All Quotes are Not Alike

[posted by Callimachus]

The only Muslim serving in the U.S. Congress stirred up some controversy in this newspaper graph:

On comparing Sept. 11 to the burning of the Reichstag building in Nazi Germany: "It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it and it put the leader of that country [Hitler] in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted. The fact is that I'm not saying [Sept. 11] was a [U.S.] plan, or anything like that because, you know, that's how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you."

People are tearing into each other over what exactly he meant by that. Whether he's "not saying X because, though I believe X, if I say it they'll call me a nut," or "I'm talking about the similarities between the effects of two events, but not saying their origins were at all alike, and I want to make that distinction clear here."

But what I really want to know is the context of this comment. Did Ellison bring this up on his own? Or was he answering a question from the audience? (The story has alluded to the presence of at least one "Truther" in the crowd.) That makes all the difference to me in how I perceive the quote. Is he going there on his own? Or did some kook start out there, and is he, as a public servant duty-bound to answer the question, doing so while trying to keep his distance?

And this, typically, is something the reporting fails to tell me.

Just Misunderstood

[posted by Callimachus]

No, no, no, the Hollywood left doesn't say Bush is as bad as Hitler. Don't you dare accuse them of that. They say he's worse.

You could argue that even the world's worst fascist dictators at least meant well. They honestly thought were doing good things for their countries by suppressing blacks/eliminating Jews/eradicating free enterprise/repressing individual thought/killing off rivals/invading neighbors, etc. Only the Saudi royal family is driven by the same motives as Bush, but they were already entrenched. Bush set a new precedent. He came into office with the attitude of "I'm so tired of the public good. What about my good? What about my rich friends' good?"

How can anyone not see it? It's not that their policies have been misguided or haven't played out right. They. Don't. Even. Mean. Well.

Of course it doesn't help Bush's case when someone attempts a push-back against this nonsense and of the two examples that come to mind, one is the "stated dream of a manned mission to Mars." Hell, Hitler could have dreamed that, too.

This all reminds me of the sort of thing that was said, and believed, about Reagan back in my youth. And, I have read, about FDR in his day.

Somehow it's so easy to lose sight of the fact that we all broadly agree on the challenges that face us as a nation, and the goals we have of peace and security and protections of freedom and rights here and around the world. We disagree sharply on the tactics or the best paths to get there.

Avert Your Eyes

[posted by Callimachus]

Every now and then while surfing through a site like Memorandum I get suckered into clicking on one of the big Democratic/left bloggers. Usually it's with some sense of impending horror, as in this post, which I read to learn whether the supremely important Matthew Yglesias really couldn't get the name of Iran's president right. Apparently, he couldn't. [But after all, all those other world leaders don't really matter. The only thing that matters is Bush.]

And when I read them, I usually compound the error by reading the comments. That's where I learn about the people who have a much, much more coherent and informed view of the realities of the modern world than us war criminal neo-cons.

And here I meet comments such as these:

What are Ahmadinejad's politics, Petey?

I kinda seem him as the rock that broke the nose of the most idiotic leader our country has had. ...

----

My feeling is that anyone being smeared by the morons who got us into Afghanistan and Iraq can't be all that bad...

----

Kinda reminds me of Bush and the rest of the planet right now. Every black eye and blow we receive is cheered by quite a few people. I can't say as I look back any of the bullies I remember from the past ever turned out OK. Sociopaths are a pretty tough group to cure of their pathologies.

----

Bush looked a lot crazier and scarier than Ahmadinejad. The guy just doesn't come across as the scary lunatic the neocons are trying to portray him as.

I agree that Chavez has an entertaining style. Speaking at the UN, he dramatically said that "el diablo" had been at the lecturn the day before, crossed himself, then said he could still smell the sulphur. It was hilarious. Also, I read an article about him a while back in the Atlantic. If I remember correctly, it was mentioned that Chavez sometimes refers to Bush as the devil, but usually just calls him shithead.

----

Bush is the devil and he dresses like shite. There, I said it. I'd much rather have Chavez or even Ama-whatsit running this country. Look at the profile of the U.S. since Bush took over- down, down, down. Look at the profiles of Iran & Venezuela- all up arrows.

Any questions?

----

No "Rite Wankers" allowed. This was a light-hearted post about the leader of Iran, not some kind of political screed. So what, the guy looks cool, and at least he represents his country well. Our "president" makes us look like a bunch of buffoons, um, because he IS a buffoon.

Maybe we can get a real leader next time that could be seen in the same hallway with Kofi Annan and not look like a retard.

Chavez wiped the floor of the UN with Bush. It's a fact.

Next!

At this point a disapproving link from Instapundit came in and, as someone posted, had the effect of lifting a rock and letting the sun shine on what was going on under it.

People seem to forget that if someone wants to kill you, just maybe you might have done something to piss them off a little bit? Maybe you should figure out what that thing is, and I don't know, stop doing it? Or maybe rather than arming yourself to the teeth and killing everyone in your path in "self defense", you should sit down with this guy, and ask, "Why are you so mad at me?" It's called diplomacy, and it's a word that most righties seem to have forgotten the meaning, or existence of.

Also, apparently being witty, charming and well-dressed gets you respect and approval on the world stage. Bush should try it. I've certainly learned that being stupid, looking like a monkey and pissing the whole world off just gets you a boat load of trouble.

----

So are you saying that looking like a monkey is an advantage? I think not. Imagine sitting across the table from this guy as another world leader, as Bush bumbles, fumbles, mumles and stumbles. It would be a joke! Chavez is only pointing out the obvious, and it looks like it finally took a non-American to have the balls to say it. Many in this country have certainly been on the case since even before the "election" of '00, but when Hugo Chavez talks, people listen. When our president talks, people protect their dictionaries' ears.

I'm ashamed to say it, but the emperor was shown to be clothes-free yesterday at the U.N. If Chavez has the guts, and humor, to inform the world, then more power to him. If Amadinijad feels threatened by the U.S., who wouldn't? If you lived in Iran you'd be calling for nukes just to protect you from America. Unfortunately we citizens of America have nothing to protect us.

Democrats in '08, that's all I can say. For our sake.

----

I'm not saying that Bush is Hitler, I'm just saying he has certain, shall we say, Hitler-like qualities I could do without. Kind of like the difference between eating a can of straight anchovies and having an anchovy pizza. Now the pizza isn't anchovies, but it does have a certain unmistakable anchovy aftertaste...

But please, do go on Bush men (and ladies, but I have a feeling there are no ladies here). You amuse me.

----

If Venezuela and Iran can have shrewd, savvy presidents, why can't we?

----

Instapundit readers: You are all a bunch of stupid pussies. George Bush has been raping you up the ass for 5 years, while Glenn Reynolds has been egging him on. He's like your pimp, except when the john slaps you around, unlike a real pimp he doesn't do anything, just counts his money.