The MSM are at huge fault. Rather than call these wignuts out, they take the track that both sides must be heard. Even if that means wildly stupid rethoric is spewed and hate is poured from every corner of the Right. Perhaps Noonan is right. The Party lacks any real intellectualism. At the very least that part of the Party of Lincoln has lost it's voice. FOX noise is particulary to blame. It's pretty much a 24/7 prpoganda tool of the far right and the MSM is allowing it to continue to progate 24/7 with nary a wimper of honesty about what it says during it's broadcasts. Shame on them. Nauseating...

Read any critique from the Right on the Kennedy years and you'll see the same thing. Or Truman. Or FDR. Or Lincoln -- and they didn't have Hitler to use back then, but it's still practically the same language. The Right always uses this shit. For a century and a half now. In favor of things like slavery, Jim Crow, big business, militarism, endless wars of conquest and imperialism. Anytime the government tries to do the right thing. They claim despotism and/or Marxism or fascism.

And they are always, always lying. Every fucking time.

Funny, I saw the headline and thought this was about a new nickname for my now-departed Senator, Mr. Coleman...

On the topic at hand, the point that Mr. Hinderaker was trying to make neglects to accept that what BushCo was doing in those years was comparable to totalitarianism and authoritarian rule than anything Obama has yet displayed. In other words, there was more than some element of truth to such accusations about BushCo as liberals made/make them, but as with all things reality-based, there is liberal bias.

This is coming from people who actually are fascistic.

Illustrating yet again that social conservatives cannot see past their own mirrors.

The neo-cons are projecting their sins on others for political gain....SSDD.

people go to prison for that shit in ... germany...

a working hypothesis since seeing george W(arcriminal) Bush he3ading to Washington DC back in 1999 -- and the fear and loathing I felt:

The United States beat fascism militarily before I was born.
The United States has never faced it culturally, internally.

and then comes along a freak like mr. nepotism doughboy-pants who revises the history of fascism with a vocabulary for fourth graders -- you got the deck cleared for a bible wrapped in a flag and a boot smashing a face in america...

Steve, you might not be familiar with Godwin's Law, which states that all discussions in internet forums will eventually degrade into comparing your opponent's ideas to Hitler's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Perhaps this could be extended to public debate as well. I think if people were aware how cliche the practice is, they would cease doing it so much!

Let me rephrase that-- an internet discussion will eventually degrade into *someone* comparing the other's ideas to Hitler's. According to the wikipedia article, it is tradition that the party who invokes the Nazi comparison automatically loses :)

A few years ago, conservative blogger John Hinderaker wrote, "I, personally, would like to see a moratorium on all references to Hitler, the Third Reich, Nazism and the Holocaust in the context of domestic political debate. Such a rule would have no perceptible effect on conservative discourse, but it would render the left virtually mute."

I emailed a copy of this washingtonmonthly.com posting to Powerline--with my earnest hopes that John Hinderaker will denounce these inane argumenta ad Hitlerum at his earliest opportunity.

If a wingnut says it there's a good chance you can take the exact opposite as gospel truth.

JK, thank you - I will never use a Hitlerian comparison of Shrub again. However, it might take a while to shake the Martin Bormann-Karl Rove comparison from my brain.

Move on...get it?

The Republican party is a party of the survival of unfittest for a democratic society. Through the years the intelligent, concerned Republican (Federally speaking) has been ousted out and a FUNDAMENTALIST NEOCONSERVATIVES have replaced any intelligent persons with sycophants who believe they are chosen by God and can do no wrong such as commiting murder , adultery etc. The Republican party has gotten away with out any accountability. The republican party would prefer to run America as IRAN runs their country with a religious supreme leader who feels he is told by God how to gun down innocent citizens, steal from it's own people. That is how the repubblican would like to lead. Censor writing, music and art, lie about history in books,and not allow women to hold office but live ina submissive mode only.(Until the men want SEX) Cheney's secret guard would prevail to punish all "sinners" of the state.

What's funny is that before WWII, in US politics opponents were often compared to Napoleon or Julius Caesar. I don't think most people even know who they are anymore.

The Fuhrer was a great dancer.
Omama is a great dancer.
Do I need to make it any more clear?

JK, there is an exception to Godwin's law for discussions about actual totalitarianism, for obvious reasons:

http://xkcd.com/261

Comparing Obama and Hitler of course is absurd--but if we were talking about a certain previous adminstration, who held people without charges or trials, and tortured them, the comparision would be legitimate.

I'm kind of hurt. What's with all this witless comparing bourgeois liberals to Nazis and Hitler? My gang used to get all the ink. Where did ''Commie,'' ''Red,'' and ''Pinko" go? Work all your life at being shunned and reviled and then the goddamned reactionaries forget all about you! A fine state of affairs ...

even for a lowly trotskyist like me.

Other questionable comparisons, made by Republicans have, to Hitler and Nazis:

1] Saddam Hussein
2] Abortion
3] Affirmative Action
4] Dan Rather
5] Rap
6] Weather
7] The DELICIOUS McRib Sandwich
8] Poor people
9] Immigrants [as in "These Mexicans are invading America like the Nazis invaded Poland!"]
10] Using a gerund
11] Parade magazine
12] T-Ball
13] Cargo shorts
14] Women with short hair
15] "That guy who keeps telling me to stop touching his wife's breasts."
16] The Appalachian Trail
17] Facts
18] The Toyota Prius
19] Germany [post-9/11]
20] Mike Sinclair of Batesville, IN. [He knows why.]

What a civil group we have. Almost an hour later, and no one has called Hinderaker assrocket yet.

I don't see any problem with comparing your opponent's ideas to that of Hitler or the Nazis or Stalin or Pol Pot or Mussolini or even Genghis Khan for that matter. If you think it's an insightful and legitimate comparison, why not? Of course you certainly chance embarrassing and discrediting your argument through crazy hyperbole but that's the risk you take.

Otherwise you're left to the brilliant rhetorical device of comparing bad guys to people like Pinochet and then having to explain why that's bad thing.

Once you realize that the right wing hates America and Americans, everything they do and say makes sense.

Usenet has had this rule for twenty years. It's called "The First corollary of Godwin's Law" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Whoever mentions Hitler or Nazis first, loses.

It's actually a good strategy if they can get away with it, since the left is already tarred with the atrocities of the communists, so associate the left with the fascists as well and everything bad is on the left - everything good is on the right.

As for Goodwin's Law, the election of Hitler and the Nazis, and their takeover of a western middle-class country with a great intellectual and artistic tradition, is one of the astonishing and defining events of recent history. Unfortunately, it seems we are now forbidden to draw any lessons from it since we cannot use it in current political discourse without offending someone for being "compared to Hitler." We have in effect wished it away.

It's called "projection." Just follow one simple rule and you will know all you need to know about the wingnut: Whatever they claim "Liberals" are doing or acting like...it's to cover-up the fact that they are EXACTLY what they are accusing others of being.

"Otherwise you're left to the brilliant rhetorical device of comparing bad guys to people like Pinochet and then having to explain why that's bad thing."

Yeah, but that's not so hard, and you get a warm glow from edumakhatin the little rascals wether they like it or not.

Since these fuckwits all like to read the Bible, perhaps they ought to go re-read the part about worrying over the mote in the eye of another while ignoring the beam in one's own. of course, that would involve self-awareness and intelligence on their part in order to understand the significance, and if they had that (self-awareness and intelligence) they couldn't qualify as wingnuts.

But it is interesting to see them call out in others what is so obviously a major part of their own political movement - there is that theory that you can't recognize what you don't do yourself.

Even if you are discussing totalitarianism and government, just by making a Hitler comparison, you are banking on the notion that no one can possibly argue that Hitler was good (and therefore everything that Hitler did was the most heinous form of evil) and if the opponent begins to argue on the side of Hitler, then they're in danger of producing the most damning soundbytes to be used against them.

Invoking Hitler/Nazis is intellectually lazy no matter how accurate the comparison is. There ought to be a public list of shame for people using Hitler to make their point!

Even if you are discussing totalitarianism and government, just by making a Hitler comparison, you are banking on the notion that no one can possibly argue that Hitler was good (and therefore everything that Hitler did was the most heinous form of evil).

Obviously--if your opponent understood why torture/murder/general authoritarianism is a bad idea then you wouldn't have had to invoke Hitler at all! A second corollary to Godwin's law ought to be "if you are forced to invoke Hitler to explain why your opponent is wrong, then you're never going to convince him anyway." (Which can be a frightening realization.)

rea said: "... but if we were talking about a certain previous adminstration, who held people without charges or trials ..."

You might want to rethink that particular argument as the current administration is doing the same fucking thing!
They have even "floated the balloon" that they have the right to indefinitely detain Gitmo prisoners who are aquitted in a court of law. In my view that makes them a continuation of the Bush administration when it comes to the "war on terror." Think about it.
(for a better understanding you might want to read Glen Greenwald's last few posts on the subject.)

Republicans - Project much?

Great Dancer? Perhaps, but, could Obama paint a one bedroom apartment in four hours; two coats? Hitler was a MaHvelous painter, courtesy of "The Producers" (Original Movie)

Comparisons to Nazis or Hitler are almost always shallow and kill any chance of reasoned debate, but they're not the sole province of any political persuasion. Every group is tempted to use them- that's what Godwin's Law means. Take a look through the Media Matters boards sometime. MMFA is one of my favorite websites, but I get so tired of commenters referring to "Reich-wing Republicans" like it's the most clever thing they've ever thought of. The problem is there were times when I think the Bush Admin actually deserved to be called fascists, but even then you can stop short of actually saying Nazis or Hitler. It's not a very productive way to think, no matter who's the target or who's the accuser.

Perhaps comments about the Nazis appear to be so shallow is due to a lack of knowledge of who they were, how they were able to gain control of a nation and how one party rule can destroy a country. I have read many a comment from the right saying the Nazis were Socialists because the word Socialist in NSDAP. They never went beyond to study how the Party allowed capitalism to florish as long as the capitalists toed the Party line. They were never Socialists. I wonder how the executed leaders of the SDP who had to flee, momentarily for freedom, to Prague would say to that.

One of the most disengenuous comments is when someone such as BillO says "Oh, I really want the Democrats to do well - I want a two party system" - Baloney, when they were in power, Grover Norquist and his ilk wanted only one party rule. You do not have to wear uniforms, such as in the thirtyish Rome, Berlin, or Madrid to be facist. Franco embraced the Catholic Church to rule Spain with a heavy hand. Hitler used the Protestant Lutherans working class to help him rule Germany. Il Duce used the church as well. Bush and the RepuGs embraced the fundies to start their Rovian desired decade long rule.

If, we have to discard any comparisons to the facists of recent memory, we will be fighting at a disadvantage. Just make sure your comparisons are apt and not, just, thrown against the wall.

What drove home for me just how unhinged the right is getting is that Glenn Reynolds (a sophistic asshole to be sure, but I've never thought of him as delusional) approvingly links to this misleading piece of paranoid insanity:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Political-opposition-is-not-a-hate-crime-7949121-50392297.html

Fascist, Bert, fascist - Not one who wishes to look into a mirror.