Imagine if the Today's Right-Wing Were Around for Nuremberg (Update: AOL Poll)

I was talking to Frank Mankiewicz recently (he was the press secretary for Bobby Kennedy and campaign manager for George McGovern) and I asked him what's the difference between the right-wing in this country back in the 60's and 70's and right now. Certainly there were crazed conservatives back then, and in many ways they were even more dangerous and vicious back then. But Frank was more concerned about the right-wing of today. Why?

He said it's because back then they were considered the radical fringe and now they're taken seriously as part of the national conversation. Back then there were pockets of these guys in different parts of the country, but now they're national. So, every single issue is nationalized and made more partisan. The fringe is united behind their demagogues (mainly radio and television talk show hosts) and drive every issue into a senseless and fevered ideological battle.

It's as if we're taking the opinions of doctors and the lunatics at the asylum just as seriously. They are not equal and legitimate sources of information.

So, every week there's something else crazy that's discussed as if it's a legitimate issue. This week there are already two such topics, and it's just Tuesday. First, the right-wing is incensed that President Obama showed courtesy to a foreign leader by bowing to the Japanese Emperor. Are you kidding me? Bush practically made out with the Saudi leader at Crawford, but we didn't make that a real issue. You know why? Because it's not a real issue!

It was funny to see Bush walking hand in hand with King Abdullah, but we get why he did it. He was respecting their culture. Now, when Obama does something much less controversial, it's a nationwide debate (including a slight bow to the same Saudi Arabian leader). You can chuckle over Bush or Obama in local outfits or practicing what appears to be strange customs to us, but you can't treat it as if it's something that tells you about their leadership or as if it's a real national security issue.

Let alone what Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, had to say about Obama bowing "controversy":

But Mr. Obama, unlike his predecessors, likely knows no better, and many of those around him, true children of the grungy '60s, are contemptuous of custom. Cutting America down to size is what attracts them to "hope" for "change." It's no fault of the president that he has no natural instinct or blood impulse for what the America of "the 57 states" is about. He was sired by a Kenyan father, born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World and reared by grandparents in Hawaii, a paradise far from the American mainstream.

Look at these statements -- "natural instinct or blood impulse"; "sired by a Kenyan father"; "born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World." Again, are you kidding me? We're supposed to take these guys seriously?

Then there is the issue of the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial. Bill O'Reilly had this thoughtful commentary on the KSM trial, "The guy's admitted it, so he shouldn't be going on trial anyway, he should just be shot." We're listening to these guys?

So, under that logic, if the authorities claim someone "admitted" a crime to them, we should just skip the trial and shoot them in the head. How very American!

Imagine if we these right-wing lunatics were around - and were being taken seriously - after World War II. We would have never had Nuremberg. They would have gone ballistic; screaming for blood and seething at the idea of bringing Nazis to justice. They would have exacted a terrible political price for trying to bring these guys to trial. So, instead of setting a history making precedent on how victors in war can be just and fair, we would have lynched those detainees, punished the rest of Germany and made the same mistake as almost every other country in history by brutally oppressing the defeated.

You think these guys would have gone for the Marshall Plan? Rebuilding your enemies? Giving tremendous amount of money and US resources to rebuild your two biggest adversaries who just killed millions of people in a terrible war they started? Inconceivable. They would have called the Marshall Plan an act of cowardice and appeasement that showed weakness to your enemies. They would have destroyed the greatest American diplomatic accomplishment. They would have tried to scuttle the very policies that made this country great - that made it exceptional.

But the current right-wing radicals (which includes nearly every major conservative talk show host in the country; they were unanimous in their agreement that KSM should not be tried in the American justice system) aren't just crazy, they're un-American. They missed the whole point of the country. What makes America great is our justice system. We don't take people out and shoot them in the head without trials. That's what despots and dictators do. We are a country of laws, not men. We are supposed to be exceptional in our justice, fairness and jurisprudence. These people don't believe in any of that. They just want blood. But we might be crazier than they are for taking them seriously.

Watch TYT Here

UPDATE: Vote on the AOL Poll that asks the question 'Would Current Day Conservatives have Objected To The Nuremburg Trials?'.

< Mike Huckabee and the End of Days; GOP Days | Is conservatism a form of postmodernism? (featuring Palin and Perry) >
 Display:

...but, they were in the Defendent's chairs...






(BTW, in this particular case, does Godwin apply since the thread is ABOUT Nazis? Discuss among yourselves...)

by MedfordTim on 11/17/2009 05:14:47 PM EST

As far as I see it ... The Right-Wingers are what they hate.

A Proud Progressive!!!

by teron678 on 11/17/2009 05:24:52 PM EST

The Right-Wingers are what they hate.

Admittedly, it's hard not to be, when you hate so many things.

Hating feels good, in a way. Everyone does their share. But progressives have an advantage, in that, because we are in the majority, we can focus our animosity toward those who stand against us: A scant handful of voices known as the fringe right.

The fringe right, on the other hand, find themselves in a position where all they have is enemies. That's why it seems like their message is never focused, their voice is never united and their battles are never won.

Their unpopularity is the only thing holding them together.

by OneHitKill on 11/17/2009 08:47:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Winston Churchill wanted the major war criminals shot on six hours notice to all the allied powers--just confirm identity and shoot. (Or something like that.) And I'm sure there are others who felt that way.

The Emperor bowed to Obama first. If someone bowed to me, I'd bow back. However, you aren't supposed to shake hands at the same time. Obama screwed up--western civilizati on will fall.

You need to know how to observe Japanese  customs in a proper way. For example, how to barf on your host.



 

by thisuser on 11/17/2009 06:50:38 PM EST

You need to convince. Its those independents and moderates, and right now Conservatives are making more sense by opposing the Tax & Spend Lunatic Left rather than presenting ideas of their own. The left can't sell the shit they're peddling because everyone knows its bad for America. You Liberals need to stop worrying about what nutjobs like me think and learn better ways of selling your own product... Forget Nuremburg and worry about next November's unemployed Liberals...

by bobo1 on 11/17/2009 08:00:57 PM EST

As usual in the Republican World .. Politics trumps Policy .... Hence the past 8 years of utter incompetence ...

As someone said .. "keep fucking that chicken"

A Proud Progressive!!!

by teron678 on 11/17/2009 09:18:07 PM EST

[ Parent ]

"stop worrying about what nutjobs like me think"

Consider it done.  In fact, I started doing it years ago.  You're welcome.

by Spencer on 11/19/2009 05:57:08 PM EST

[ Parent ]

"rather than presenting ideas of their own"

What ideas?

A conservative believes nothing should be done for the first time

by C D on 11/20/2009 07:13:34 PM EST

[ Parent ]
"worry about next November's unemployed Liberals... "

Quoted For Truth

by RedPossum on 11/26/2009 07:27:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
got it in one, tim

we fought against totalitarianism then, the nazis were just a bunch of right wing "nuts" in the twenties and early thirties. "Those who don't learn from history...."

by brumac44 on 11/17/2009 08:50:44 PM EST

Okay, I love Obama and this gaffe doesn't change my mind about supporting him. However, he wasn't given enough cultural coaching on the Japan trip.

I lived in Japan, worked in Japan and speak Japanese. I also know the etiquette of bowing in Japan.  You can study it for months and not understand all the nuances of bowing, but any Japanese person looking at that picture is going to be embarrassed for Obama because he got it wrong.

When I first heard about the controversy, I thought, "oh, this is just another stupid Republican over-reaction (as usual)." However, when I saw the bow in the video I actually felt bad for Obama. The poor guy didn't get good advice on the etiquette.

It's all about the depth of the bow. Japanese measure rank by how deeply you bow. If you are meeting an equal you can both do a slight bow. Sometimes even a head nod is enough of a bow. The important thing is that equals both bow to the same depth.  

Now, if you're younger, or a woman, or somehow subservient to the other person you bow deeper than they do. So, the superior person will do a slight bow and the inferior person will do a deeper and lower bow.  In this case the Japanese Emperor is not even declining his head at all, and Obama is not paying any attention to that and doing this bow where he's completely bent in half.

This is the way a geisha girl would bow to her client. This is the way that the girls at the entry way of the Japanese Department stores bow to the customers entering the store saying "irashiamase!" This is the way that that the doorman of a hotel would bow to a CEO as he took his bags.  This bow sends the message to any Japanese person that 1) Obama knows nothing about Japanese culture 2) none of his aides took the time to tell him the basics of Japanese greetings and 3) that he just innocently tried to figure it out himself and do the right thing.  

Therefore, as an American I'm slightly embarrassed. Both for the ignorance of the President's cultural advisors and also that he does look pretty silly & submissive in the eyes of the Japanese.

Should the President have bowed at all? Yes! He just should have done a shallower one.  Dick Cheney is an ass if he thinks the President shouldn't have bowed at all.  When you're in Japan, it's totally appropriate to do their type of greeting which is bowing. Just like when the Japanese will also do a handshake when they're doing business with Americans. So, Dick Cheney is an ass to say "Americans should never bow" - that's just ethnocentric and wrongheaded. But of course we expect that from him.

That's my two cents. I'd be interested to hear a Japanese person's opinion on this issue since I'll admit I don't know much about the etiquette of bowing when in comes to the emperor.

by ilovecenk99 on 11/18/2009 12:59:50 AM EST

Okay, so I checked with a native Japanese person on this and I got "schooled" so I hereby recant my previous post.  Obama and his aides got the bow right.

Apparently, the Japanese believe that the emperor is a bit different than your "elected official" and therefore, even the Prime Minister of Japan would bow that deeply to the Emperor of Japan because the prime minister is "of the people". Since Pres Obama is also "of the people" he would do a deeper bow to the emperor and an equal-level bow to his counterpart in Japan, the Prime Minister.

When I asked this Nihonjin if Japanese people, looking at Obama's bow, would think that Pres Obama was being submissive or somehow giving up power, the guy told me that the people of Japan, upon witnessing his bow would think nothing of the sort. Rather, he said that a Japanese person would instantly think that Obama is a very polite and well-educated person. And since politeness goes with being "upper class" they would also consider Obama to be well-born and generally a good smart educated person. He then went on to quote an ancient Japanese proverb that says something like the deeper that the rice plant bows, the better is the fruit (the better quality of the rice grain on the stem) which basically means that the Japanese would think that Obama is a very good person by his bow.

Now, if the intention of diplomacy is to go to other countries and make the leaders and citizens of that country think you are a "good person", well educated, polite and considerate, then Obama had a successful trip. If however, we go along with the Dick Cheney school of diplomacy then I suppose the purpose would be to prove that you're willing to insult an entire nation and look like a rude, crude uneducated ARSE just to make the people back at Fox News happy.

I was wrong on this one and this is one time I'm happy to admit it!

by ilovecenk99 on 11/23/2009 07:09:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Most people on the right feel that KSM and the others scheduled to be tried in federal court in NYC should be tried in military tribunals instead.  This stance is not bourne out of some crazy bloodlust as the hysterical left would claim, but out of the belief that 9/11 was an act of war, not a criminal act.  Throughout this nation's history, the perpetrators of war crimes have been tried in military tribunals.  

There are several problems with putting KSM on trial in federal district court as an ordinary criminal.&nbs p; First, as KSM was treated as a POW, as opposed to a criminal suspect, I sincerely doubt that he was Mirandized upon capture or afforded any of the other Constitutional guarantees that a criminal suspect (but not a captured soldier on the battlefield) would customarily be afforded.  Therefore, it may be problematic to introduce as evidence any statements that he made in custody.  These statements would be admissible in a military tribunal.  Second, KSM would be entitled to the receipt of classified information via the discovery rules, as was the case in the trial of the perpetrators of the 1993 WTC bombing.  Even though the defense in that case was under strict instruction to keep all classified material confidential, somehow those classified documents found there way to an Al Queda safehouse in Afghanistan, where they were later discovered by US troops.  Somethin g like this is likely to happen again.

Finally, if memory serves correctly, weren't the Nuremberg trials military tribunals?    ;    &n bsp;     ;  

by tccesq on 11/19/2009 11:33:23 AM EST

The precedent of victors being just and fair is important, to be sure. But Nuremberg set another more obvious legal precedent by establishing that "just following orders" is not a viable defense. By throwing out any similarly valuable legal precedents that could potentially be generated by the KSM trial, conservatives are just doing what they always do: Fighting against progress.

by OneHitKill on 11/19/2009 08:48:27 PM EST

sorry but i find it very hard to believe that nobama is not well briefed on local customs..i have no freaking idea why bush held hands..but no president or us flag has bowed to a foriegn govt until now..one year and we are circling the bowl i give this clown another year and he is impeached with dirty harry pelosi and the rest

by texastornado5 on 11/20/2009 05:34:30 PM EST

I noticed that no one remarked that NAZI stood for the National Socialist Worker's Party. Trying to link that to conservatives of today and the individuals who were tried at Nuremberg is a long stretch, even for liberals.

You may also have noticed that one of the victors was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that committed crimes against their own people before the war under Stalin.

Nuremburg was just another show of "winners make the rules", which is not saying that top Nazis should have been persecuted but how do you justify jail terms for Generals and other officers who were only guilty of fighting a war, not committing war crimes? It was the same attitude at Versailles of punishing the Germans for starting the war, continuing the naval blockade starving civilians and creating the climatefor the rise of Hitler. In fact, one of the signers stated that "All we have done is guarnatee another war in a generation." He was off by one month.

The point is ideology has no place in determining what is best for this country. Left or right, in-between, petty politics has no place in America right now. If Obama is to be the leader, time to lead, no more Bush blaming for inaction on the economy, defense, foreign affairs, etc..
We need to get our own house in order first, then we can look for grand causes elsewhere to solve. I wouldn't wait too long though, there's not much difference between a hungry democrat and a hungry republican when they look at DC where the table is always overflowing for some special interest group. Eventually the people will come to even out the portions regardless of party. It would do many good to keep this in mind.

by WaffenSS on 11/20/2009 09:59:24 PM EST

As a new member, let me introduce myself as your "resident Libertarian."

Being a Libertarian doesn't render me absent of bias...not by a far cry...but it sure does give me an incredibly objective POV when listening to Republicans/Conservatives and Democrats/Liberals moan and groan about each other.

Face it...neither of you can see reality and you are BOTH equally responsible for the systematic dismantling of this country. Both of you are so caught up in your pettiness and your hatred of one another...so unwilling to say that either side is capable of a good idea...its just as hilarious to listen to CENK as it is to listen to COULTER.

Honestly...you people are total political hacks and hypocritical to the core.  You only see one side and you love it that way.

How about a little reality around here?

by JSL on 11/24/2009 12:32:45 PM EST

You posted you where a libertarian..  that leaves you out.

libertarians are a right wing fringe group that hates anything to do with the federal government    whose only difference from Glenn Beck is  they smoke pot ( although I think Beck does something stronger)

so get real

dude

A conservative believes nothing should be done for the first time

by C D on 11/24/2009 03:41:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: