Joseph Farah on how Obama and Liberals are like Nazis

Godwin's Law taken to new heights, you might say. Farah from WorldNutDaily has come up with a column which is, truly, a better-than-perfect example of complete and simultaneous hypocrisy, irony, dishonesty, and general stupidity, along with a staggering lack of self-awareness that brings a twinkle to bloggers' eyes and an evil smile to their lips. The whole thing is his lackluster attempt at likening Obama and the Left to Hitler and the Nazis (yeah, that's never been done before, has it?), but you really need to read the whole thing – it's incredible just how blind the crank is to his (and his side's) own actions.

One early indication that he might already know his column is full of shit is how he quickly preemptively denounces anyone who might quote it or refer to it, as such:

This is going to be, shall we say, "a controversial column."

Outfits like the George Soros-subsidized Media Matters will have a field day with it – excerpting passages out of context, deliberately distorting the words I am carefully choosing and, in typical knee-jerk fashion, mocking its premise.

Cable TV propagandists posing as "newsmen" will hurl invectives and dub me as a villain for expressing my honest and candid opinions – all of which are based on reality and truth.

... And the strain to keep oneself from bursting with laughter starts already, especially at that last line about "reality and truth". This is a clown who wouldn't know reality if ... oh, screw it, there's no ending to that phrase that isn't horribly clichéd anymore.

But, alright, Farah. I promise to read, and comment to, your column whilst keeping everything in its proper context. Happy? Let's see where that takes us.

Now, I'm gonna be reading it and commenting in real-time. Let the hilarity begin!

Lately, both sides of the political spectrum have suggested their political opponents resemble Nazis or fascists. Are both sides equally wrong?

Generally – yes.

He spends some time debating the definition of "national socialism" and how it applies to the left. It's tired stuff that warrants no commenting, so let's skip ahead a little:

National socialists, whether they seek to kill Jews or old people or the disabled or unborn babies, will always be national socialists – no matter what kind of lipstick they put on the pig.

Keep in mind he's talking about how the left are basically national socialists here which, in proper context, basically means he's saying left-wingers "kill Jews [and] old people [and] the disabled [and] unborn babies". Nice.

Then, he comes up with a list of reasons why Obama is so similar to Hitler and his administration's reign is very comparable to the Nazi regime. Seriously, you need to read this. (And you also need to not be drinking or eating anything while you do.)

Obama has power. His opponents, for the most part, do not. Furthermore, Obama seeks to use his power to impose policies that have, like it or not, a striking resemblance to those Hitler promoted in the 1930s.

Like what?

• Abortion
• Infanticide
• Government deciding life-and-death issues in dispensing medical care for both older people and those with serious illnesses;
• Unfair treatment of Jews, in Obama's case, with regard to Middle East conflict;
• So-called public-private partnerships – blurring the line between government responsibilities and the private sector. This is one of the definitions of fascism;
• Picking winners and losers among corporations and the dispensing of government favors and punishments to them;
• Hiring and firing of supposedly private corporation executives;
• Attacking free expression;
• Secrecy
• Using taxpayer funds for the hiring of political partisans to "organize" communities and sign up new voters;
• Demonizing political opponents;
• Encouraging citizens to "rat out" friends, family members and others who oppose his policies;
• Keeping tabs on political opponents;
• Filling top government posts with like-minded political extremists who would normally be regarded as internal security threats;
• Ignoring the Constitution;
• Blaming his predecessor and the fundamentals of the American political and economic system for all the problems besetting the country;

I mean, I could go on and on. George W. Bush and other predecessors in the White House had their faults. Some of them did terrible things, showed incredibly bad judgment, made horrible mistakes. But I can think of no precedent for someone in the White House doing all of the above at once – all of which bear striking parallels to the leadership of infamous fascists such as Benito Mussolini and Hitler.

... I'm utterly speechless here. There is nothing I can say that would do justice to the staggering, massive, unbelievable amounts of hypocrisy, irony, total lack of self-awareness and generalized ignorance and stupidity that are present in that list. Nothing at all.

Primarily, and as you will all be dying of laughter (literally) and eagerness to point out – there is not one single pointer in that list that can't be used, with tons of correlating evidence and documents to back it up, against Bush and his administration's rule. (That is, except for "Abortion" and "Infanticide" – though why did he, of the standard "Abortion is infanticide!" crowd, separate those?) From the PATRIOT Act to the absence of a leash on murderous HMOs, to the polarizing of politics and political opponents, to basically shitting on the Constitution for eight solid long years and then saying, "So what? You can't stop us!" ... One cannot rationally comprehend the amount of hypocrisy and dishonesty it takes for someone like Farah to liken these traits and actions to Obama, when he, for one, has been an avid (rabid?) supporter of Bush when he and his administration implemented the very same tactics, though on a far larger and less constitutional scale than ever before.

(Not to mention that, of course, half of those accusations are totally bogus without a lick of evidence to back them up other than sheer paranoia, the likes of which has been running rampant in the Right-wing circles for a few months now.)

Really, I'd have to dissect that crock of shit-of-a-list point-by-point to truly bring out the lethal amounts of disingenuousness present in it, but I simply don't have that sort of patience. Maybe someone else will be up to the task (lucky them).

Worse, the leaders of his party and his acolytes in the media can see no danger posed by any of these policies. In fact, like good Germans, they blame the opposition in the most disgusting, vile ways – often unfairly accusing them of doing what they themselves do.

Um ... by now, the worst Right-wingers have been accused of being, other than by Left radicals or idiots, is "idiots", "kooks" and "liars" (and combinations and variations thereof). Not nice (though richly deserved), perhaps, but far from fitting in under the header of "disgusting" and "vile", I daresay.

Want another taste of the blind dishonesty in this turd-of-a-column? Here ya go:

Why is it acceptable for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to say American citizens attending congressional town halls are swastika-carrying thugs, but wrong for her political opponents to point out the similarities between her party's policies and those of Nazi Germany?

More than plain ironic or dishonest, this is just utter bullshit and lies. Pray tell of a single time when Pelosi, or anyone else from the White House (or anywhere else, to be honest), has ever said that "American citizens attending congressional town halls are swastika-wearing thugs"? Never.

What Pelosi (and many others) have said, is how the loudmouthed, ignorant and uncivilized yahoos who keep erupting in feigned moral outrage over absolute lies and bullshit spread on the air by fucking morons like Glenn Beck & co., are just trying to disrupt proper debates with demagoguery, more lies, and irrational fears about "losing their America" (and what the fuck does that even mean, anyway?).

Am I calling Obama a little Hitler, a Nazi or a fascist?

Sounds like you did it all, there.

I am saying American liberty faces very serious challenges from the country's own leadership – not from citizens who dissent against those policies.

You mean, not from the handful of gun-toting, ignorant, bigoted and fundamentally dishonest jackasses who roar up and down about how the evil socialists (Dems) are taking away their America and freedom and MediCare and such bullshit. As for everyone else – truth be told, by now half are just enjoying the spectacle, and the rest are mourning the loss of what could've been a truly great medical system^[1]. I know I'm one of them.

[1] Can anyone tell me – and please do – how a majority of Democrats ruling Congress and so forth, can simply cave in to the feigned moral outrage from lying and bullshitting Rethuglicans, despite having more than enough numbers to ignore their ridiculous charade and protests and to simply truck on without them? Huh? Why is (the myth of) bipartisanship so fucking important to those idiots? Who fucking cares about bipartisanship, when you don't need it?

(via Dispatches from the Culture Wars)