It's Beginning to Look a Lot Like Hitler (A Rocky Mountain Mike Song Parody)

Another great classic Christmas song parody by Rocky Mountain Mike, celebrating life during the Trumpageddon. This time, of course, to the tune of, It's Beginning to Look a Lot Like Christmas.

Donald Trump Obliterates Godwin's Law

Godwin's Law: (or Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"—​that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism. -- Godwin's Law - Wikipedia

---

Godwin's Law has moved beyond internet message boards, and is now generally used as a discussion-ender in general. You invoke a Hitler or Nazi analogy, and you lose the argument. Nothing, the feeling goes, is on par with Nazi Germany. It's the ultimate in lazy and/or hyperbolic comparisons. Trump broke that rule, but in a different way than he tends to break all others: He himself negates it by himself becoming his own Hitler analogy. And it's difficult to argue with. Especially when his own GOP opposition thinks so too.
 

Facepalm: Tea Party Says Obama is America's Hitler

I can't even. . .

Found at: Joe.My.God

"Impeachment" Should be Off the Table

Rep. Steve Stockman, paragon
of virtue. Image from ThinkProgress.

Godwin's Law states, "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." As such, it is usually common practice that if a person uses Hitler as an analogy, their argument fails, immediately. The response, "Godwin's Law" is all that is needed to end the discussion. I propose the same be true with the impeachment of the president except as a last resort, for obvious and clear violation of law.

Why? Because it's getting ridiculous. Ever since President Obama was sworn in, Right Wing World has been buzzing about impeachment with varying degrees of passion. It's been an impeachment in search of a reason, in their eyes. They'd literally go after him for anything they thought would stick. And we know this, because we have evidence. Recent evidence. Impeachment has only been tried twice (Nixon escaped by resigning), and one of those times was brought over a lie about a blowjob.* In a question no pertinent in a case that was ultimately dismissed.

There he is, pointing that finger.

If I didn't know how much the right hated Bill Clinton at the time, I'd have sworn that his impeachment was a deliberate dodge, in order to make the next Republican president bullet-proof. I mean, after all the loud protests about the ridiculous impeachment of Clinton, how could Democrats really go and do the same thing, right? And though it may not have really been that kind of genius behind the impeachment, that's what we got.

Yes, during Bush's second term, when the Democrats took over, and their base was ravenous for some sort of repercussions for what they saw as war crimes (and so many other things), impeachment was off the table. Even later, after President Obama was elected, we were all told that we were looking forward and not back. To my knowledge, the only Bush Era toadie to pay any kind of price (and it was light) was Scooter Libby.

So Bush/Cheney (Rice/Rumsfeld/et. al) got off clean and clear. Whether you despised the lot of them or were in their corner, there is no doubt that there were things in there that were stronger reason for hearings (at least) than a freakin' lie about a bj. And yet--even though the lot of them got a "get out of jail free" card--you can find righties, be they bloggers or actual elected officials who float the impeachment balloon.

Stop it. Just stop it. Before Bill Clinton, you have to go back to Andrew Johnson in 1868 for pete's sake.  Impeachment is a serious charge, and it should be reserved for the very last resort, when there is no other remedy, for a serious, serious reason. It's not for revenge. It's not to get rid of a guy you don't like and didn't vote for. It may be asking a bit too much, but could we just grow up already, with the political back-and-forth? It's embarrassing.

[Excerpt]

Rep. Stockman threatens Obama impeachment over guns

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) is threatening to file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he moves to change gun regulations through executive order.

“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said. . .

Read more at: Politico


*By the way, one thing that can still--oddly--get a staunch conservative riled up is to make light of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I still maintain it was a stupid reason to impeach a president. Yes, Clinton himself was stupid to put himself in that position, and was also stupid to lie. But it was an irrelevant lie, in an ultimately irrelevant case. As political lies go, it was utterly and completely meaningless.
"But, he LIED to Congress! He LIED to the American people!" As have--likely--every single president before him. As certainly Bush did. Over much, much, much more serious matters. Congress lies to Congress. Nearly every politician who has ever gone on Meet the Press or Face the Nation has lied to us about something. They may call it "spin," but spin is spun with lies. So, save your indignation over that particular lie, alright? It doesn't rise to "high crimes and misdemeanors," it just doesn't. If the identical lie was told in the identical case, and Bill Clinton was just an Arkansas lawyer, the chance he'd have been brought up on perjury charges over it are virtually nil. Again, stop it.

Meanwhile, on Facebook: Idiot Romney Voter!

It needs to be a named law: "If you're trying to insult a group of people (especially online), you will make a foolish mistake that proves that you are the idiot." It may be a corollary to Murphy's Law, but it needs its own name. Poe's Law is taken. So is Rule 34. Godwin's Law too. Dare I make the idiot rule "Greenlee's Law?" Nah, I'm sure someone has already taken it, and that's kind of like being Lou Gehrig, Mr. Parkinson or Mr. Alzheimer. Anyway, the idiot rule applies here (and yes, I initially misspelled "idiot" in the headline!).

Blast From the Past: "I'm a Nazi/He's a Nazi" by Rush Limbaugh!

Oh, hello there! Ever get caught in a Wiki-hole? That's when you look something up on Wikipedia (or other site), and one thing leads to another, and you burn up a couple of hours. Happens to me all the time, but this time it happened to me on my own blog! Is it narcissistic to re-read posts from my past? I dunno. Anyway, one gem wasn't even my work, and it is as relevant today as ever. It's "I'm a Nazi (He's a Nazi)" and it is actually "sung" by Rush Limbaugh through the wizardry of audio editing. Godwin's Law be damned, this is a masterful--and hilarious--work. It co-stars Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly. Enjoy!

Hank Williams Jr. Compares Obama to Hitler

Every time a liberal entertainer says something politically controversial, the right wing predictably stands up and says in unison, "shut up and sing!" or, "shut up and act!" or whatever fits. But when a conservative entertainer gets political, they're all for it. Ronald Reagan (now sainted), Arnold Schwarzenegger (when he wond the Governorship of California), John Voit, Kelsey Grammar, even the tremendously batty Victoria Jackson are now right wing heroes. Now, Hank Williams Jr. may be bumped off the list. But I doubt it. When Ted Nugent made nasty, offensive references to Hillary Clinton, he stayed in the right's good graces.

Just a Thought: Is it EVER Okay to Bring Up Nazis or Allege Racism?

From time to time, a thought enters my head, and I can't shake it until I write it down. Fortunately, I have a blog, where "writing it down" is pretty much the job description.  So, I'm introducing "Just a Thought," a banner beneath which I will toss out these random brain droppings.  I'll not promise coherence. 


Godwin's Law: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." (Source: Wikipedia)

Kind of a bad idea. . .

It is a good rule of thumb to not use Nazis, Nazi Germany or Adolph Hitler as analogies in any situation.  In general, nobody is as bad as Nazis, and nothing compares to the evil committed by Hitler.  But here's the thing I got to thinking about.  One of the most commonly quoted phrases arising out of the aftermath of Nazi Germany is, "Never forget." This would mean--I assume--that we are not to forget the lessons learned from that period of time.  And that we should heed any sign of a repeat of those events.

But how do you heed supposed warnings, if any comment referencing similarities to Nazi Germany are immediately deemed to be a shut down of serious discussion?  No analogy is ever perfect, but there are sometimes similarities between events, even extreme events.  This doesn't mean that I support anti-Obama tea baggers who paint--with no foundation--President Obama as a Nazi.  With any analogy, there must be some sort of underlying similarity, and none exists there.  It seems to have come in response to Bush and Cheney being similarly portrayed. But at least there was some foundation to build upon there, and many more years in office before those sorts of analogies started to be drawn.  Anyway. . .

On a tangent, this subject for some reason directs my brain to a different one. That of recognizing and commenting on veiled racism.  If for example one were to posit that there are racist elements in the Tea Party movement, one would be immediately slammed for playing "the race card."  Now, put aside for a moment whether you believe or disbelieve my premise.  Just notice how alleging racism is now equivalent to being racist.  If you "play the race card," you've done pretty much the same thing--in today's politics--as making a Nazi analogy. You've effectively ended all serious discussion.  Not that pictures like the above merit serious discussions of either subject. I think we can all agree that it is just a bad idea.

Ann Coulter Blames Obama "Hitler" Signs on Liberals

The funniest thing about this video to me is that Ann Coulter believes there are whack-job "outliers" in the tea party movement, or that the nuttiest of the fringe are liberals in disguise. How would one be able to tell the difference between a "mainstream" or a "fringe" tea bagger, exactly?

The other noteworthy thing about this video, is that President Obama is clearly pointing out the inherent WTF? things about the tea bagger movement, in this case the Hitler imagery as it pertains to health care reform. It makes about as much sense as the "Socialism" signs with Obama as The Joker. Again, WTF?

Bill O'Reilly vs. Godwin's Law

Godwin's law states that the longer an argument goes, the more probable a Nazi comparison will be made. It is then posited that anyone who uses a Nazi analogy automatically loses the argument. I don't entirely agree, as I think it is possible that some situations are comparable (not identical, of course). But most of the time, Godwin's law holds true. Looks like somebody forgot to tell Bill O'Reilly. . .



Found at: News Corpse