The Nazi Card
In the political world, nothing ticks off people on either side of the spectrum more than playing the Nazi card. The latest comments aimed back at President Bush from Hillary Clinton are more of the same in a long line of liberal hypocrisy.
In a speech at a celebration in Israel, President Bush said the following (which I completely agree with):
“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before… As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”
Lines around the block formed in Washington of high level Democrat leaders just frothing at the mouth ready to condemn the audacity of a comparison of one of their own to a Nazi sympathizer… yet I seem to recall the very same people being strikingly silent during the last 7 years when all of this was being tossed about…
I know I know… Freedom of speech, expression blah blah blah… I could care less what you call the President, Speaker of the House or your mother for that matter. It’s just a bit telling when YOUR side does it and you turn a blind eye, but the second a Conservative does it you line up around the block to condemn them. The thing that gets me the most about the outrage is that he compared the policies set forth by the Obama campaign to an idiotic policy by Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain was not a Nazi… and Bush did not call Obama or anyone else a Nazi. Bush condemned the idea of appeasing terrorist by comparing it to the OBVIOUS failure of a similar form of appeasement.
Funny how the N word is off limits ONLY if your a Conservative.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
But it wasn’t the Congressional members who were making these Nazi comparisons over the past 7 years and not especially on a stage for the world to see. Bush went OVERSEAS to celebrate the 60th Anniversary of Israel and A) stuck his nose into the primary season, B) threw out a veiled criticism of Obama, and C) did it overseas! And what’s crazy is, his right hand men (and women) have been wanting to negotiate and have talks with these so called radicals for a while. But regardless, I think it’s in bad taste to abuse the position of the Presidency to criticize your opposition and compare the current situation to WWII especially on international land.
I put a reply here but the system ated it. Maybe because of some Godwin-related verbiage I used.
(Basically, in the lost comment I said that the willingness to engage in talks is not appeasement. What happened in the 1938’s was that Chamberlain went to Munich and let Germany have half of Czechoslovakia in order to appease the Nazis. If you want an example of modern-day appeasement, see the arms for hostages deal Reagan struck up with Iran, don’t look to Obama’s words. By the way, “Appeasement” means “acceding to the demands of aggressive powers to avoid war.” This is yet another case of President Bush twisting history to justify his failure at foreign policy.)
Chetan, last time I checked the Presidential Primary isn’t a closed system by which only “authorized” opinions are allowed. The President is still a citizen and still fully capable of holding and expressing his opinions. Yes he’s held to a higher standard than you or I but that doesn’t mean he HAS to keep silent.
Obama may be a Democrat, but he is not an opponent of Bush’s.
I meant US Presidential campaigns not primary season, my mistake. I understand he’s a citizen but his position is held in high regards and looked up to by many across the world. He should not being using the office to denigrate others and their positions, especially on foreign soil, but rather reinforce his own (failed as they might be). I probably would not be as upset if he did it on US soil and was stumping for McCain or some other Republican but it’s a little low-balled to bring out attacks on someone else when you’re on an international stage. I’m not saying he doesn’t have a right to express his opinion like any other citizen but when you’re a President you have to pick and choose your words and your battles wisely.
Actually of any foreign audience, Israel was THE one who would care if our President was hard or soft on terrorism…
They live in an area where their neighbors speak openly of their obliteration… they too would love NOT to see a President who’s foreign policy consists of “lets talk about our differences”.
The Dangers of Appeasement
Initially Europe, and certainly the United States, did nothing. Hilter absorbed Austria into Germany in 1938, by mutual consent. Then he took over most of Czekoslovakia, a region called the Sudetenland, without the consent of the Czechs but with the blessing of European powers - particularly England and France. The Prime Minister of England at that time, Neville Chamberlain, showed how little England cared about the problems of Eastern Europe in this speech:
“How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.”
England and France negotiated a pact with Hitler in Munich on October 29, 1938, promising to look the other way. Afterwards Chamberlain, satisfied Europe would be safe from Hitler, declared:
“I believe it is peace in our time … peace with honor.”
A year after this infamous statement, World War II broke out — a war in which 50 million people would die — showing how naïve is a leader who thinks that by placating evil peace can be won.
I’m pretty sure the difference that nut jobs on the left or right throwing around words like Nazi, Hitler, or nigger is one thing, President Bush or other prominent politicians doing it is quite another.
This didn’t make news because a Republican made the analogy, it made news because this Republican made the analogy. Well, that and the problematic fact that few people actually think the Hitler analogy has much salience in this context.