Memo to Vatican Priests: Criticism of the Catholic Church for Sexual Abuse Charges is not Tantamount to the Persecution of Jews

I spent the entire time I was reading this article trying to figure out how, exactly, it was being interpreted that the criticism the Catholic Church is getting for a slew of new molestation cases is comparable in any way to the violent persecution of Jews. I couldn't find anything that answered that question.

Here's a request of all people in positions of power: please stop comparing things to the persecution of Jews, the Holocaust, and Hitler. The unfathomable atrocities of the past should be constantly remembered and the gravest of human transgressions should always be reflected upon and never be allowed to happen again. But comparing those atrocities with things like flak for sexual abuse allegations, health care reform bills, and political tactics not only detracts from your case for why you're right or why you're a victim, it also diminishes the barbarity, gravity, and enormity of those events.

Thanks.

Are You a Sensible Person and Oppose Obama's Healthcare Plan? Sorry

Congressman Frank Kratovil (D-MD) hung in effigy (DailyKos)

Given all of the hullabaloo going on about the health care town hall debates (and the ensuing mainstream media soap boxes being handed to crazy healthcare protestors), I thought to myself, what do you do if you're a sensible person who opposes healthcare because of the facts contained in the bill and not because of some irrational, made-up fear of euthanizing people once they get their AARP brochures?

The behavior of some of the members of the Republican Party the past couple of days has been pretty discouraging. I discussed last week Rush Limbaugh comparing the Obama administration to Hitler's Germany, as well as Palin's thinly veiled eugenics comparison and your run-of-the-mill town hall protestors likening Obama to one of history's most evil villains. But these folks have gone beyond the Hitler comparisons (that was soooo last week) and have moved to straight up racism. While those looking to harass Rep. David Scott (D-Georgia) started out with the played-out swastika graffiti, they really stepped it up with their correspondence:

I think Claire McCaskill may have missed the boat on that one.

But mere words, unlike sticks and stones, do relatively little damage to a person. Some town hall protestors have taken to packing heat when getting emotional and angry about America's inevitable plunge into socialism, then communism, then making a roundabout to fascism and killing everyone over 55. Take William Kostric, who openly displayed his piece outside of Obama's town hall in Portsmouth, NH (and then subsequently got an interview on mass media outlets to talk about healthcare). Another protestor in Arizona dropped his gun at a town hall (did we learn nothing about sweatpants and firearms from Plaxico?).

But it's not just the protestors who are a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Clearly there's Sarah Palin, who (through her new medium - Facebook) called Obama's health plan something akin to eugenics with "death panels." There's the Investor's Business Daily editorial stating that British citizen and resident Stephen Hawking would not have a chance to flourish because of his ALS (despite the fact that Hawking has lived and flourished under Britain's socialized healthcare system). And then there is Senator Chuck Grassley, who after being praised by Obama, went back to his state of Iowa and told a crowd there that the government's plan can determine whether or not to "pull the plug on grandma."

So what do you do if you're a reasonable fellow who disagrees with Obama's plan to introduce a government option, but don't necessarily want to paint Hitler mustaches on our President's likeness, carry a loaded gun to town halls, ignore what's in the bill and argue on made-up death panels, or call black politicians "niggas"? You're certainly not going to be given airtime on one of the networks or cable news stations, because you're not incendiary or loud enough to draw in viewers. As soon as you tell someone you disagree with Obama's healthcare proposal one of the first things that comes to mind (if you follow the news) is swastikas and loaded guns. It's sad that the actions of a few have smeared the reputation of the many (like Islamic extremists casting a dark shadow over Islam), but unfortunately it seems like in this era of mass media ratings and toeing the line between controversial and pulling-all-of-our-advertising controversial, the most outrageous and ridiculous voices get heard while the reasonable or well-grounded are labeled boring and unworthy of debate. Maybe the Republicans can go with Nixon's silent majority scheme - internally.

Palin Jumps on the Nazi Comparison Bandwagon

On Friday I discussed Godwin's law and its applicability to politics. Now a "frontrunner" for the 2012 Republican nomination has compared Obama's administration to the Third Reich, albeit slightly more subtly than Rush Limbaugh did last week. Harking back to the pseudo-science of eugenics (a tenet synonomous with the Third Reich), Sarah Palin stated that she fears losing her parents and her son under Obama's healthcare plan that would supposedly weed out the less "productive" of society.

What she said was extreme, considering she essentially accused Obama of wanting to set up a "death panel" to decide who gets health coverage based on their perceived value and productivity to society. What Palin stated, in other words, is that Obama wants to re-establish the practice of state-supported eugenics in this country by denying those who this imaginary "death panel" deems unworthy of medical coverage. I like to think that this country has come a long way from Buck v. Bell; there is no evidence of a desire by the Obama administration to set up a death panel to withhold health coverage based on subjective predicted productivity in society.

But Palin struck a different tone in a later Facebook post, saying that

"we must stick to a discussion of the issues and not get sidetracked by tactics that can be accused of leading to intimidation or harassment. Such tactics diminish our nation’s civil discourse which we need now more than ever because the fine print in this outrageous health care proposal must be understood clearly and not get lost in conscientious voters’ passion to want to make elected officials hear what we are saying. Let’s not give the proponents of nationalized health care any reason to criticize us."

So first Palin fans the flames of extremism by claiming that the Obama administration will practice Nazi-era eugenics through a death panel, then calls for civility in the health care debate? Hypocrisy at its finest. There were two contradictory posts on her Facebook, one original post and another, cover-your-ass kind of post. I wonder which one was sincere. Peace.

Photos - Sarah Palin (Examiner)

Comparisons to Nazism: Never Called For

Godwin's law states that as an internet discussion becomes longer, the likelihood of someone using Nazism or Hitler as an analogy increases. Unfortunately, this law also applies to political discussions that are supposed to be productive and informative (but are actually counter-productive and mind numbing). Take, for example, the healthcare debate.

Now I know very little when it comes to the nitty gritty of the healthcare argument, other than the following: Obama and a large number of Democrats are suggesting a public option for healthcare coverage that would compete with private sector healthcare and (hopefully) spurn price reductions in the spirit of capitalist competitiveness. Republicans and a small number of Democrats fear that this public option will eventually put the private options out of business and we will all be forced to seek health insurance from the government. That's what I proclaim to know; but this post is not about healthcare coverage.

It's more about the inanity being portrayed from certain people in the debate. It seems that some people think that Obama's charisma and ability to speak to the American people equate him with one of the world's worst people ever, namely Adolf Hitler. Rush Limbaugh, who just last week was praised by House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), said that "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate."

Additionally, people at these "town hall debates" about healthcare also seem to be jumping on the Nazi bandwagon. Take, for example, the following pictures from one of these debates in Denver:The young man with his arm up is a 16 year old wearing a shirt saying, "Hitler Gave Great Speeches Too." The lower picture is pretty self-explanatory. Of course, we saw this type of immature/hateful behavior with anti-Bush folks, too. I'm sure that people think Obama is doing horrible things, and it's pretty evident that Bush did some horrible things, but Nazism? Not even close. To invoke the Third Reich detracts from one's argument and shows one's inability/hesitancy to discuss the real issues and argue their merits rather than resort to name calling.

And the overall irony of this is stunning; why would Obama model his policies after someone who, had Obama lived in Germany during his reign, have sent him to the crematorium because of his race? Is Obama's plan to wipe out an entire race in America, take over Canada and Mexico, and eventually rule the world? Hardly. It is highly offensive to compare someone to Hitler; let's not forget what Hitler did. I'd like those who compare anyone to Hitler to sit through hours of archived video and photos and listen to the stories of Holocaust survivors. Then we'll see how quick they are to compare someone to such evil incarnate. Peace.

Photos - Rush Limbaugh (Salon), Protesters invoking hateful symbols of the Third Reich (Huffington Post)

Bush Takes Subliminal Shot at Democrats, Further Hones his Hypocrisy

As this country's blind loyalty to Israel continues, George W. Bush aired out some of America's political dirty laundry in front of a foreign nation and the backlash has been severe (and warranted). In a Knesset speech on May 15, 2008 Bush compared the policies of "some" in American politics who have stated that we should open up diplomatic relations with nations like Iran or territories like Palestine to those involved with Nazi appeasement in the late 1930s and early 1940s. It was then later acknowledged by White House staffers that these comments were directed at prominent American figures like Barack Obama and former President Jimmy Carter. Obama has been vocal about his support to sit down and open up diplomatic relations with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Carter has pushed for negotiations with Hamas. President Bush has said that no "ingenious argument" will cause the violent tendencies of these groups to cease. Of course, this is coming from a president who doesn't even try diplomacy and has plunged this country into a five year war in Iraq that has undoubtedly destabilized a massive region of the Middle East. On the other side of Bush's argument is a president who put his ass on the line to reach the Camp David Accords with Middle Eastern countries without having to fire a shot, but Bush does not like, as we were told do to in kindergarten, to "use his words."

The facts are clear: Ahmadinejad is nuts. Hamas seems pretty determined to get rid of Israel. One link is missing here, however. Bush continues to alienate these factions by refusing to talk with them and instead using the neo-conservative rhetoric of preemptive military action (thanks Wolfowitz) instead of using good old-fashioned diplomacy. It could be that diplomacy will not work, but how will we ever know if we do not try? Sure, GE and Northrup-Grumman won't be getting multi-billion dollar government contracts for defense spending, but thousands of lives could be saved and maybe the rest of the world won't look at America as an arrogant, war-mongering country.

Beyond the politics of everything, however, lays a deeper layer of hypocrisy. To begin with, George W. Bush appears to be a born-again Christian. Christians, for the most part, believe that those who do not seek salvation in Jesus Christ and take him as their savior as mortals here on Earth will perish in the depths of hell for eternity. Thus, as Bush was speaking to a group of Israelis - the majority of whom were probably Jewish - his beliefs and faith dictated that they were all going to hell for not recognizing that Jesus was the son of God and salvation is found in undying devotion and faith in him. I do not see myself as a Christian scholar at all, but from going to church as a kid (where the teachers specifically told my brother that his Jewish friends were going to hell when he asked about them) and from reading parts of the Bible, this is what I have gleaned.

Then there is the Prescott Bush connection. Bush, of course, is father to George H. W. Bush and grandfather to George W. Bush. Prescott Bush was a major businessman and American senator in the first part of the 20th century in America. Prescott Bush also was linked to numerous German companies who both financed Hitler's rise to power and the rearming of the German state (in direct defiance of the Treaty of Versailles), as well as benefited from Nazi slave labor at the beginning of World War II. It was at this point that the U.S. government stepped in and seized the assets under the Trading with the Enemy Act, established during the Great War. In addition to all of this, Bush was involved in a plot to overthrow Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933 and establish a fascist state in America based on Hitler's and Mussolini's model in order to combat the Great Depression. So while Obama and Carter may want to sit down and talk with leaders like Ahmadinejad and groups like Hamas, they still oppose what they do and are not supporting them - financially or otherwise - like George W. Bush's own grandfather did with Hitler's Nazism. I understand that you cannot choose your family, but if Bush wants to compare Obama to Hitler appeasers, then he should at least condemn his grandfather's actions prior to (and during) World War II.

Thus, despite George W. Bush's pledge to keep himself out of the 2008 presidential race, he has thrust himself into it. While McCain did not compare Obama to the Western powers that appeased Hitler prior to World War II (the American government being one of them), he did say that Obama was "naive" and "inexperienced" because he wanted to try out diplomacy before, in McCain's own songful words, "bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb[ing] Iran" if necessary. Beyond the complete idiocy and divisiveness of Bush's words, it is completely inappropriate to put down another member of the American government in front of a foreign gathering for political purposes. This is one of the reasons that people think Americans have little class, as Bush appears to be just like school in the summertime (no class). I think in the end, this might hurt the Republicans because it is very extreme to invoke Hitler into modern day politics in any light. To compare one of the more liberal presidential candidates in a long time to one who would appease Hitler is out there and really does not make sense. But Bush is not exactly one to follow that fickle law of "logic." Peace.

Photos - Bush before Israel's Knesset on May 15 (www.bloomberg.com), Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran (www.msnbc.msn.com), Prescott Bush and George W. Bush (www.tsl.state.tx.us)