It's remarkable what those fiendish GOP operatives can squeeze into thirty seconds: Not only does McCain's "celeb" ad have "Barack Obama will rape yo daughters overtones," says Rick Perlstein (who's apparently under the impression that most Americans think of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears as stand-ins for their daughters), but it was edited to blatantly evoke Triumph of the Will as well - the better to freak out elderly Jews in South Florida, perhaps. Comparing the "Celeb" ad to stills from Leni Riefenstahl's work, Perlstein writes: "I actually wonder if the Republicans had a crew on the scene to capture
just the right angles; for instance, the identical camera placement
shooting the speaker over the shoulder at stage right." If he actually wonders that, I fear for his sanity. Here's a tip for liberals: If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg.
« Britney and Crypto-Racism | Main | Is Slate Conservative? » Barack Hitler Obama31 Jul 2008 01:44 pm TrackBackListed below are links to weblogs that reference Barack Hitler Obama:
» Dayum! That McCain is one clever guy! from Sister Toldjah Comments (148)
It must be a huge relief to finally be able to use that title. 
10 Apr 2008 11:07 am Books May 2008 Atlantic Monthly
These set of posts are becoming a hell of a resignation letter Ross.
Ross Goebbels Douthat. I guess this sort of crankiness has set in because "Gross New Party" is now down to #7,329 in books on Amazon.
Now it just looks like Ross is angling for a think tank position where this kind of crazy is appreciated, like AEI or Heritage. He must be super-jealous of Yglesias.
I enjoy reading your posts because, in addition to their insight, they typically lack the cheap outrage and snide commentary so widespread in the political journalism of all political persuasions. Of course the accusation that the campaign meant to evoke Hitler rallies is absurd, but this is hardly a widely endorsed charge, so why bother addressing it? Stay above this filth.
I think that given the terms and conditions: By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Atlantic does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule. That the intern will have to delete Ross's post.
Ross, The summer heat is turning your brain into mush. Your postings are getting more ridiculous, delusional, obnoxious, and just plain stupid with each passing day. Dude, you need to check yourself into a mental health facility ASAP. You're losing touch with reality at an alarming rate.
Respectfully, Ross, this hasn't been your greatest ever day of blogging. Maybe something GNP-ish would be better. It's no fun to watch you do this in-the-trenches day-to-day politics stuff, because everyone knows you're capable of more than defending the RNC's talking point du jour.
I think the narrator is the same one as from the "Willie Horton" ad. And there are hands in the ad that look suspiciously like the ones from Jesse Helms's infamous "white hands" ad against affirmative action. And I could have sworn I saw a daisy in there somehwere...
It's no fun to watch you do this I think it's hilarious, to see such petulance and snide and ridiculous posts finally reveal Ross. Keep doubling down Ross, like you did with Bush's Legacy, The Surge, Vitter for President. It's fantastic.
Respectfully, Ross, this hasn't been your greatest ever day of blogging. Maybe something GNP-ish would be better. Yeah, one of the things I (used to?) like about this blog is that, compared to what else is out there, it's not as polemical and as obsessed with manufactured political "controversies." If this blog is just going to be a better-written rehash of The Corner I don't see the point of reading it.
I saw you Bill Moyers Journal a few weeks ago. You're only four years younger than me, and probably cool guy to have a beer with. You're a smart guy, but when it comes to politics, I want what your smoking. But, in fairness, at least you're not a neanderthal like Glenn Beck.
Does this qualify as Godwin's Law?
Oh great, somebody call a wah-mbulance. Ross isn't being fair enough for the liberal trolls today. Never mind the fact Ross is spot on.
Yeah, it would be frightfully ignorant to have the GOP to have some integrity when it comes to the Hitler references...
If this obsequious bit of party hackery doesn't get Ross on Limbaugh's show nothing will!
Ferret licks: "Never mind the fact Ross is spot on." It's nice that Ross's little brother posts here. But when did conservatives all decide to use the British slang phrase "spot on" as their applause line? I see it everywhere now.
Oh great, somebody call a wah-mbulance. Ross isn't being fair enough for the liberal trolls today. I'm neither liberal nor a troll. I just hate seeing Ross doing a Jonah Goldberg impression.
The thing liberals are missing is that when McCain compared Obama to a skinny blonde multimillionaire airheaded Republican heiress, it was actually a compliment. After all, McCain married one.
I'll freely admit that the last sentence of this post is a good one-liner. Otherwise, what everyone else said. Your readers don't come here looking for cranky partisan hackery on the political outrage du jour. We come here for the intramural Republican catfighting and your ethereal, bizarrely out-of-touch ruminations on metaphysics and prewar Tory literature. Don't let your audience down!
Just wondering, if by including Paris Hilton in the ad, is McCain's campaign suggesting it is a bad thing to be associated with rich, young women? You know, sort of like what he did with his current wife?
hmmm... didn't St. Reagan once give a big speech in Germany, in front of a historic symbol of German power, with 20,000 Germans in attendance? nah. that couldn't have happened.
Doug- If you're black, yes.
cleek asks: "hmmm... didn't St. Reagan once give a big speech in Germany, in front of a historic symbol of German power, with 20,000 Germans in attendance?" Well, yes, he did, but that wasn't the real highlight of his German experience. That came when he paid tribute to dead SS soldiers. "These [SS troops] were the villains, as we know, that conducted the persecutions and all. But there are 2,000 graves there, and most of those, the average age is about 18. I think that there's nothing wrong with visiting that cemetery where those young men are victims of Nazism also, even though they were fighting in the German uniform, drafted into service to carry out the hateful wishes of the Nazis. They were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps." Today the sons of Saint Reagan inform us that the only people affected by racism in the US today are white. The Saint would be proud.
"If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." HAHAH! This post is awepome! you call liberals whiners for complaining that the right compares Obama to Hitler because the right isn't doing it. Then you say "but you can't blame them for doing it cause it's true!" Yea, I mean, he's popular, just like Hitler was!
Gosh, these Obama supporters are a particularly humorless bunch. Let's get this straight: Perlstein makes the bizarre, and frankly insane, charge that McCain's ad both plays on white fears and mimics the portrayal of the supreme white supremacist in Triumph, thereby sinking to a new low in scurrilous punditry, and Douthat mocks the silliness of this so-called argument by pointing out that if the ad looks like something out of Triumph, well, it's in large part because the Obama campaign selected iconography that is vaguely reminiscent of that film. And some commenters are genuinely dull, obtuse, or humorless enough to accuse Ross of crossing the line by identifying Obama with Hitler, an identification made only by way of satirizing the absurdity of Perlstein's blather? What utter boors! Where's the outrage at Perlstein for invoking Triumph and Obama in the same breath in the first place? Or is that okay because he lays this ravingly insane charge at the feet of Republicans? (After all, as Moe no doubt
I love the use of "Hack" for someone who holds views different from your own. What has Ross written to be considered a hack? So basically if a conservative expresses conservative views, that's "hackery." Ridiculous. Just like the fact that all "open-minded" people will of course draw the same enlightened conclusions. Moe, I'm no Ross sycophant, and I disagree with him from time to time. Which makes it annoying when the lefties here get all bent out of shape about Ross not toeing the David Brooks Fair/Ambiguous Conservative line. And now look what you've done - you gave Sailer an opening to start talking about wangs.
Ferrell- If this is a 'conservative' view, then liberals win.
rickm - I like you better on Fire Megan McCardle, which is actually pretty funny. If I read Ross the last few days, he doesn't like the McCain spots, but thinks critics of those spots go overboard. I agree that isn't "conservative," but it is reasonable, and Ross is taking a lot of heat for it I don't think he deserves.
I virtually never read this blog but took a look today. Now I realize why I had decided it's not worth my time.
Gosh, these Obama supporters are a particularly humorless bunch.... I'm not an Obama supporter (I'm not a McCain supporter either; I'm just... depressed). And I completely agree that claiming there's a subliminal "Obama equals Hitler" message in McCain's (terrible) ad is ridiculous. What I object to is the snide tone of Ross' post. Someone who's truly interested in ideas (which Ross genuinely seems to be) should just sidestep this kind of campaign-season pig-wrestling. This is exactly the sort of manufactured internet food-fight that will piss off a lot of people for a week, then be jettisoned in favor of some new irrelevancy. If Ross is interested in rebuilding or reforming the Republican party he shouldn't be wasting time or energy contributing his two cents to the great "Do Republicans think Obama's like Hitler?" conroversy of July 31, 2008. P.S. Can someone fix the spam filter so it doesn't block my posts 75 percent of the time?
Absolutely obnoxious post. Simply beyond the pale. Meet your moderate republican.
Richard writes: "Where's the outrage at Perlstein for invoking Triumph and Obama in the same breath in the first place? Or is that okay because he lays this ravingly insane charge at the feet of Republicans?" There's nothing "ravingly insane" about Perlstein's piece at all. He supports his charge well enough - certainly better than Ross does. I suppose that's because he's a better and more honest writer. "After all, as Moe no doubt I don't think all Republicans worship Hitler, though a fondness for torture and invading helpless countries seem to be de rigueur for GOP party members these days. And while Hitler may be popular among Republicans - just ask Pat Buchanan - he's not popular with most Americans. That's why the Republican propagandists would like to make the connection. It's not like they're above such a thing. I don't
Charlie, I wholly agree with you about the spam filter. I comment a couple times a day at most, but lately I've been getting messages when I try to post a comment telling me that I've posted too many. One wonders why Moe doesn't seem to have similar difficulties. Is there no justice? I thought the tone of Ross' post was just fine. Some "ideas" deserve only mockery and are best addressed with a hearty, dismissive laugh, and Perlstein's commentary is the best example of such that I've seen in a very long time. Ross got both the substance and the tone of the response just right, and I, quite frankly, enjoyed the laugh. Does it affect my view of Obama one way or the other? Of course not, though I must admit the responses in the comments tend to confirm my suspicion that an Obama presidency is going to be a long, hard slog, what with his worshipers patrolling the nets and the airwaves for any sign of racism, or, even worse (in their minds), lese majeste or sacrilege among the nation's pundits, satirists, and comedians.
Large crowd + Germany + politician + cameras = yup, must be Hitler incarnate. Give it a break. If McCain wouldn't have thrown down the challenge to Obama to go overseas and see if he could act presidential (guess you found out he can - and oh, how that makes you madder than hades) y'all on the right would have nothing to complain about except McCain and his pathetic attempts to string coherent sentences together without (i) making a mistake or (ii) reversing a position he steadfastly believed in mere months ago. It must be hard when the straight talk express is exposed as just another Berlin streetwalker.
Richard writes: "I must admit the responses in the comments tend to confirm my suspicion that an Obama presidency is going to be a long, hard slog, what with his worshipers patrolling the nets and the airwaves for any sign of racism, or, even worse (in their minds), lese majeste or sacrilege among the nation's pundits, satirists, and comedians." It can't compare to the "slog" of the Bushpig years, as I watched this country get taken over by a gutless cabal of torture-loving warmongering maniacs and saw their followers denounce anyone who objected as traitorous. But you loved all of that, didn't you, Dick?
"I must admit the responses in the comments tend to confirm my suspicion that an Obama presidency is going to be a long, hard slog, what with his worshipers patrolling the nets and the airwaves for any sign of racism"
Mr. Douthat, the advertisements are unimportant. Discussions of the Republican Party and race relations hosted herein have little to do with current or past history and a great deal to do with how a certain subset of partisan Democrat conceives of himself vis-a-vis the opposition and vis-a-vis the man in the street. Best pick another topic.
In just one week Ross Douthat has morphed from writing: Yes, of course the Hitler comparisons are absurd to writing: the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg. There doesn't appear to be much coherence to Douthat's conservatism.
Douthat: "Here's a tip for liberals: If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." asshole. i don't exactly know what's compelled Douthat to make these last couple of posts, but the true picture of this man is finally emerging, and it is ugly.
So basically if a conservative expresses conservative views, that's "hackery." Bingo.
"it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." This is just really stupid. If the footage comes out looking like Hitler well then there is the tiny issue of Obama not being Hitler. If the standard for being a neo-Hitler is standing in front of a huge crowd of Germans then David Hasselhoff is really Hitler. Everyone else just plays at it. And it still doesn't stand to reason that because the pictures come out looking like Hitler that it is intellectually honest to compare the two.
Gee, Ross, allthose suggestions for reinvigorating the GOP that you make in your book seem to have disappeared in the heat of a campaign, haven't they? But then, those were just vaporings, anyway. The soul of conservatism is what you are posting today.
"it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." But it is the GOP who used the footage in an ad attacking Obama's popularity. And if you're conceding that the images are redolent of a Nazi rally, you're admitting that Perlstein's right.
Godwin called, he's wondering what part of his law you didn't get.
When you hire the "Harold, call me!" guy, then the burden of proof shifts a little. If the standard for being a neo-Hitler is standing in front of a huge crowd of Germans then David Hasselhoff is really Hitler. Also, Leonard Bernstein. Totally Hitler.
So, Ross Douthat (1) holds up absurd accusations by a leftist blogger concerning McCain's ad for much-deserved derision and (2) points out that the Obama campaign inadvertently and amusingly provided the context for said blogger's spurious and paranoid ravings without the GOP's help -- but Ross gets blamed for drawing this comparison? I read Ross's remark as being the equivalent of saying that McCain did not shoot Obama in the foot -- but snickering that now that you mention it, Obama is hopping around funnily, and he seems to be holding a smoking pistol in his own hand.
Me: "I don't like Obama's energy policy. It doesn't address the needs of a growing economy." Mr Crabby Pants: "Racist!"
"But it is the GOP who used the footage in an ad attacking Obama's popularity. And if you're conceding that the images are redolent of a Nazi rally, you're admitting that Perlstein's right." Perstein wrote, "I actually wonder if the Republicans had a crew on the scene to capture just the right angles; for instance, the identical camera placement shooting the speaker over the shoulder at stage right." The McCain used footage from Obama's campaign or from big media news sources. Therefore, Perlstein should look in those organizations for the new Leni Riefenstahl.
"Here's a tip for liberals: If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." LOL...brilliant! And so true too, as evidenced in how mad it has made the Obama fans!
mishu fabricates: "Me: "I don't like Obama's energy policy. It doesn't address the needs of a growing economy." Mr Crabby Pants: "Racist!"" Conservatives now have absolutely nothing to stand on but lies and fantasies. It's a fitting end to the Age of Saint Reagan, the dumb bastard who built his sickening legacy with fairy tales about "welfare queens with Cadillacs" and who once claimed to have taken part in liberating a concentration camp.
The one thing that turned me completely off Obama is his supporters. Their Kool-Aid response to anything remotely negative written/said about their "Messiah" is truly pathetic. And I say this as a registred Democrat.
I think it's more likely that "Kendra" is the 44 pound cat from New Jersey than that he, she or it is a "registred" (sic) Democrat. And the phrase "Kool-Aid response" makes no sense.
And the phrase "Kool-Aid response" makes no sense. Ever heard of a place called Jonestown? Something happened there back in 1978 that forever linked flavored drink mixes to suicidal fanaticism -- thus the very well-known cultural reference to "drinking the Kool-Aid." You might want to look it up.
Whoopi and Joy from the View were less obnoxious about attacking the McCain ad than most of you. Someone: mention Godwin's law, and feel smart. Everyone: forget that Obama is running on celebrity, and that this ad says exactly that. We don't like being reminded of that, do we? LMJ: You're right about Atwater, et al., but I don't think McCain or GOP operatives have to "appeal to racists." A minority is running - they'll vote for him or they won't(!). I don't see the need to insert racist undercurrents where a simple photograph will do. Or do you lefty geniuses think racists will say, "Oh that's right, Obama is black!" The issue that operatives rightly criticize is The Anointing. And not a single one of you addresses it. Move on.
Ronny quotes and writes: "And the phrase "Kool-Aid response" makes no sense. Ever heard of a place called Jonestown? Something happened there back in 1978 that forever linked flavored drink mixes to suicidal fanaticism -- thus the very well-known cultural reference to "drinking the Kool-Aid." You might want to look it up." I don't have to look it up, chuckles. I remember the incident very well, and I'm well acquainted with the use of the phrase "swallowing (or drinking) the Kool-Aid" as it's used in connection with politics. But the phrase "Kool-Aid response" still makes no sense. I'm not sure why you think "drinking the Kool-Aid" corresponds to "Kool-Aid response" but I assume it's due to the basic lack of literacy among so many on the right.
Gwacious whites: "LMJ: You're right about Atwater, et al., but I don't think McCain or GOP operatives have to "appeal to racists." A minority is running - they'll vote for him or they won't(!). I don't see the need to insert racist undercurrents where a simple photograph will do. Or do you lefty geniuses think racists will say, "Oh that's right, Obama is black!"" That's an inane argument. Atwater and company used racist ads because THEY WORKED. There's no reason to think they won't work simply because the opponent is "already" a minority. The despicable Jesse Helms didn't hesitate to use such an ad against a black opponent. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and purpose of such ads. They're not meant to move hardcore racists. They're aimed at idiots in the middle and are designed to make said idiots feel a little uneasy about voting for a particular candidate. If you can move 1 or 2% of the electorate in a close race that can make all of the difference.
Does the main stream media do ANYthing besides promote and proliferate Republican attack ads, which only focus on petty, personality issues? Take a look on Yahoo's buzz or ABC's blogs and there is nothing on the candidates differing tax or Iraq withdrawal proposals. Instead, all we get are snide or self serious repetitions of Steve schmidts' attack ads on the Democratic Presidential nominee. They are always the same: the Demo nominiee is elitist, cocky, effete, and out of touch. Doesn't matter who it is, the attack is the same. It doesn't matter what the issues are, the MSM repeats and spreads these attacks. The MSM has done this for the last 12 years. When will it stop? And when will commenters here stop using snide insults to claim that other commenters are Nazis, or elitists, or communists?
so, if I'm reading this correctly, all you Ross-bashers agree with Ricky Perlstein that the RNC is trying to suggest that Obama is out to rape your white daughters? It's worse than I thought: the delusion is massive and irreversible.
I'm a bit late here, but the only thing I really find objectionable about this post is...who really cares what Rick Perlstein says?
Jeez, you must have gotten linked by some particularly grim Obama worshipper - where else are all these trolls coming from? I take it they all agree with Perlstein (and, by the way, with all the NYT blogs) that the ad is racist and evocative of Hitler.
RH Potfry writes: "so, if I'm reading this correctly, all you Ross-bashers agree with Ricky Perlstein that the RNC is trying to suggest that Obama is out to rape your white daughters?" No, not yet, although that's not actually what Perlstein is saying. I don't expect conservatives to understand the distinction between "overtones" and suggestions, but if you're familiar with theories of subliminal advertising it might make sense to you. If McCain is down 10 points with a month to go then I expect the usual Republican hacks like Limbaugh, Hannity and Coulter to be doing more than SUGGESTING racist associations. I think they'll be accusing Obama of being in daily contact with Al Qaeda and suggesting that he's having daily sex with 14 year old Catholic school girls. And no, I'm not kidding.
How many African-Americans does McCain have on his campaign? Just curious.
Be careful sir. The Obama supporters are a thin-skinned lot, like Obama himself. No humor allowed. Even the most absurd defenses of Obama's behavior and choices are verboten to humor.
Shorter Ross: Its ridiculous to suggest that Republicans would compare Obama to Hitler, who, by the way, are very similar.
Gentlemen: I read this blog from a far enough place (Spain) to grant me a disapassionate view (good) and a disinformed one (bad). What I have to say from this standpoint is that Ross Douthat is obviously an independent thinker and he carefully keeps himself as far from partisan bigotry as possible. I don't imply that he's neutral or objective, but I consider him really careful about the rules of debate and generally gives both sides of any question a chance. I wish we had more (or any) pundits like him in my country. Those claims of being dissappointed and finally seing RD real ugly face sound to me way out of touch. But then again, I'm just a stranger oddly interested in american politics.
Jack is off: "The Obama supporters are a thin-skinned lot, like Obama himself. No humor allowed. Even the most absurd defenses of Obama's behavior and choices are verboten to humor." More nonsense. Obama was quite humorous when he was describing what "they" would be up to - the lines about how he had a funny name and didn't look like all those presidents on all those dollar bills are funny, and his audiences laughed. It's also funy because it's based on reality - Repiglicans have done everything he said they would do, and it will continue. I'm glad he's defanging the idiots and I hope he continues to mock them. It's funny how Republicans think the proper response to the total catastrophe of the Bush years is the election of a guy who has been sucking up to Dumbya for 7 years and who plans to continue 99% of his policies if elected. Now THAT is a massive delusion!
This said, my two cents on the subject are: gee, this Obama supporters should better go get some sense of humour if they want to survive the campaign.
Great post, Ross. If we ignored the truly idiotic things being peddled by the left in support of Barak Obama, we'd just be giving in to the soft bigotry of low expectations. And don't worry about Moe. Some day, he'll thank you.
You have McCain surrogate Sean (Scumbag Punk) Hannity spewing one racially-tinged lie after another and coordinating with the McCain campaign. You have McCain supporters spreading filth on the Internet that would make a Klansman proud. And you have conservative Ben Stein saying that Obama's Berlin speech looked like the Nuremberg rallies. The real paranoia and unbridled hatred is overwhelmingly flowing from the rightwingers. (And I dare you to wade into the sewer of Hannity's blog commenters.) So I think I'll ignore Ross Douthat today, and maybe from now on.
Barak Hussein Obama will loose by a landslide in November to a liberal Republican...its too late folks. Most of you people here need to move right of marx. Socialism won't work in the USA. Just give it up...
Barak Hussein Obama will loose by a landslide in November to a liberal Republican...its too late folks. Most of you people here need to move right of marx. Socialism won't work in the USA. Just give it up...
I'm not sure why you think "drinking the Kool-Aid" corresponds to "Kool-Aid response" but I assume it's due to the basic lack of literacy among so many on the right. Perhaps my understanding of the phrase -- and any other person with a reasonable knowledge of language and cultural history, whatever his or her political persuasion -- is because I can make an obvious inference from a not-very-oblique passing reference to an extremely common meme? I find it funny, though, that you count the ability to make such a simple linguistic move a mark against literacy. The irony is delicious.
Here's a tip for liberals: If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg. The Germany speech was a mistake. Barry's poll numbers are sinking faster than John Kennedy's U-Boat. Instead of castigating someone who points out that Obama's campaign isn't perfect, learn from these mistake. When Obama is elected, can we expect you to continue to excuse his every flip-flop (i.e. Gun control, campaign finance, FISA?) If so, it's going to be an entertaining four years.
As another commenter noted above, by racism, Mr. CP means, of course, "criticism of the Anointed One, whether directed toward his character or his policies." The only acceptable humor is that directed by Obama at Republicans or that expressly approved by the man himself. Let's also not forget, of course, that the most pervasive use of racist tropes (as racism has traditionally been defined) in this campaign thus far came from the (last time I checked, Democratic) Clinton campaign and its surrogates. Apparently for Mr. CP and his ideological compatriots, that's now all water under the bridge, and Sean Hannity is as much a McCain surrogate as Bill was Hillary's.
Jay: The assertion that Obama's poll numbers are dropping is a falsehood. Major new surveys put him ahead by 7 to 9 points. JSD: Learn how to spell. It's not "loose". And BTW, people who disagree with you are not automatically Marxists, although I'm not sure you know what a Marxist is. Stop embarrassing yourself.
If you think that the German rally was creepy, just wait until The One addresses 76,000 screaming teeny boppers, err, true believers in Denver. Can we have a torchlight parade at the end? Yes we can!
Yawn.
There is a simple discounting formula to be applied to these posts and, indeed, to the middlebrow Douthat: Relevance of opinion = 1 - 0.5*(1[voted for GWB in 2004] + 1[voted for GWB in 2000]) where 1[.] : action -> {0,1} Since Ross ain't too good with math, I'll let 2X4 McArdle 'splain it to him.
J. Miller: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/07/gallup-poll-upd.html
Wow, the Obamjaweed is out in force today. All your comment sections are belong to 12-year-olds and complimentary psychoanalyzers. 20-odd posts without a substantive critique, then I gave up. Guess that's why you get paid the big bucks now, Ross. Too bad, your old comment section back at the Scene was kinda fun. And interesting.
@JSD: 1/10 Try harder.
zic yawned. yawn. dampwick - how many good posts have you written? Just curious.
Gordy is curious. Yawn.
If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg.Or like Reagan, who spoke at the other end of the street.
JSD writes: "Barak Hussein Obama will loose by a landslide in November to a liberal Republican...its too late folks. Most of you people here need to move right of marx. Socialism won't work in the USA. Just give it up..." "Loose"? Why can't Republicans learn English? Jay writes: "Instead of castigating someone who points out that Obama's campaign isn't perfect, learn from these mistake." "These mistake"? Why can't Republicans learn English? "Barry's poll numbers are sinking faster than John Kennedy's U-Boat." Kennedy had a PT boat, not a U-Boat. I can well understand how a traitor who hates the troops like Jay does could make that sort of mistake, though. David Warner says: "20-odd posts without a substantive critique, then I gave up." Since you didn't attempt to offer a substantive critique yourself, I'd say you gave up faster than that. The impotence of McCain's supporters is self-evident. But I suppose the problem is that even they don't like him much, and they know he's a broken, senile old goat who has the same shot Bob Dole had in 1996. Which is to say no chance at all.
JSD: http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php Polls all over the place. You cherry pick yours, I'll cherry pick mine. I used to be a Reaganite conservative a long time ago. Commentary, National Review, the whole nine yards. But the racial bigotry I saw in too many of my fellow Republicans, as well as adherence to creationist idiocy, worship of the Confederacy, and just an outright contempt for the poor drove me away. I've never looked back. You gotta let me know, JSD--just how bad do things have to get before conservatives admit that not only do they not know how to govern, but are killing America's future as well? How rotten a president does Bush have to have been before you admit that he doesn't deserve a third term courtesy of McCain? How many things have to go wrong, exactly? How much corruption will be enough? How much more blood has to be spilled in a war that should never have been fought? How much more do we need to go into debt? When the hell will enough be enough?
What a depressing slide from Ralph Waldo Emerson writing perhaps about Henry David Thoreau to Ross Gregory Douthat writing a post called Barack Hitler Obama. There was a time when The Atlantic was a respected publication. That time has long passed.
This was a tasteless post.
There is actually now available in the archive Emerson writing about Thoreau: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/186208/thoreau-emerson and also on the Emancipation Proclamation http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/186211/emerson-proclamation I'm sure he'd be delighted at such racial tolerance on this blog 150ish years later.
And no, I'm not kidding. And that is why right-thinking Democrats and even Obama supporters everywhere should distance themselves from opinions like yours. They are exemplars of the worst kind of shrill, hyperbolic, hateful conniptions that, along with the messianic religious fervor of some of your fellow travelers, really make a lot of people move from stating with regard to many of Obama's followers "I disagree with you" to "You know, you're funny in an unintentional sort of way, but you really are starting to give me the creeps."
If Obama = Hitler
JDS, the issue remains: McCain will extend all of Bush's failed foreign, economic, and social policies. He has caved in to the Religious Right lunatics he used to hold in contempt. He listens to Neocon fanatics that are willing to wage infinite war, just as long as they don't have to do the bleeding. Again, when will it be enough for you? How desperate does this nation's circumstances have to get? Forty per cent--40%--of all the debt accumulated since George Washington has been rung up by Bush and Cheney. Our military is stretched thin, our infrastructure needs massive work, and your government has legalized torture. When will your limit be reached? And yes, I realize that Obama might not win. McCain's lies might just prevail. I'm realistic enough to know that. Of course, since McCain has sold out everything he believes in (including not endorsing his own immigration bill), it's obvious that victory for its own sake is all he wants.
Perlstein showed himself to be a dick in the thread on Yglesias's blog a few months ago, the day before his book appeared in the NY Times Book Review. He refused to acknowledge the possibility that South Vietnam could have survived had we backed their ground forces up with air power when they were invaded in '74-'75, the same way we had successfully done in 1972.
Fred says: "He refused to acknowledge the possibility that South Vietnam could have survived had we backed their ground forces up with air power when they were invaded in '74-'75, the same way we had successfully done in 1972." They probably could have survived for a while. Why would that have been a good thing? Their government was no better than that of North Vietnam from a human rights perspective, and it would have kept the civil war going on and on and on... Oh, I get it. You just wanted to keep an arms market open.
Like 20 comments worth of accusing Ross of trolling his own blog, and not one of them makes a substantive point against what he said, which was perfectly reasonable: Perlstein and others are going off the deep end in their interpretive accusations. How many regular joes have ever even heard of Triumph of the Will, let alone seen it? Still, at least on the crowd thing, it's hard to believe that the admeisters didn't smirkingly know what associations those images would evoke. Maybe Obama set himself up for it by daring to speak to those shifty Germans. But that doesn't add a whole lot of honor to someone who knowingly chooses to hit it out of the park.
Geez - the O! bots here are a bunch of thin-skinned crybabies. For eight years, we had the idiotic screeching of the BOOSH IS TEH HITLER crowd, and the commenters here were nowhere to be found trying to lower the volume on that idiocy. They cheered it on. If that were McCain in Germent before a massive crowd of brainless, enraptured, chanting throngs of Germans with the backdrop of a Prussian war memorial, I'm sure the O!bots here would never - no, NEVER - draw any allusions to Nazi Germany or Hitler. That kind of meaningless hyperbole is just beneath the left, after all.
Geez - the O! bots here are a bunch of thin-skinned crybabies. For eight years, we had the idiotic screeching of the BOOSH IS TEH HITLER crowd, and the commenters here were nowhere to be found trying to lower the volume on that idiocy. They cheered it on. If that were McCain in Germany before a massive crowd of brainless, enraptured, chanting throngs of Germans with the backdrop of a Prussian war memorial, I'm sure the O!bots here would never - no, NEVER - draw any allusions to Nazi Germany or Hitler. That kind of meaningless hyperbole is just beneath the left, after all.
Good Lt types: "massive crowd of brainless, enraptured, chanting throngs of Germans" There you go, folks - yet another example of conservative literacy. A massive crowd of throngs! That one wins the coveted Dumbya award for this episode.
Are you a self-hating German, Ross? Or is it your slave-owning heritage which makes you disdainful of the 'Prussians'? Douthat, Robert William (1840–1925), papers, 1861–1995. 113 items. Mss1D7493a. Douthat family papers, 1795–1922. 1,432 items. Mss1D7495a. Microfilm reels C240–242.
This heritage of course, would have no bearing on who you think is 'presumptuous', or, indeed, 'uppity'.
James has, I think, officially jumped the shark by stretching the ad hominem fallacy to its breaking point. If we are now to be held to the family history of folks who share our last name - who knows if these people are even related - if this is to have a bearing on how we evaluate the substance of a person's argument, James himself should do us all the favor of revealing his own last name so that we can determine whether his family history (or that of another family sharing his last name) gives us any reason to dismiss his argument. In the absence of such evidence, I think the presumption should be for dismissal: Given the universal fallenness of human nature, I think it's almost a certainty that at least one of James' forebears over the past five centuries has committed the crime of rape or participated in (or benefited from) slavery or other forms of economic oppression, which would, of course, undercut anything he has to say about contemporary politics for the same reason that Ross's alleged slave-owning heritage makes him disdainful of Prussians: well, um, just because! Aside from demonstrating a degree of intellectual deficiency that is quite impressive, James's comment is downright creepy: Who on earth goes around looking up the distant family histories of minor conservative pundits? Given the disturbing tendencies suggested by James's obsession with Ross's family history, I think Ross might be wise to consider having a restraining order drafted and ready to file. After all, you never know when creeps like this will make matters really personal.
Um, James, are you actually researching Ross's genealogy? WTF is the point of that? An awful lot of Americans have at least one slave-owning scumbag for an ancestor, myself included. I also don't think it's a very good idea to turn this election into a referendum on whether campaign ads contain subtle racist messages. If you want to criticize Ross, the fact that he has Steve Sailer on his blogroll is probably a bit more relevant than his great-great grandfather's plantation.
Well done Richard, it was meant to be completely unfair. Much like saying how ridiculous that an advert is made to make Obama look like Hitler, then state - but he does look like Hitler. Not sure about the rape, but my ancestry is Irish, so I'm not sure what economic oppression we benefited from.
For eight years, we had the idiotic screeching of the BOOSH IS TEH HITLER Maybe because Bush enacted the same torture policies as the Nazi's? That couldn't have anything to do with it.
For eight years, we had the idiotic screeching of the BOOSH IS TEH HITLER Maybe because Bush enacted the same torture policies as the Nazis? That couldn't have anything to do with it.
Actually, I was curious if Douthat was German - it sounds French but that would be odd in Virginia. It took all of five minutes before I found loads of slave documentation. It's completely unfair and pointless and mean spirited, I agree. Just like Ross's last three posts, linking to and copying from Steve Sailer, being best buds with segregationist Buckley, welfare duchesses etc.
douthat slave owned #3 google result (1/2 this blog) http://ccharity.com/virginia/charlescity1860.htm F. L. Douthat, 29 Successful family
C'mon now, JordanT. Bush enacted Stasi torture policies, not Nazi torture policies. Only a shrill, America-hating librul would compare a fine, freedom-loving role model like Honecker to Hitler.
Wow, I didn't mind this post that much. I didn't take the title seriously, as I took Ross's point to be that massive rallies in Germany in front of the Prussian Victory column are intrinsically more likely to evoke thoughts of Nazis than the particular camera angles of the shot. That seems true, and hardly a slander of Obama.
James, How do you know that the slaveholding Douthat's are even related to Ross? I have an ancestor about seven generations back who was employed by a Muslim king who persecuted Christians, but that doesn't make me particularly sympathetic to Muslim persecution of Christians today. And don't be moronic. Ross didn't say that Obama looks like Hitler. He said that _to the extent that_ Obama looks like Hitler in the ad, it's because he looked like Hitler in the original news footage, since the ad used the original news footage without alteration. How is that the same as saying that Obama "looks like Hitler"?
The ignorance out there is scary...the words Muslim, Patriotism, Arrogance, and Elitist were injected into the race as a fear tactic...there are those who are trying to fear us away from thinking about the dumb war in Iraq, Education, Healthcare, The environment...it's outrageous... http://www.enewsreference.wordpress.com
MoeLarryAndJesus, Your posts are delusional, ignorant, hyperbolic rants. They truly are an embarrassment to the cause of the campaign you claim to support.
The ignorance out there is scary...the words Muslim, Patriotism, Arrogance, and Elitist were injected into the race as a fear tactic...there are those who are trying to fear us away from thinking about the dumb war in Iraq, Education, Healthcare, The environment...it's outrageous... http://www.enewsreference.wordpress.com
C'mon now, JordanT. Bush enacted Stasi torture policies, not Nazi torture policies. Only a shrill, America-hating librul would compare a fine, freedom-loving role model like Honecker to Hitler.
C'mon now, JordanT. Bush enacted Stasi torture policies, not Nazi torture policies. Only a shrill, America-hating librul would compare a fine, freedom-loving role model like Honecker to Hitler.
"it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." It's pretty clear what he said Hector.
Ronny writes: "Your posts are delusional, ignorant, hyperbolic rants. They truly are an embarrassment to the cause of the campaign you claim to support." You and your Bushpig heroes are an embarrassment to the country and the entire human race, Ronny. Have a nice day.
Hector writes: "He said that _to the extent that_ Obama looks like Hitler in the ad, it's because he looked like Hitler in the original news footage, since the ad used the original news footage without alteration." Without alteration? That's certainly not true. The footage was blurred and slowed down, for one thing. I think at one point what was an ordinary wave by Obama was cropped and slowed down to make it look like a Nazi salute. Look at it again, Hector. Tell me I'm wrong. Now these are ordinary tricks in political ads, and I don't think it's all that big of a deal. But let's not shut off our minds and buy into crap like "without alteration."
James, Please read more carefully. There is an "if" in the statement you quoted. It's a conditional statement. In the same vein one might say, "If John McCain did give secret information to the North Vietnamese, it was only because he had been weakened by torture." I doubt that anyone who says that, actually believes that John McCain actually gave them information, but one would use those arguments as a way of showing that the opponent's logic is invalid _even on its own terms_, in that their conclusion does not follow from their premise. Similarly, Ross doesn't really think that Obama is similar to Hitler, he thinks that any perceived or marginal similarities are inherent in the event and not in the Republicans' portrayal of it.
With supporters like this pathetic "MoeLarryAndJesus" character, who needs enemies? I think previous poster was correct; Obama's "Kool-Aid" supporters does a better job of turning voters to McCain than any ad or campaign strategy.
Let your bile and hate continue to flow, O-bots. There's enough leftwing circlejerking on this thread to last through November and beyond. Your boy isn't even rising above the margin of error in polls nationally, and here you are whining about the notion that the same tactics and rhetoric you've spewed incoherently about BOOSH/anybody to the right of Stalin can be applied with equal irony to Barack (no middle name) Obama. He goes to Germany, there are legions of socialist and statist fools waiting there to bask in his presence (like they were for Hitler) and mindlessly chant his name (like they did for Hitler) in unison (as with Hitler) in front of national symbols of power (like Hitler)with the sole intent of creating a spectacle and to 'show the world' the 'support' for this clown (even though he can't crack 50% in the US and can't rise above the margin of error), as well as provide propaganda for his campaign to be used against opponents (like they were designed to do with Hitler) who would suggest that leading a screaming mobs of socialists to "change the world" is not a policy platform - it's rather a fairy tale constructed to further political support for an ambitious leader who wants to make "change" in the world. And the morons were only there because of a rock concert that happened to precede the Obama mass rally...er...foreign policy speech. Now, of course, Obama is not Hitler. But the same "allusions" can be drawn that are drawn to Bush. Obama is using Nazi-style media and propaganda tactics to run his campaign - staging large rallies of blindly devoted statist supporters is something the Nazis used to do. Them's the historical facts - I didn't write 'em. You lefties made that "Any GOP politician I don't like = DER HITLER" bed, now you get to sleep in it. Deal.
McCain is Satan, I'm sure of it.
Observation: Writing a post entitled "Barack Hitler Obama" and letting it sit at the top of your page for a few days is the Internet equivalent of hosting a cock-fight in your backyard.
You and your Bushpig heroes are an embarrassment to the country and the entire human race, Ronny. Have a nice day. Of course, moe doesn't hate. Obama will eat puppies and make baby Jesus cry. I'm sure of that.
Resha types: "I think previous poster was correct; Obama's "Kool-Aid" supporters does a better job of turning voters to McCain than any ad or campaign strategy." Yet more broken English from a conservative! Good Lt types and types and types: "He goes to Germany, there are legions of socialist and statist fools waiting there to bask in his presence (like they were for Hitler) and mindlessly chant his name (like they did for Hitler) in unison (as with Hitler) in front of national symbols of power (like Hitler)with the sole intent of creating a spectacle and to 'show the world' the 'support' for this clown (even though he can't crack 50% in the US and can't rise above the margin of error), as well as provide propaganda for his campaign to be used against opponents (like they were designed to do with Hitler) who would suggest that leading a screaming mobs of socialists to "change the world" is not a policy platform - it's rather a fairy tale constructed to further political support for an ambitious leader who wants to make "change" in the world." Nice sentence structure, sport. But not as classic as your "massive crowd of throngs." Conservatives are the original children left behind.
mishu quotes and writes: "You and your Bushpig heroes are an embarrassment to the country and the entire human race, Ronny. Have a nice day. Of course, moe doesn't hate. Obama will eat puppies and make baby Jesus cry. I'm sure of that." Baby Jesus doesn't exist, chuckles. And I certainly do hate the war criminals who disgraced this country by invading Iraq and making torture an official instrument of US policy. You, on the other hand, voted for them and you want them to remain in power. Am I supposed to admire you for that?
I think Ross's comments and the responses raise an interesting tangental question which deserves some thought. Why does the political culture of the "Information age" resemble the pamphlet based partisanship of earlier times The Barrack-Hitler comparison is laughable but so are the Bush-Hitler comparisons which are played by the other side. George Orwell summed up the way modern political discourse was headed in his essay politics and the english language: Why has political discourse fallen so far?
Is John McCain going to return the $4600 the Hilton's gave to him? Furthermore,, i'm not sure why the hilton's are demanding a refund. if someone i gave money to insutled my daughter on national television for political gains, i'd be pretty pissed.
Is John McCain going to return the $4600 the Hilton's gave to him? Furthermore,, i'm not sure why the hilton's are'nt demanding a refund. if someone i gave money to insutled my daughter on national television for political gains, i'd be pretty pissed.
As a good conservative I'm sure Ross reads other conservative sources, such as the Corner, and is well aware that Obama gets compared to Hitler every time he steps in front of a crowd, or proposes national service, or pretty much says or does anything. (I assume it's just a demonstration of envy, but it is also a profound illustration of their total lack of ideas.)
"...it isn't the GOP's fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg." No, but why would they choose that footage? Is there something crazy about suggesting some kind of motivation for a particular choice of imagery for the ad? Because surely a political ad wouldn't have some sort of intent would it?
Steve V, I read the Corner and other conservative sources occasionally, and I cannot think of what is your justification for claiming "that Obama gets compared to Hitler every time he steps in front of a crowd, or proposes national service, or pretty much says or does anything." In fact, the first remarks I can recall about such a comparison at the Corner started yesterday in response to Perlstein. I'm sure that, with some diligent digging, you or someone else can come up with a list of instances when such comparisons occurred at the Corner or some other mainstream conservative media site, but in my experience it is happening sporadically enough that I have had a hard time coming across instances of something that you claim is happening all the time. Now I will say that quips about the quasi-religious airs assumed by or bestowed upon Obama are regular fodder for the Corner and other (not all of them conservative) sites -- but the Hitler comparison, not so much.
Obama likes these big Nuremberg rallies. So he decided to have a big one in Denver. Not exactly smart to have Parteitag rallies in a culture that is deeply skeptical of Mass Rallies and Personality Cults. Hurrr? In mah 'Murka, that's all we do.
leave barack ALONE! he's human! he's making America the coolerst place. all you people care about is votes! http://londonamerican01.blogspot.com
Sorn says: "The Barrack-Hitler comparison is laughable but so are the Bush-Hitler comparisons which are played by the other side." Really? Bush is a flag-waving fascist who lied this nation into a war of aggression. He instituted torture as an official policy. He's the head of a corrupt party which has overseen the redistribution of wealth upwards at the expense of the middle class. Sounds pretty Hitlerific to me. And he even has the Borrmanesque Cheney by his side. You cite Orwell. Orwell would have recognized Dumbya and the Bushpigs for what they are, and he would have been disgusted by them.
Moe, Undoubtedly Bush's policies have been harmfull to American interests in many respects. However he was duly elected and will leave office when his term is up. The Hitler comparison doesn't hold water. George W. Bush isn't responsible for the Murder of Millons of people. He is at best out of his depth and at worst too committed to the neoconservative agenda. Not Hitler by any stretch.
Sorn replies: "Undoubtedly Bush's policies have been harmfull to American interests in many respects. However he was duly elected and will leave office when his term is up. The Hitler comparison doesn't hold water." You don't need full similarity in order to point out certain similarities, Sorn. Your argument makes no sense. Hitler and Bush differ, but to my mind it's a difference of degree, not of kind. By the way, Bush wasn't just "harmful to American interests." If that's really all you care about then I suspect you're part of the problem. Bush has been harmful to HUMAN interests. He's a war criminal, guilty of crimes against humanity. That's a phrase that used to mean something to Americans and still should, though it seems to mean nothing to Repiglicans.
Mr. Moe. This is where we differ. To compare a despot with an elected representative is to compare apples and oranges. War Criminal? War is a killing business unfortunately. I know I served my country. In reply to your other statement about human interests A presidents job is to advance the national interest of his country not his own agenda.
Sorn writes: "War Criminal? War is a killing business unfortunately. I know I served my country. In reply to your other statement about human interests A presidents job is to advance the national interest of his country not his own agenda." He's a war criminal because he waged an unnecessary war of aggression and then used torture quite deliberately. After WW2 many Germans were tried and convicted for such crimes. Your response seems robotic and inhuman to me - as though you would happily shake Rusty Calley's hand because he, too, "served his country."
If Bush is a war criminal then what does that say about the state of political discourse in this country? War by its nature is a business that often asks people to do horrible things in its prosecution. I am not justifying such practices, however if you had served perhaps you would be less likely to judge. I dislike Bush, because I feel that the country wou;ld be in a better place if John McCain had been elected in 2000. Just as now I feel that Obama is the better man for the job. I also dislike militant orthodoxy of any stripe. So your Repiglicans comments and your assumption that Bush=Facism is just as repellent to me as the stupidity of Rush Limbaugh. In Fact you are cut from the same mold you just hate different things. It's a difference of degree Moe not of Kind.
Moe Have you seen fog of war? Are you aware of the fire bombing of dresden? Tokyo? The Masacre in the Katyn Forest? the Term War Criminal is often a mere justification for prosecuting the loser of a war. War makes all men criminals. That is what I meant by if you had dones some time in uniform maybe you would know that. Torture is a slippery slope. Agreed that it shouldn't be used, however if you don't like it change the law. Write your congressman. Abuses happen thankfully we have the means to change them if we want to. If my goverment sanctions the use of teror that means that as an American I am equally culpable because in this country we elect our officials. If we sucumb to biogotry and hatred then we are no better than our enemies. As for Rusty Calley read the Newsweek Article about him written in 1971. He is an interesting psyhological portrait more complex than you would think.
Wow, Ross, you're on the same page as Pam Atlas on this. Congratulations.
Let's see ... well, it isn't the Corner but I recall Geraghty had two Hitler comparisons in one day, including a post entitled "Obama Youth?" referring to Obama's national service proposal. I recall howls of "Nuremburg!" coming from various quarters of the right blogosphere when it was announced he'd be speaking in Germany (not to mention the announcement of the Dem Convention speech), accusations of cozying up to Nazi iconography in connection with the victory column, and on and on (uneasy mutterings of fear of charismatic leaders, e.g.). NRO, Weekly Standard, random righty newspaper columnists and of course the online nutjobs have all dabbled in it, I'm quite sure. It makes sense; the right has been involing 1938 in knee jerk fashion for years and they're transferring to a new alternative meme from the usual "Chamberlain!"
Notice how the lefties howl in crocodile indignation? That happens every time something identifies their irrational emotional core. You know you have hit home when they howl so loud. Keep it up. It keeps them even more unbalanced than they already are and its fun to watch.
Time - Verbatim - For the week of Feb. 28 - Mar. 6, 2005 There's nothing exotic or complicated about how phenoms are made in Washington, and, more to the point, how they are broken.
John McCain on "60 Minutes" in 1997: "I am a war criminal; I bombed innocent women and children." Let him put that in his ads.
|
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
When did you morph into a theoconservative Gawker wannabe? Tone down the snark.
Posted by Dave | July 31, 2008 2:24 PM