Political Cartoons You wish to share

This one is sure to generate controversy note the Obama emblem behind the swastika:



Poker

pokermind wrote:This one is sure to generate controversy note the Obama emblem behind the swastika:

Just when you thought the american right wing couldn't get more stupid....

The E wrote:

pokermind wrote:This one is sure to generate controversy note the Obama emblem behind the swastika:

Just when you thought the american right wing couldn't get more stupid....

Any more stupid than the American Flag with Obama's symbol or his photo in the blue field? Any more stupid than the American Flag with rainbow stripes? Both Right and Left attack symbols of the other side. Remember this one:



Poker

The E wrote:

pokermind wrote:This one is sure to generate controversy note the Obama emblem behind the swastika:

Just when you thought the american right wing couldn't get more stupid....

Right wing or not it is a good cautionary statement. At the rise of Hitler the German people did see him as a positive and did believe that he brought hope and did believe that he would bring positive change. Now we tend to look back with 20/20 hindsight but at the time his veneer of charisma/optimism/vision etc did an exceptionally good job of hiding his inner evil. The info on what an evil person he was was there, it just took a little digging to find. But very few did so (Winston Churchill was a notable exception). Little has changed.

Little has changed. In Obama's case a significant number of Obama supporters were caught up in the glamour and supported "hope and change" without paying enough attention to what change. And many were so caught up in the first Black president that they didn't consider what type of a president he would be. (Note just to clarify, no one on this subforum falls into these groups, we ALL pay attention and those on this subforum who do support Obama do so because they like his policies not because of the glamour). Many low information glamour voters were deeply disappointed by the real man.

We'll see if this election is different. I doubt it. There still will be a significant number of supporters of the new president who are low information voters supporting him/her for the wrong reasons. We as a society still haven't truly learned the lesson from Hitler's rise.

And I suspect many/most of the other democracies around the world struggle with the same problem.

biochem wrote:Little has changed. In Obama's case a significant number of Obama supporters were caught up in the glamour and supported "hope and change" without paying enough attention to what change. And many were so caught up in the first Black president that they didn't consider what type of a president he would be. (Note just to clarify, no one on this subforum falls into these groups, we ALL pay attention and those on this subforum who do support Obama do so because they like his policies not because of the glamour). Many low information glamour voters were deeply disappointed by the real man.

We'll see if this election is different. I doubt it. There still will be a significant number of supporters of the new president who are low information voters supporting him/her for the wrong reasons. We as a society still haven't truly learned the lesson from Hitler's rise.

And I suspect many/most of the other democracies around the world struggle with the same problem.

Okay. So I guess now's the time for me to explain to you why comparing Obama to Hitler is really stupid and actually more than a bit offensive to people like me, who were born in Germany, were educated in Germany, and who have more than a passing interest in the hows and whys of Hitler's rise to power.

You see, unlike Hitler, Obama never campaigned on the basis of "the system has failed and has to be replaced completely".
Unlike Hitler, Obama never tried to change the way US politics works.
Unlike Hitler, Obama never instituted policies to systematically kill a small and historically maligned group of people.

At his worst, Obama was a disappointment. Hitler, by contrast, became a benchmark for evil.
You can disagree with Obama's policies, his reasoning for those policies, his haircut, his choice of lawn ornament, whatever petty crap you like. But being disagreeable doesn't make him, or the democrat party, or "Liberals" in general modern reincarnations of Hitler and the NSDAP. By equating the two, you elevate your petty disagreements into a holy war that has to be fought for the good of your culture, and you diminish one of the few examples of a regime that has to be destroyed for the good of the world.

Finally, if you wish to equate your political opposition to the Nazis, you also have to prove that your side isn't Stalin.

OK E name the president of the United States who signed an executive order that the President could order the killing of American Citizens without due process of law? The jailing of citizens without trial? Not exactly a tasteless lawn ornament IMHO a clear violation of the constitution and his oath of office to support it. Stalin had a higher death toll, but then he was in power 30 years, and Hitler only a little over a dozen.

Poker

pokermind wrote:OK E name the president of the United States who signed an executive order that the President could order the killing of American Citizens without due process of law? The jailing of citizens without trial? Not exactly a tasteless lawn ornament IMHO a clear violation of the constitution and his oath of office to support it. Stalin had a higher death toll, but then he was in power 30 years, and Hitler only a little over a dozen.

Poker

But unlike the Weimar Republic, your judicial and electoral systems are still intact and can be used to rectify these things.

In short, everything Obama has done can be repealed, amended and fixed. He didn't break the system beyond any hopes of recovery, as Hitler set out to do.

He also didn't annex other states, declare certain groups of people criminal by default, didn't order the construction of death camps, didn't outlaw his opposition, didn't drag your country into a fight it couldn't possibly win (if only because you're already fighting two of those). He may be a bad president, but he isn't Hitler and the Democrats aren't the NSDAP.

One other thing: When I said that if you want to portrait your opposition as Hitler, you need to prove that you're not Stalin, I wasn't referring to death counts, or time in office. It merely means that if you want to demonize the others and paint them as people who cannot be allowed to come into or remain in power, you have to prove that you're actually better. You conservatives are just as happy to violate the constitution if it fits your personal biases (Separation of Church and State, for example, is something you seem to have trouble with).

The parallels are much closer than you are willing to accept.

He used the IRS against political enemies to restrict their ability to mount political resistance.

His support of planned parenthood has resulted black babies being targeted, killed and their body parts sold for remuneration. Planned Parenthood abortion clinics are disproportionately located in inner city minority communities. Margret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, believed in eugenics and had ties to Hitler's prewar Germany. With this agency minorities have been targeted and killed.

Obama's pledge was to fundamentally transform America. Much as Hitler promised.

He has encouraged his Attorney General's office to foster unrest in the inner cities. The increased unrest resulted in higher murder rates and violent crime across the country's inner cities. Instead of quelling the orchestrated unrest out of Ferguson, MO, he has fanned those flames. That entire episode was built on a lie that the White House never tired to seriously expose as a lie. Reports indicated that the sources for the tweets encouraging violence in Ferguson came from about 40 accounts outside of the city. This is not necessarily related to the White House, but it does suggest orchestration.

So, no Obama is not pure evil. Yet, he doesn't need to be. All Evil needs to prosper is for good men to do nothing or in this case an ambitious man to ignore small evils. Telling us to ignore the smaller evils that parallel Hitler because it does not rise to Hitler's level will simply lead to greater evil.....perhaps eventually to another actual Hitler figure.

The E wrote:

pokermind wrote:OK E name the president of the United States who signed an executive order that the President could order the killing of American Citizens without due process of law? The jailing of citizens without trial? Not exactly a tasteless lawn ornament IMHO a clear violation of the constitution and his oath of office to support it. Stalin had a higher death toll, but then he was in power 30 years, and Hitler only a little over a dozen.

Poker

But unlike the Weimar Republic, your judicial and electoral systems are still intact and can be used to rectify these things.

In short, everything Obama has done can be repealed, amended and fixed. He didn't break the system beyond any hopes of recovery, as Hitler set out to do.

He also didn't annex other states, declare certain groups of people criminal by default, didn't order the construction of death camps, didn't outlaw his opposition, didn't drag your country into a fight it couldn't possibly win (if only because you're already fighting two of those). He may be a bad president, but he isn't Hitler and the Democrats aren't the NSDAP.

One other thing: When I said that if you want to portrait your opposition as Hitler, you need to prove that you're not Stalin, I wasn't referring to death counts, or time in office. It merely means that if you want to demonize the others and paint them as people who cannot be allowed to come into or remain in power, you have to prove that you're actually better. You conservatives are just as happy to violate the constitution if it fits your personal biases (Separation of Church and State, for example, is something you seem to have trouble with).

The E wrote:

biochem wrote:Little has changed. In Obama's case a significant number of Obama supporters were caught up in the glamour and supported "hope and change" without paying enough attention to what change. And many were so caught up in the first Black president that they didn't consider what type of a president he would be. (Note just to clarify, no one on this subforum falls into these groups, we ALL pay attention and those on this subforum who do support Obama do so because they like his policies not because of the glamour). Many low information glamour voters were deeply disappointed by the real man.

We'll see if this election is different. I doubt it. There still will be a significant number of supporters of the new president who are low information voters supporting him/her for the wrong reasons. We as a society still haven't truly learned the lesson from Hitler's rise.

And I suspect many/most of the other democracies around the world struggle with the same problem.

Okay. So I guess now's the time for me to explain to you why comparing Obama to Hitler is really stupid and actually more than a bit offensive to people like me, who were born in Germany, were educated in Germany, and who have more than a passing interest in the hows and whys of Hitler's rise to power.

You see, unlike Hitler, Obama never campaigned on the basis of "the system has failed and has to be replaced completely".
Unlike Hitler, Obama never tried to change the way US politics works.
Unlike Hitler, Obama never instituted policies to systematically kill a small and historically maligned group of people.

At his worst, Obama was a disappointment. Hitler, by contrast, became a benchmark for evil.
You can disagree with Obama's policies, his reasoning for those policies, his haircut, his choice of lawn ornament, whatever petty crap you like. But being disagreeable doesn't make him, or the democrat party, or "Liberals" in general modern reincarnations of Hitler and the NSDAP. By equating the two, you elevate your petty disagreements into a holy war that has to be fought for the good of your culture, and you diminish one of the few examples of a regime that has to be destroyed for the good of the world.

Finally, if you wish to equate your political opposition to the Nazis, you also have to prove that your side isn't Stalin.

Actually I was comparing voter subgroups, not the leaders themselves. The subgroup of German voters (and other supporters worldwide) who adored Hitler when he was rising to power without doing due diligence to find out who he really was and then were stuck with an evil psychopath share great deal in common with the subgroup of voters who voted for Obama because it was cool, the in thing to do, his charisma/optimism, the feel good thing about the first black president and didn't pay any attention to the real person, what his policies were and whether or not they agreed/disagreed with his agenda. These voters were very disappointed in Obama. He didn't walk on water after all and many were disappointed in his agenda. Frankly with their failure to pay attention they got lucky. I'm not exactly an Obama fan but he could have been far worse. If the election was solely up to them they could have elected an evil psychopath.

Unfortunately that subgroup of voters still exists (and is large enough to swing a close election). Hitler is a cautionary tale of be very careful who you vote for that these people do not heed. Fortunately for them and us, while some of the candidates appear to be narcissistic blowhards none appear to have that inner evil core Hitler did (or if they do they are academy award winning actors who have successfully preformed without error for several decades).

PeterZ wrote:So, no Obama is not pure evil. Yet, he doesn't need to be. All Evil needs to prosper is for good men to do nothing or in this case an ambitious man to ignore small evils. Telling us to ignore the smaller evils that parallel Hitler because it does not rise to Hitler's level will simply lead to greater evil.....perhaps eventually to another actual Hitler figure.

Oh look, it's our old friend the slippery slope argument.

Look, as long as you people still have fixed election periods, as long as you people can still choose your leaders from several competing ideologies, you still have a chance to fix everything. Which is not an option the Germans had anymore after January 30th, 1933. Until one of your presidents actually dismantles the basic tools of your democracy, I will continue to not accept any comparisons with Hitler or the Nazis.

The thing is, if you keep saying that "X will lead to actual Nazism in the US", no matter how far-fetched it is (as in your planned parenthood example), you devalue that saying.

biochem wrote:Unfortunately that subgroup of voters still exists (and is large enough to swing a close election). Hitler is a cautionary tale of be very careful who you vote for that these people do not heed. Fortunately for them and us, while some of the candidates appear to be narcissistic blowhards none appear to have that inner evil core Hitler did (or if they do they are academy award winning actors who have successfully preformed without error for several decades).

That subgroup has always existed and will always exist. Better get used to it.