’t Saddam squirrel away about $40 billion? Didn’t that just come out? Isn’t he singing like a songbird?
    And what’s this “we” stuff — …”which we destroyed Iraq’s economy,…”
    I think Saddam, his purchases of weapons, sending money to the Palis and the oil-for-palaces program did one outstanding job in that regard. If you’re a European, however, your comment would make sense.
    Does anyone have any idea of the value of the weapons we’re finding over there which should have been spent on his people????

  39. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    Oh, and Diana?? I’m not interested in this–“and the fictitious link to 9/11…”
    I want to know about WTC 1993 and Oklahoma City. See Laurie Mylroie and Jayna Davis.

  40. Steve Rhodes Avatar
    Steve Rhodes

    Jackie, you, Drudge and everyone else had a responsibility to put the ads in context.
    The two stupid Hitler ads were not featured on moveon.org. The contest was featured on the site and they were among over 1500 ads randomly served to be voted on.
    Anyone looking at the site (which I assume Jeff did since he linked to the award ceremony below) or doing a simple google could have figured that out.
    Here is Moveon’s statement
    They say their screening process should have been better and point out:

    Contrast this with the behavior of the RNC and its allies when supporters of President Bush used TV ads morphing the faces of Sens. Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Max Cleland (D-GA) into that of Osama Bin Laden during the 2002 Senate races.

    It would have been interesting to see what a Newsmax anti-Clinton ad contest would have produced.
    You can look at the 15 moveon finalists (chosen by voters with higer bandwidth than I) and judge them for yourselves.

  41. John Irving Avatar
    John Irving

    lk, while I fully respect your right to have an opinion, the fact that your opinions, if allowed to be made into US policy would provide aid and comfort the enemeies of the US, means that I do consider you an enemy of sorts by extension, if only a political one. But not a very effective one. Nowhere did I mention the Russian mafia, his weaponry was quite apparently Soviet, French, and Russian in origin, and if you deny that Hussein has ever had WMD’s, you need to seriously consider coming out of the crack-haze filled cave you must be living in, because not only has he admitted to it, we have the evidence that they were used, both against Iran and against the Iraqi Kurds. His requirement under the cease fire was to provide proof of the destruction of all of his WMD’s, and he failed to do so. So even if he used them up, gave them away, burned them, or just plain forgot where they are, he was in violation and subject to military action.
    As for middle management, lk, fuck you. You leftists may like to lie to improve your positions, but I’m quite proud of who and what I am.

  42. O'McSomething Avatar
    O’McSomething

    my fellow liberals
    WTF???
    Heh! So, why are you running a right-wing blog?
    Oh, right! So after the conventions you can make a big announcement that blah de blah be blah de blah the Dems and your fellow liberals have run such a blah de blah be blah campaign that you have now choice but vote for the great divider….blah, blah, blah!
    I’m sorry, Jeff, you ain’t convincing anyone and pretty soon somebody is going to mention the H word.

  43. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Mithras & O’:
    Yes, liberal.
    You aren’t the holders of the flame; you don’t get to decide who and who doesn’t qualify; and you certainly don’t know enough to judge. One issue does not an ideology make, boys. And, in fact, my support of the war to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein only makes me more liberal for this is a humanitarian cause.

  44. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “So, why are you running a right-wing blog?”
    And when did you stop beating your wife?

  45. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    Diana –
    “Which, I repeat, were the moldy remains of what we sold him”
    I have not read the book you recommend but, I note that the Amazon reviews refer to a lot of European countries and, it is subtitled “How the West Armed Iraq”. This comports with the references I have seen which document quite cleary that the US contribution to Saddam’s arsenal was utterly negligible compared to France’s, Russia’s, China’s and Germany’s contributions. And, lo and behold, these clowns were still on Saddam’s side, right to the very end.
    But, you still haven’t confronted my argument which is this: if, as you claim, we sinned in the past, it is all the more incumbent upon us to rectify the sitation now, not less so, as you seem to prefer. Do you even realize that you are arguing against yourself here?
    As for Lisa or whoeverthef— talking about Hitler, I don’t see any way whatsoever that that SOB is related to the present circumstances and I refuse to be drawn into an argument about it. People who trot out comparisons to Hitler as an arguing point are basically admitting they have lost the argument and are now only interested in trying to make their opponents mad.

  46. O' Avatar
    O’

    RE:‘my fellow liberals’
    Sorry, my bad. I see the photo at the top of the blog, and you do appear to be a “fellow”. At least that part is truthful.

  47. lk Avatar
    lk

    John Irving “…your opinions, if allowed to be made into US policy would provide aid and comfort the enemeies of the US,…. “. You lied, you are most certainly not middle management, you are Dick Chaney.
    Yes, at one time he had WMD’s (Hussein, not Chaney). Yes, he had no WMD’s when we invaded. Yes, he had not disclosed what he had done with the WMD’s. Yes, that violated UN resolutions, No, that violation was not serious enough to justify the invasion of Iraq and the loss of hundreds of young Americans. Them’s my opinions and I’m sticking to ’em.

  48. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    I just got clued in to Godwin’s Law which seems germane to this thread. Thought I’d share. LOL.

  49. lk Avatar
    lk

    Godwin’s Law has met its match in these comments. Who’s Godwin?

  50. John Irving Avatar
    John Irving

    lk, please provide proof (not opinion, not the other shit you spout, but documented proof) that Hussein had no WMD’s as of the time of our invasion. This means none in the 85% of sites we have yet to search, none that may have been smuggled to Syria (as reports have indicated), none which he was frantically burning even as we crossed the border. Then bear in mind the Tigris river tested positive for fairly high doses of certain key toxins used in chemical weaponry.
    But I accept that you’re sticking to your opinions, regardless of the actual events. Stuck as close as your tinfoil hat, apparently.

  51. KMK Avatar
    KMK

    What do you want from a bunch of socialists? Hopefully more articles like this http://www.americandaily.com/item/4155 questioning their fundraising will be addressed. The ad is nothing more then a cheap form of propaganda. Remember this is the same group who lobbied to impeach Clinton. They are no friend of American politics. I’ll defend their right to free speech but I can’t help but wonder what kind of person supports their movement. Are you disgusted by freedom, democracy, success and happiness? Moveon.org agreed that the ads were in

  52. lk Avatar
    lk

    John Irving – It is difficult to prove a negative. Right now I base my opinion on the fact that no one has said we found a WMD. Maybe WMD’s will be found since Powell has pictures. I am patiently waiting. I have been wrong before – I thought Hussein was behind 9-11 at one time.

  53. John Irving Avatar
    John Irving

    Then, lk, in that case, please indicate which intelligence agency you are employing, that refutes the information collected by American, British, French, German, Russian, Austrailian, etc etc etc agencies that indicate that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD’s. For that matter, the UN even acknowledged that he was still in possession of forbidden weaponry. As I said, the burden of proff was on him to show he had destroyed his weaponry. If he did, but hid the proof for whatever reason, then post-execution he will be the front runner for the millenium Darwin Award, and us only four years in.
    As for Saddam being behind 9/11, it is unlikely (but not impossible) that he possessed foreknowledge of the event. But the fact that he helped fund al Qaeda, train them, and equip them, makes him fairly culpable even in that.

  54. anaid Avatar
    anaid

    In October 2003, NewsMax reported the coalition forces found 13 concrete bunkers near Baghdad filled with missles, bombs and bomb fusing devices. Seems the cluster bombs found were Russian, French and also, South African made. Many of the weapons were produced as recently as 2001. These weapons were in violation of numerous United Nation’s resolutions.
    The NewsMax report also stated “These cluster bombs can be adapted to chemical or biological warfare by replacing the conventional explosive subminition with biotoxin-armed bomblets”
    On January 5, 2004 “Crow blog” posted photos with link to the NewsMax’s October report. Crow deemed the NewsMax report as the most underblogged story of 2003.
    Perhaps people continue to believe Saddam did not have WMD’s because of the elite media’s failure to report the truth. CNN, by it’s own admission, did not report the truth about Saddam’s brutality for the nine years CNN had broadcasted from Baghdad, why would they report the truth about his weapons stash. All in the name of “peace”?
    If we had the blog site “Healing Iraq” in 1994, instead of CNN, perhaps the world would have understood the real terror Saddam imposed on all humanity instead of convincing themselves Saddam was never really a threat to anyone as CNN lead us to believe.
    Why does the United Nations impose resolutions they have no intention of acting upon?

  55. HH Avatar
    HH

    “In August 2001 he was just one of many evil leaders in the world. But because of 9-11 he became our target.”
    Except for those two or three times he was our target during the Clinton years and that whole Gulf War thing.

  56. HH Avatar
    HH

    “Drudge and others who have picked this up don’t point out this is not a moveon.org ad. It was one of a thousand ads submitted to a contest.”
    Actually, he did point this out as well as the MoveOn.org rule that they would post anything suited for television. They found the ad acceptable, period, and no amount of spin changes that.

  57. HH Avatar
    HH

    “Contrast this with the behavior of the RNC and its allies when supporters of President Bush used TV ads morphing the faces of Sens. Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Max Cleland (D-GA) into that of Osama Bin Laden during the 2002 Senate races.”
    Another Moveon.org lie… I saw the Cleland ad in question, he is not even compared to bin Laden, much less have his face morphed into bin Laden.

  58. Dan Z. Avatar
    Dan Z.

    Obviously, it’s retarded to say that Bush and Hitler are moral equals, but does anyone on the right actually believe that ANYONE on the left is making that charge? That Bush and Hitler are exactly equal? (Jeff, you specifically make that charge in your post, with it’s “Hitler equals only Hitler” comment.)
    I’m just curious whether any conservatives have the intellectual honesty to be able to acknowledge that, while Bush is no Hitler, at least some of the parallels that are being drawn between the two in terms of rhetoric, fear-mongering, even misleading the people he leads into occupying another country, have some merit. Bush isn’t Hitler, but he relies on similar rhetorical strategies, and that’s what most of these ads point out.
    These ads are unquestionably poor, inflammatory and inappropriate, but the knee-jerk “OMG!1! They said BUSH = HITLER!!!1!1” responses I keep seeing are even worse. They’re hysterical volleys against an attack nobody made, and purposeful refusals to acknowledge the fear that links both Bush and Hitler.
    Again, for those in the cheap seats: Bush and Hitler, not moral equivalents. That argument laughable, and NOT MADE BY ANYONE. Bush and Hitler’s rhetorical parallels? Worth talking about.

  59. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “Obviously, it’s retarded to say that Bush and Hitler are moral equals, but does anyone on the right actually believe that ANYONE on the left is making that charge?”
    Yep.

  60. scott h. Avatar
    scott h.

    Dan Z., the 2nd ad said, “What were war crimes in 1945 is foreign policy in 2003.” They aren’t talking about rhetorical parallels.

  61. Mithras Avatar
    Mithras

    Jarvis-
    Here’s what you wrote 9/28/01 (permalink broken): The Axis alliance of this war: Extreme fundamentalist Muslims who hate America, extreme fundamentalist Christians (read: Falwell) who hate what America has become, and extreme fundamentalist liberals (read Matt Welch and Christopher Hitchens’ attack on them) who want to blame America for what has befallen it. They’re all dangerous lunatics. Shouldn’t we in the media be exposing and and ridiculing these kooks and cults? Isn’t that in our job description?
    The first one, check. The second one, you seem to have completely forgotten about. And the third one you’ve gone on to use to tar everyone who thinks Bush’s policies are wrong and counterproductive.
    What exactly are you liberal about?
    And, in fact, my support of the war to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein only makes me more liberal for this is a humanitarian cause.
    One more time: Congress authorized and the people supported this war because Bush asserted that Iraq had WMD, and we couldn’t wait for “the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud.” Absent that, no authorization and no support. And humanitarian reasons were not Bush’s reasons, whatever he may say – they were some kind of act of regional intimidation coupled with a bid to exert more control over the oil supply. Absent those reasons, Bush would never have invaded. In short, he’s a liar and probably a fraud, and you and Totten are fools for supporting him.

  62. Jackie D Avatar
    Jackie D

    Steve Rhodes, you are missing the point — there is no “context” needed here. Moveon.org vetted these submissions and deemed them suitable for TV broadcast, and Moveon.org threw them up on the web. Why you insist that Moveon.org is not culpable for its actions is beyond me, but you are mistaken.

  63. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    If MoveOn had said, “Oh, my God, we don’t know how this got up on our site. We are so sorry. We killed it immediately. We will fire the drone who let it through. Of course, we are disgusted by this…” If they had said that, I’d have no problem with them. Stuff happens.
    But they didn’t say that. Instead, MoveOn tried to turn the quite proper criticism of them into criticism of some vast right-wing conspiracy against them. From the NY Times:

    Wes Boyd, a MoveOn.org founder, fired back, saying Republicans were “deliberately and maliciously” misleading the public by asserting that MoveOn.org had sponsored the advertisements. “None of these was our ad,” Mr. Boyd said in a statement. “Nor did their appearance constitute endorsement or sponsorship by MoveOn.org Voter Fund.”

    He also said he regretted it was there. That was all he should have said, if he were smart.
    Malicious? I don’t think you can properly paint that word onto the people who complained about this “ad” appearing on MoveOn. “Malicious” describes the act of the ad’s creator and then MoveOn.

  64. Pete Guither Avatar
    Pete Guither

    I’m tired of the use of Hitler comparisons, but they come from everywhere all the time. Perhaps moveon should have screened the thousands of ad submissions more thoroughly (I don’t know their staff size), but it’s hardly the same issue as a statement by them, nor is a to-be-voted-on ad on their web site the same as a selected ad aired on TV.
    Perhaps the New York post should screen its columnists more thoroughly (as in this column by Ralph Peters yesterday:
    “But Howard Dean and his Deanie-weenies do all they can to restrict the free speech of others. I can predict with certainty that Dean’s Internet Gestapo will pounce on this column, twisting the facts and vilifying the writer, just as they do when anyone challenges Howard the Coward…”
    “These are the techniques employed by Hitler’s Brownshirts. Had Goebbels enjoyed access to the internet, he would have used the same swarm tactics as Dean’s Flannelshirts.”
    And maybe the Bush administration should repudiate Grover Norquist’s comparison of estate taxes with the holocaust.

  65. lk Avatar
    lk

    Good catches by Pete G. Estate taxes and Holocaust – WOW. Looks like every day one could Google Hitler and find a reference. It’s nice to know the infamous are not forgotten. Maybe Attila the Hun can make a comeback.
    As for WMD’s – mentioned earlier – “Are you going to believe your eyes, or what I tell you?” Right now I am going with the eyes, and they see nothing. If the Admin has proof they have very big pulpit from which to show the world, do not blame the media.
    And my final point (thank God), if liberation was sought because of gassing Kurds, that opportunity was wasted in 1991.

  66. KMK Avatar
    KMK

    Pete – This is not an issue of oversight. They have the right to say and support their opinion (within the legal realm of course). If you sponsor something and air it you will be held accountable for it. Much like your examples in that you hold the Post responsible. I clicked on quite a few of the finalists ads and after each one it say “sponsored by moveon.” Now they are under the scope and are squirming, not supporting their view and it has to be a right wing conspiracy. The only ones misleading the public are moveon.

  67. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    lk sez: “if liberation was sought because of gassing Kurds, that opportunity was wasted in 1991”
    Why do you people think this is an argument against Bush? He wasn’t there in 1991. And, if we failed the people of Iraq at some time in the past, isn’t it all the more our responsibility to come to their aid now, as we just did?
    This is the real problem – libs are so consumed by their hatred of Bush that they can’t even argue coherently.

  68. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    And, Mithras – One. More. Time. You are not dealing with slow children. We (70% of Americans) have heard your specious arguments ad nauseum and reject them as shallow, overwrought, and manipulative.

  69. lk Avatar
    lk

    Reid – where were you in ’91? Were you pushing for regime change because of Husseins use of gas? If so, you get a pass. If not, why not? If not, why now? I.Do.Not.Hate.Bush, he’s my President. But he is not my President, right or wrong.

  70. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “Right now I am going with the eyes, and they see nothing.”
    We know, lk. We know.

  71. lk Avatar
    lk

    My eyes are used to pictures, like JFK showed us of Russian missles in Cuba. Gimme pictures. My seeing eye dog is trained to recognize WMD’s. She thought she saw some in Powell’s hands at the UN, but they turned out to be Taco Bell trucks full of salsa.

  72. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    lk – as unlikely as it is that you will see this, you are still doing everything you can to avoid addressing the question. Let’s try one more time:
    If we failed the people of Iraq at some time in the past, isn’t it all the more our responsibility to come to their aid now, as we just did?

  73. lk Avatar
    lk

    Reid – No, we do not have to come to the aid of people in other countries, despite mistakes of the past. I’m not sure if that answer is liberal or conservative, but who cares, it is my opinion, and I’m sticking to it, until I change my mind (that happens occasionly). We made a mistake and did not do regime change in 1991, but there has to be a statute of limitations on correction, maybe 3 years or so, and that would make in 1994 – thus, as we can all agree, blame Clinton.

  74. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    lk – then your argument makes no sense at all. I thought you were arguing that we were bad people for ignoring Iraq in the past, therefore we can’t be trusted to do the right thing now. But, that argument obviously fails because of what I argued – that past sins demand repentance and an attempt to set things right.
    Now, it appears you want to argue that we did bad things in the past and, the time is up for rectifying our mistakes and we aren’t allowed to try any longer. Needless to say, that argument makes no sense at all.
    I suspect your argument is really not even intended to be coherent in any way but, is just a way of getting under the skin of your adversaries. Like Sun Tsu said, if your enemy is stronger, evade him. If angry, irritate him.
    Fine and good. You get an “A” for strategy in dealing with the very weak hand you are holding. But, I’m afraid you can only dodge and weave for so long before your opponent calls your bluff, as I just have. With President Bush ensconced in the White House for another four years, you’ll have plenty of time to hone your forensic talents in the art of annoyance.

  75. lk Avatar
    lk

    Reid – Very good analysis. It reminds me a lot of things said by my ex-wives. I hope you are not one of them, or happen to meet up with one. When people gang up on me it gets difficult.

  76. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    …or happen to meet up with one
    That appears to be a benediction of sorts. Amazing that we, in this country, can be so civil with one another across the great divides of opinion which separate us. Thanks for the thought.