Organizations dedicated to opposing anti-semitism, as well as our national media elite, expressed immediate and sustained outrage when an anonymous blogger posted a Bush = Hitler comparison on Move-On.org's website in 2004. However, the same cast of characters remained virtually silent this week when Rush Limbaugh provided a detailed - and genuinely ignorant - comparison of Obama to Hitler and the Nazis.
Let me get this straight. An anonymous blogger posts a Bush - Hitler comparison on a liberal website and there are calls for blood in the street. But Rush Limbaugh tells his fifteen million listeners that Obama is just like Hitler and . . . virtually no response from the very same players . . .
That's what I call "Thundering Silence!
In response to an inquiry by Glen Greenwald regarding their non-response, the American Jewish Congress responded as follows:
"The Limbaugh comments comparing Obama ( and Pelosi )to Hitler and the Nazis are grossly offensive and intolerable. They reflect a nasty and hyperbolic tendency on our political culture, one which makes reasoned discourse impossible, confuses disagreement with evil, and which makes it impossible to distinguish evil from ordinary politics. . . . It behooves all participants in the political process to unequivocally disavow the comparison and to make it plain that peddlers of such noxious comparison have no place in our politics, no matter how large their audiences. And all Americans should make plain their disgust at the comparisons by talk show hosts by a prompt use of the off button.
Better late than never, but the fact that this response had to be prompted by a direct inquiry from a prominent blogger tells you something about these organizations, and about our supposedly "liberal" media elites.
However, I'm most interested in the emboldened text. I agree with it wholeheartedly and think these tendencies are growing at an alarming rate. But I have no idea how to combat them. I have been accused of being evil, based on arguments I have advanced. And the people that I have talked to that have this mentality appear to be incorrigibly dedicated to their perspective.
I believe this perspective arises from a witch's brew of inflexible certitude, a sense of entitlement to govern, and a loss of political power. But understanding a phenomenon's causes is one thing - coming up with a strategy to reverse it is another.
When I look at the so called "tea bagger" disruptions to the Town Hall meetings on health care reform, I see precisely these sentiments in play. Note, I don't object to the opponents of Obama's health care policies voicing their opinions or organizing protests. But that's not what these people are doing. They appear to be so certain that they are right - based on what, I don't know - and so certain that their opponents are evil, not just wrong, but evil, that they are working to close down any discussion of health care reform.
On one of the clips of these "town hell" meetings, I heard one of the protesters shout, without any sense of irony, "this is America!"
News flash - shutting down discussion by disruption is not the American way. It is sort of . . . oh, I don't know . . . what's the word . . . fascist!
Damn! I'm now part of the problem!
Any thoughts on how we fix all this?
Joe H.
Posts
The Years Of Writing Dangerously
9 years ago
4 comments:
It's so ironic that liberals are now complaining about this type of behavior when it stifles speech; where was their outrage and condemnation when conservative speakers were and are routinely threatened and shouted down on university campuses? As far as the Bush = Hitler thing, that's so tame compared to what so many on the left said out of hatred, spite and ignorance in speaking about the former president. You go back and review the media coverage Bush received from the very beginning and you'll see the hatred, disdain and disgust clearly reflected - not against his policies, but against him personally. What Bush received at the hands of the media, entertainment and the left is so much more than what Clinton experienced when he couldn't keep it in his pants. But one has to respect Clinton for his political skill and his accomplishments and for holding the office of president, regardless of how low his character and personal life issues were. There indeed is a double standard, but it's not just one-sided - the liberal elite is just as guilty as the right-wing hacks.
Anonymous,
You seem to think that you can taint all liberals with the hypocricy of some.
I don't speak for liberals in general. I speak for myself. I don't think anyone whould be shouted down, liberal, conservative, or radical. I think there should be discussion, and then more discussion, and then more discussion - hopefully informed by reflection and evidence. I was never in favor of campus liberals shouting down conservatives - although I think that is a lot rarer than you seem think.
I don't think all conservatives endorse shouting down congressional representatives. That's why I didn't mention conservatives, in general or as a group. I merely commented on what some of them were doing.
I don't agree with your assessments of the Press coverage the various presidents received, but defending my view would require a lot of data, the sort of which I don't have time to accumulate. What I do know is what I wrote. It is a specific example of an extreme media bias - and it is troubling.
Joe
"I don't agree with your assessments of the Press coverage the various presidents received, but defending my view would require a lot of data, the sort of which I don't have time to accumulate."
You're serious - right? You really believe that the media is not biased in favor of liberal, democratic-party presidents? That's funny, considering that 95% of media, news and institutions of higher learning are democrats or very liberal or extremely left on the political spectrum. Of course, that's not a problem since all of those folks are surely objective as they go about their business - right? Maybe they and you should reread your post on bias :).
Anonmyous,
No, I don't believe that the press has a liberal bias. I think the press used to have a liberal bias, but that bias is long gone. The press has an elite concensus bias.
If you doubt this, just look at the history of the coverage in the run up to the Iraq war.
I think Stephen Cobert got it exactly right when he was the keynote speaker for the press correspondence dinner a few years ago. Look it up on you-tube if you're interested.
Joe
Post a Comment