Media Amnesiacs Suddenly Appalled at Hitler Comparisons

  • Bookmark and Share

A liberal Washington Post columnist laments today of the loss of civility in the public discourse. Strange that he is suddenly outraged that Americans would dare call Obama a socialist or a fascist, given that Bush-Hitler comparisons were widespread during the previous administration.

Liberals in the media spent the summer and early fall bemoaning signs at town hall protests and tea party rallies calling Obama a socialist or communist comparing him to Hitler (incidentally, many of these signs were actually created by supporters of uber-leftist Lyndon LaRouche, as reported by Seton Motley here and here). These pundits had no such admonitions for signs at anti-war rallies during the Bush administration comparing him to Hitler and the Devil, and calling the president a fascist.

So the Post's E.J. Dionne's complaints about the loss of civility in the debate over federal politics fit right in with the narrative liberal pundits have been pushing since last year: comparing an American president to a murderous dictator is unacceptable...if that president is a Democrat.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Wrote Dionne in The New Republic yesterday,

The most surprising and disappointing aspect of our politics is how little pushback there has been against the vile, extremist rhetoric that has characterized such a large part of the anti-Obama movement.

President Obama's administration has largely ignored those accusing him of "fascism" and "communism," presumably believing that restraint in defense of dignity is no vice.

Dionne quotes former Congressman Jim Leach, R-Iowa, to illustrate the horrific degradation of the national discourse:

There is, after all, a difference between holding a particular tax or spending or health care view, and asserting that an American who supports another approach or is a member of a different political party is an advocate of an 'ism' of hate that encompasses gulags and concentration camps.

Might that same characterization have applied when MoveOn.org considered airing an ad contrasting images of Bush and Hitler, and stating "What were war crimes in 1945 is foreign policy in 2003"? Searches on Google News and Nexis show no complaints from Dionne about the petty Bush-is-a-Nazi attacks that pervaded his presidency.

The five latter years of the Bush presidency were rife with Nazi comparisons. As Byron York reported in 2003,

"It's going a bit far to compare the Bush of 2003 to the Hitler of 1933," writes Dave Lindorff in "Bush and Hitler: The Strategy of Fear," which appeared in February on the far-left site Counterpunch.org. "Bush simply is not the orator that Hitler was. But comparisons of the Bush administration's fear- mongering tactics to those practiced so successfully and with such terrible results by Hitler and Goebbels are not at all out of line."

Liberal author Wayne Madsen, reported York, accused Bush of "borrowing liberally from Hitler's play book," and said that the Nazi dictator "would be proud that an American president is emulating him in so many ways."

The American Thinker also documented scores of Bush-Nazi comparisons. NPR's Garrison Keillor called Republicans "brownshirts in pinstripes." George Soros said Bush "reminds me of the Germans," as "my experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me."

Hugh Pearson, writing in Newsday, compared the 2004 Republican National Convention to "Nazi rallies held in Germany," Republicans who display American flags to Nazis who were "obsessed with endless displays of swastikas," and the war on terrorism to "pre-emptive war to protect the self-interests of the Third Reich."

Even elected officials have toed the Republicans are like Nazis line. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., referring to the 1994 Republican Revolution, stated, "When I compare this to what happened in Germany, I hope you see the similarities to what is happening to us."

He also compared the GOP's drive for tax cuts to the Ku Klux Klan's racist ideology. "It's about race and a certain costume change. Where once it was the sheets and hoods of the Klan, it's now the black suits and red ties of conservative politicians. It's not 'spic' or 'nigger' anymore. They say, 'Let's cut taxes.' "

One must wonder where Dionne has been for the past decade or so that he is only now starting to notice classless and crude comparisons of an American president to a murderous dictator, and a major political party to violent racists and genocidal regimes.

From protest rallies to advertisements from far-left advocacy groups to statements from Democratic legislators, liberals have never hesitated to smear prominent conservatives as members of this hate group or that murderous regime. Dionne and his fellow lefty pundits only seem to notice such characterizations, or find them objectionable, when they are directed at a Democrat.

—Lachlan Markay is an associate with Dialog New Media. You can follow him on Twitter and Facebook.

Coming soon: A brand-new NewsBusters design. But we need your help!


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The Nazi's would love

The Nazi's would love Obama's policies.

This guy is a Democrat:

Pic.

First of all, I thought

First of all, I thought Dionne was a mustard, but I digress...

If this supposed grayish, mustard-like substance purporting to be a columnist for WaPo did some real homework (Google: Obama = Hitler), he'd see that it is the extreme wing of his own party that most prominently displays the Obama = Hitler signs. (The LaRouche folks must be hoppin' made after an entire summer of being accused as Conservatives.) Besides, a few communists infiltrating Tea Parties certainly doesn't compare with the debauchery regularly displayed in Frisco.

Come out from that little bottle Dionne; it's a big (and cooling) world out here...

Mandela

The difference between Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela is that while Obama THINKS ON BEING GREAT....Mandela simply is.  Obama wants to be that highly regarded by EVERYONE in the world that they compare him to Mandela and it will NEVER HAPPEN because Obama can't simply BE any thing without first arranging that it HAPPEN as he sees it..choreographing every move.  Obama is an empty vessel.  Liberals can herald his coming all they want and deem him worthy of praise and make any kind of disagreement on any level to him a crime punishable by torture and it won't change the fact that Obama is an empty suit...and empty head...a cheap knock off of the real deal.  Sad that liberals have to invent their own messiah to feel anything at all remarkable.

Mandela was a member of a

Mandela was a member of a terrorist organization, a Communist and South Africa is in a shambles ridden with crime...notice the MSM doesn't say "boo" about that dump anymore?  Winnie fell out of the public eye once it became apparent what a loon she is.

They even have hijacking warning zone signs on their highways down there.

Other than that, I agree with your basic disregard of His Oneness.  However, I'm not so sure that he is an empty suit.  Though it may not seem like it, there's a strong possibility that He knows exactly what he's doing.  It's just that his agenda and ours are different.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

Hypocrisy du Jour

A few weeks ago Roger Ebert posted something similar to this in his blog. It was a long rant bemoaning the blind hate tactics of the "fringe" on the right, etc. etc, complete with psychoanalysis of how Conservatives were so flawed as to behave this way. At least liberals, he said, played by the rules.

Soon, in the comments for the blog, someone posted a link to a webpage showing Liberal protesters carrying anti-Bush signs that were far more foul than anything Ebert was complaining about coming from the right.

Well okay, Ebert replied, maybe Liberals didn't always play by the rules, but the difference is that Bush DESERVED it. And then he began recycling all the leftist conspiracy theories from the Bush years, which was funny because in the original blog post he had complained about paranoid right-wingers who believed in outlandish conspiracy theories about Obama.

You can't reason with these people, Ebert had said, they are too crazy. When exposed as a total hypocrite, Ebert proved that he himself was the one who couldn't be reasoned with. It was hypocrisy of mind-bending proportions.

What a bunch of whiney

What a bunch of whiney nitwits.  When Pravada media, and lieberals in general are losing the debate they always cry about the lack of civility that they have no possesion of.  

Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.

They Can't Be This Dumb

Can they be this dumb to think no one else remembers and hasn't kept track of the double standard when it comes to Obama over the way THEY TREATED BUSH... not that long ago?  Seriously...and then to complain about Obama's critics lacking the social skills they have no measure of in the smallest degree on any given day unless they're using it to blow sunshine up Obama's nether regions....I'm talking about civility and tolerance.  Liberals are some of the most hateful and crude people on earth...to each other...they become lethal around any one who doesn't agree with them.   

On the contrary.  They are

On the contrary.  They are that dumb.  I have full faith in their own pestilent stupidity. 

For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me.  As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.

Ian Anderson "Wind up"

 

 

Come on...it's EJ Dionne,

Come on...it's EJ Dionne, The New Republic, let alone he is quoting from Jim Leach...which is laughable in itself....you can be sure the leftist, especially groups like SPLC are all smiles with where they are all going with their agenda...which is always on the back-burner and in progress once the dems take over, let alone just a Prez with a 'D' behind their name.

As far as I'm concerned, they are all stuck on stupid.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

Come on, don't you see the difference?

It's free speech when the liberals criticize conservatives. It's hate speech when anyone criticizes liberals.

Throw 'da bums out!!!

Before it's too late. 

www.loyaltoliberty.com

Now they get upset?

It's OK to use Hitler in comparison to GW Bush.  But when the term "socialist" or "fascist" is used regarding Obama, suddenly journalists get all bent out of shape?

Their hypocrisy just grows and grows day by day.  I hope that the American people wake up and stop watching and listening to network news, CNN,  NPR and all the other liberal garbage out there.  

The duplicity and phoniness of news today is so blatant - they don't even try to hide it anymore.  Geez.

Do as I say, not as I

Do as I say, not as I do...

They're filthy, stinking hypocrites, the whole lot of them.  I fear theyr'e stampeding the country towards an unrest that could border on civil war.  They've choses sides, and are waging war anyway.  They're biting off fingers, they're beating up blacks, they're screaming and raving about 'nazis and evil-mongers' and they won't listen to reason.  All the while, saying how they 'mourn the loss of civility' in the country today.

 

The Reason

The reason is simple, these guys are Communists! I know it hurts but this is right out of their playbook! You antagonize and agonize until you sieze power. Than you lie and say you never did any of the things your opposition accuses you of! you compound it by accusing them of the very things you did! Get the press in your corner and BINGO, here comes the Mustard Man, Dionne!

The Weekly Standard crushed Dionne's foolish observation

You should show or mention The Weekly Standard's Parody page of last week, 23 November 2009. The page showed roughly 57 varieties (I was too sickened to count precisely) of leftists' poster comparisons of Bush to Hitler and, to a lesser extent, his government as Nazi.

The photos raised several questions. Who took them? How did the Weekly Standard's staff find them? Did the Associated Press take any of the photos? Did any reporters for any newspapers or news services or news and opinion magazines, or TV news organizations ever attend any of the rallies where these signs were present? Did anyone ever comment on them?

Yes, news media reporters, correspondents, op-ed columnists, run-of-the-paper columnists, and editorial board members are usually partisan and sometimes propagandistic, but they are also often corrupt and incompetent. E.J. Dionne? Probably more fanatic than anything else. It's my opinion that he has modified an originally religious support for "social justice" into blind political passion, ignoring the worst ethical transgressions of his fellow leftists while pushing for practically and morally dubious ends and means.

Dionne's column was obtuse, as is its writer. 

 

I laugh when the comparison is silly, but ...

I don't have any problem with anyone comparing our government to anything we would like to avoid.

What is the purpose of speaking about the age Stalin, Mao, and Hitler, if it's not to serve as an instruction of what to avoid? And how better to avoid it than to point out when someone is proposing changes that might resurrect that age.

Would they rather we ignore history altogether so as not to offend those who might stumble upon it accidentally via their own actions?

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.