As I noted yesterday, the comparison of an anonymous person in the 2004 MoveOn.org ad contest of Bush to Hitler generated a massive media firestorm for a full week, with all sorts of political figures and organizations vehemently condemning the actions of this anonymous individual. As a result, I contacted many of those people to ask for their reaction to yesterday’s comparison of Obama and Hitler by GOP leader Rush Limbaugh, speaking to his audience of 15 million people. I’ll post any responses I get here. These are the ones I’ve received thus far:
National Review‘s Cliff May:
It is wrong, outrageous and damaging for Rush Limbaugh to compare Obama to Hitler. . . . Such hyperbole only serves to confuse and trivialize issues much more grave than tax rates and health-care plans.
The American Jewish Congress:
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.
What could possibly justify a week-long, Scandal of the Month deluge by the major media when an anonymous person on the Internet does this, while ignoring it when the leader of the conservative movement does it to his audience of 15 million? I’m anxiously awaiting a response from the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, two of the most vociferous attackers of the anonymous Internet user in 2004.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called attempts by some opponents of health care reform to bring Nazi imagery into the debate, “outrageous, deeply offensive and inappropriate” and condemned remarks by talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who compared President Obama’s health care logo to a swastika, and policies championed by the Democratic Party to those of the Nazis.
“Regardless of the political differences and the substantive differences in the debate over health care, the use of Nazi symbolism is outrageous, offensive and inappropriate,” said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor. . . .
In recent days, street protests against President Obama’s health care plan have gotten ugly, with some protestors appearing in photographs wearing swastika and SS symbols.
That prompted Rush Limbaugh to remark on his radio program that, “They accuse us of being Nazis, and Obama’s got a healthcare logo that’s right out of Adolf Hitler’s playbook.” He went on to compare certain Democratic Party policies to those of the Nazis.
It’s really amazing — though not at all surprising — that when an anonymous Internet user compares Bush to Hitler, the media goes into Full Hysteria Alert, but when the most influential conservative figure in the country does the same thing, they utter barely a peep of recognition. We’ll see if that changes as America’s leading Jewish groups — and even some principled conservatives — issue rather harsh condemnations of Limbaugh’s comments.
UPDATE II: I just got off the phone with Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean and Founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. He made clear that he has some “serious objections” to some of Obama’s policies — “especially in the foreign policy context” (read: Israel) — but was nonetheless scathing in his condemnation of Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh’s comments are “shameful,” ”beyond the pale,” and “unworthy of Americans.” He said that to compare Obama’s health care package to Nazi programs, or to compare Obama to Hitler, is to “demean ourselves”; that efforts to compare Obama’s health care logo to Nazi logos are “preposterous” and “offensive”; and that Limbaugh’s monologue in particular was “really disgraceful” and “shameful.”
UPDATE III: ABC News‘ Jake Tapper has an article entitled ”Jewish Groups Assail Nazi Comparisons Made by Conservatives in Health Care Debate,” reporting that “the ADL’s Foxman specifically said cited Limbaugh’s comparison as offensive.” As Tapper was one of those who reported on the MoveOn ad contest “scandal” on television, it remains to be seen whether this will be treated with as much importance.
We see a woman clad in “Mad Men”-era finery, slowly walking from the camera down a long hallway. A voice familiar to fans of “House” narrates. “Only decades ago, women suffered through horrifying back alley abortions, or they used dangerous methods when they had no other recourse. So when the Republican Party launched an all-out assault on women’s health, pushing bills to limit women’s access to vital services, we had to ask,” she continues, as the image cuts between the woman opening a closet containing a single wire hanger and the distressed face of actress Lisa Edelstein: “Why is the GOP trying to send women back to the back alley?”
It’s a powerful spot from MoveOn, one that couldn’t be more timely, what with the GOP’s recent tactics to rebrand rape so only women who’ve really been raped-raped would have access to abortion, or make it OK to kill abortion doctors. But what makes it all the more intriguing is the presence of a popular television actress, one who in fact plays a doctor. While celebrity culture doesn’t lack for political points of view — that’s what the godless, liberal-controlled media that Glenn Beck is trying to save you from is all about, folks — abortion is still such a wildly divisive, taboo topic that television and its actors generally bust out the 10-foot poles when it’s broached. It’s one thing for Hollywood to be riddled with joyous baby bumps — isn’t it great about Natalie Portman/Kate Hudson/Jane Krakowski! — it’s another to come forward in such a public way to support safe and legal choice. There are occasional exceptions, like Jack Black, Ed Harris and Amy Madigan’s pro-choice spot for Barack Obama three years ago. But Edelstein’s is not some cheerful get out the vote message. It’s a stark and harrowing reminder that restricting access to abortion does not make abortion go away. It only pushes women to desperate, unsafe options that jeopardize their health and their lives. So why are so few actors and actresses willing to come forward and say the same? Sticking up for women’s health, as Edelstein has, should not, in 2011, still be a controversial move.
But as if to illustrate the utter cluelessness that we are dealing with regarding abortion, noted lesbian-hairedhealthcare expert Justin Bieber told Rolling Stone this week that “I really don’t believe in abortion. It’s like killing a baby?” He went on to explain that even in cases of rape, “Um. Well, I think that’s really sad, but everything happens for a reason. I guess I haven’t been in that position, so I wouldn’t be able to judge that.” Maybe everything happens for a reason when you’re a 16-year-old millionaire without a uterus, but it’s a little more complicated when you’re, say, a pregnant 13-year-old rape victim.
There’s probably not a whole lot of intersection between Bieber’s Wikipedia hacking minions and those abortion-loving fans of Fox medical procedurals. Neither is terribly likely to be swayed by the opinions of the other. But Edelstein’s pointed, chilling MoveOn clip, which is reportedly going to start airing soon on various cable networks, is a bold step toward bringing an issue too long considered too hot, too much of a downer, right where it belongs. Into the living rooms of American families.
This morning, Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul and MoveOn publicly responded to the attack by Paul supporters on a MoveOn protestor outside the Kentucky senatorial debate Monday night.
Speaking on Fox, Paul conspicuously declined the opportunity to condemn the attack. “It’s an unusual situation to have so many people, so passionate on both sides, jockeying back and forth and it wasn’t something I liked or anybody liked about that situation,” he said. “So I hope in the future it’s going to be better.”
Watch video of Paul’s television appearance, via TPM, below:
MoveOn, for its part, is demanding that the woman’s attackers be “brought to justice,” and is calling on Paul to condemn the attack directly. The group’s full statement:
“We’re appalled at the violent incident that occurred at the Kentucky Senate debate last night. Numerous news reports clearly show that the young woman–a MoveOn supporter–was assaulted and pushed to the ground by Rand Paul supporters, where one man held her down while another stomped on her head. This kind of violence has no place in American society, much less at a peaceful political rally.
Our first concern is obviously Lauren’s health and well being. She is recovering, and we will release more details as we have them. We are concerned that no arrests have yet been made, and we hope those responsible will be brought to justice quickly, and that Rand Paul will join us in condemning this horrible act.”
MSNBC says it has rejected a TV ad calling for a boycott of Target Corp. over a political donation in Minnesota.
MSNBC spokeswoman Alana Russo says the commercial submitted by the liberal group MoveOn.org violates its advertising policy by directly attacking an individual business.
MoveOn announced plans earlier this week to spend $35,000 airing the ad on MSNBC nationally and on three networks in the Twin Cities. The group says the stations in the Minneapolis-St. Paul market are running the ad.
MoveOn head Justin Ruben says the rejection is “the height of hypocrisy.”
Minneapolis-based Target last month donated $150,000 to a political fund supporting conservative GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer in Minnesota. That triggered a national backlash from gay rights groups and liberals.
Dem. congressman Joe Sestak arrives for a debate with Dem. Sen. Arlen Specter at Fox Philadelphia studios Saturday, May 1, 2010. Pennsylvania's two Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate dueled over character issues and their devotion to Democratic principles in the live debate. (AP Photo/Mark Stehle) (Credit: Mark Stehle)
After conducting a vote among its members in the state, MoveOn.org has endorsed Rep. Joe Sestak over Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senate primary Tuesday.
That adds to the sense that Sestak has some momentum, and certainly underscores one of the basic dynamics in the race: Sestak has tried to argue he’s the true progressive, and remind voters that Specter was a Republican not that long ago.
What it means in terms of help on the ground for a campaign that could be determined by whose get-out-the-vote operation works better, though, is less clear. MoveOn.org spokeswoman Ilyse Hogue tells me the group has about 150,000 members in Pennsylvania. “They’re among the most active members of the Democratic Party,” she says. Which is true. But MoveOn is mostly just urging them to vote — and volunteer — for Sestak; the group’s endorsement doesn’t bring any actual logistical support along with it. And while Sestak won the MoveOn vote handily — with 67 percent of the total — that still means Specter has some loyalists, even among die-hard activists.
The latest Muhlenberg College/Morning Call tracking poll in Pennsylvania put Specter ahead, 45-43.
Liberals were ecstatic to see Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter announce that he’s running in a Democratic primary against Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., one of the left’s least favorite senators. And they’re putting their money where their mouths are.
As of Tuesday night, the combined efforts of four liberal groups — MoveOn.org, Daily Kos, Democracy for America and Progressive Change Campaign Committee — had raised $1 million for Halter in just 36 hours. (MoveOn was responsible for $900,000 of that.)
“These are one million reasons that Blanche Lincoln will be sorry that she consistently sided with corporate interests over her constituents on issues like the public option,” Adam Green, a co-founder of PCCC, told Salon by e-mail.
“Lincoln will absolutely lose in 2010, either in the primary or general. Hopefully this fundraising will help the Democratic Party establishment wake up to the fact that there is a well-funded candidate who can keep this seat Democratic, and that candidate’s Bill Halter.”
Firedoglake’s Jane Hamsher also reports that four big unions have also each pledged $1 million in outside expenditures on behalf of Halter.
Update: The Arkansas AFL-CIO has also officially endorsed Halter against Lincoln. Also, the Associated Press has a different number on union funding — Hamsher said it was $4 million, but the AP reports it’s $3 million from three unions.