Home > Politics > Who knew Hitler would be so useful?

Who knew Hitler would be so useful?

May 15, 2008

Well everyone knows it, I guess.  There is after all, Godwin’s Law, which states that as any Internet discussion lengthens the probability of someone invoking Hitler as a rhetorical device approaches one.  And Ben Stein has been using Hitler lately to diss Darwin.  But did President Bush have to get into the act?…

Well yes, it seems he did; and while speaking to the Israeli parliament too.  Referring to Obama’s well-known advocacy for communicating with our enemies (actually just drawing different lines, talking to Iran but not Hamas), he recalled Hitler’s invasion of Poland and a particularly headstrong Republican senator who once said;

‘Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’

Afterward when Obama responded to the speech as a ‘false attack’, Bush denied that it was intended as a slam against Obama.  In other news, a group of people dumb enough to believe that denial signed a purchase contract for the Brooklyn Bridge yesterday.

The saying that “you can’t negotiate with terrorists” is a rhetorical two-step, an irrelevant truism.  Terrorists only have power because people feel shafted; a little investigation and foresight could go a long way.  You want to stop Hitler?  Der Fuhrer didn’t have magic powers – do something about post-WWI German Reparations and he would have only been a nut yelling on a street corner.  Terrorism does not come out of nowhere and our international policies are not exclusively benign. Is there anyone too stupid to realize that actions have consequences?

If that weren’t sad enough, Donald Rumsfeld called for another terrorist attack to keep the Democrats from winning. Seriously. 

The Republicans have positioned themselves as the only party that can keep America safe.  They’ll do this by trying to scare the crap out of the rest of the world, which is presumably (if enough money is given to the Military-Industrial Complex) powerless to do anything about it. 

Well that’s one definition of security, I guess;  a giant surrounded by terrified enemies; some of them allied with other giants.  It could work for a while but in the long run, is guaranteed to fail.  As the Guiness commercial says, “Brilliant!”

“Drink Responsibly.”

Categories: Politics
  1. May 16, 2008 at 05:55 | #1

    Excellent post! It is getting very scary watching the lengths to which politicians will go, especially the Republicans, who are running scared right now, to try to put a smudge on their opponents. Obama is the only one campaigning on his merits and ideas. The other two, who are really beginning to look so much alike, seem to have nothing positive to say, but spend most of their time putting Obama down. With knowledgeable, thinking people, this enhances Obama and hurts the nameless two. But there is enough of a nutcase fringe factor out there (think West Virginia) to be worrisome. They are the same ones who STILL think Bush is doing a great job. They are the walking brain-dead among us…

  2. May 16, 2008 at 09:14 | #2

    HEY BUSH!! FUCK YOU!!

  3. May 17, 2008 at 01:46 | #3

    Terrorism flourishes best when people have stopped talking and started loading weapons. 

    Republicons seem to think that they can get their way by resorting to force in every case, but unless you plan to kill every single person in the world, it’ll never work.  You can make people fear you, it’s true. But that only works for as long as it takes for the fearful to grow fangs.  Even a passive animal will bite when it’s hurt too much. 

    It’s not a sign of weakness to talk and negotiatiate with those you’re opposed to.  It’s the grown-up and responsible thing to do.  Which is exactly why the Republicons refuse to do it.

    Excellent assessment as always, my dear!

Comments are closed.