Is Sarah Palin stirring up "Weimar-like rage"?

This forum has discussed Sarah Palin in a few contexts, but I thought that this NYT op-ed column by Frank Rich merits some reflection here because of its comparison with stirring "up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies" and "the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin." Equally, if not more, disturbing is the observation that Palin cited the racist and anti-Semite Westbrook Pegler in her Republican National Convention speech:


Even if Palin may not have been not aware of that the quote came from Pegler, some Republican speech writer knew this and with it wanted to reach out to a section of the population that Republicans cannot openly court but nonetheless show alarming signs of wooing. It is sometimes said that people should not watch the making of law, theology or sausage—because the process is too ugly to behold (even if the result can be savory). Yet I am watching this, in part because a very ugly and dangerous side of my country is showing itself again. In my view it must be watched vigilantly and confronted. Your thoughts?

why start a new thread? this topic is discussed in the other.

The other (general) thread about Palin was closed.

Exactly that's why the Presidential thread refers to both Dem and Rep candidates. We've been discussing the rabble rousing for a few pages now. RFK Jr wrote a similiar article right after the RNC finished and the link to his article referenced the same quote. Just saying.

Given the diversity of the likely topics might it be worth just having a separate subsection for the US election? One thread for such a big issue seems a little restrictive to me.

I would welcome another bulletin board for it.

The amount of words typed here to date on this subject is somewhat disproportionate for the nominal uniting theme of the website - Germany... and living in Germany ...

I disagree ... I think all related topics should be merged into one big thread, seeing as each individual topic ends up mean-reverting to essentially the same discussion.

I also disagree that this should not be part of TT ... I'm certain plenty of german language websites by and for native germans have every bit as much discussion on the US elections, if not even proportionally more considering they don't have threads asking where people can buy things like candles, aspirin and gasoline.

I don't see how Palin would have known the source of the quote. Anyhow, here is the original source of discussion over the quote:
http://www.wsj.com/article/SB1221002268596...us_inside_today

It is, IMHO, a very bad idea to liken something to the Nazis or Nazi tactics unless the analogy is accurate, and even the most jaundiced view of the use of the quote in the Palin speech cannot lead a reasonable person to the conclusion that anyone is targeting an entire racial or ethnic group for persecution and extinction in the US.

I think we all need to chill out a bit and focus on issues of greater significance for the future of our country.

Palin is anything but my cup of tea ideologically, however it's also clear that many people are going nuts over her and developing a fixation because they can't turn McCain into a hate figure to take out all their frustrations on.

I would also be happy with one huge thread.

This is clearly an occaision of note, with profound global implications. I just thought a whole sub section with its own hierachy of threads was a bit much. Just think about how inadequate the sub-section on Brandenburg for example would feel?

Jules, she seeks to be second in command and one that has a statistically significant chance of being promoted should that ticket win. While McCain has his own problems and shortcomings, she represents a large faction of Republicans that are not the best human beings on this planet and she was chosen to placate them.

There is most definitely a deliberate attempt to stir up fear and hatred and racism amongst the simpleton masses under the disguise of red-meat politics. The problem is not that these people exist (they do and probably always will), the real problem is that there are so many learned apologists out there defending them and downplaying the facts. It is these people that should be exposed for the bile spewing vermin that they are.

Reasonable people can disagree as to whether or not Palin's comments are what eurovol and some others say they are, but I also do not think Democratic partisans are ncessarily the ones best placed to divine the intent of a conservative politician's remarks. We must also bear in mind that eurovol, other Democratic partisans, and their UK sympathizers have consistently had have the most negative interpretations of anything said by Republicans, i.e., they always see the worst. My opinion is that in the comments abput Obama's association with Ayers (who is white) Palin was questioning Obama's judgement, nothing more. How one derives "racism" from the comments about Obama's association with Ayers is beyond me. I am obviously not familiar with the full panoply of Palin comments on Obama, but I have yet to see any that are as bad as the usual Democratic partisans interpret them to be. Furthermore, should extreme interpretations on either side be given more currency than more cool-headed ones? I certainly hope not.

I think McCain and Palin should focus on hitting Obama on his planned tax increases, especially the effect on small businesses, as well as his foreign policy proposals (although I have not heard about in them in so long that I cannot be sure what they are anymore). Raising taxes during a recession is hardly ever a good idea.

Eurovol, I ask for a clarification as to exactly which people you are referring to as "bile-spewing vermin"?

Probably in much the same way that you derive anti semitism from any criticism of Israel Conkie.
(quote)
My point was that you claimed (wrongly) that Israel is a religious state while also making clear your antipathy towards religion. I believe that antipathy towards religion biases you against Israel, thus you only criticize Israel and interpret everything in the worst possible light for Israel (read Jews). You didn't complain about any religion other than Judaism with regards to the Israeli state and pretty much only Bedouins among Israeli Arabs serve in the IDF, so when you are complaining about the IDF, it's obvious you are talking about Jews.

First rule of being an "apologists": attack the messenger while avoiding the facts (or twist them as you see fit).

I found this site today and have been gobsmacked with the videos on this page.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/

I just got this message from the campaign trail:


Yep, I would say that the "rage" being stirred up is real and people are taking it seriously.

Note: this is also being backed up by a number of Republicans both from elected positions and as commentators with sobering clarity. Hard to dismiss out of hand those that actually "lead" on the right (as opposed to some freeper on a board) having serious concerns about the tone of the McCain/Palin ticket!

Everyone on here that knows me knows that I try to listen to both sides of an arguement. Two years ago I was leaning Hillary but kept my options open because that is the way I am. Coming from a strong GOP based, military family I liked McCain although chose Obama because I prefered his stanceson certain issues as well feel we need change. I chose Obama before McCain chose Palin and breathed a moment of relief that I chose Obama but gasped at the idea McCain chose Palin. She is going to bring him down sadly and he is a good man.

Just my opin.

No, it was rather clear from your comments that you had Israeli Jews in mind, as I pointed out. It is too bad you did not post the link to the thread so that your comments, my comments on yours, and those of others could be viewed within context.


And I would say, by your logic, calling someone an "apologist" is very much attacking the messenger, something you have done many times to me, and often, very viruently. I was referring to your vast paper trail of negative comments on this board in reference to Republicans, something which is a fact (and certainly does not need this imaginary twisting).


Again, from whose perspective are you posting? From that of Democratic partisans. Is there independent corroboration, or is this just something to fire up Democrats?

Seem to be stirring up your own rage there mate,

Do try again with a source more credible than something written by an alleged crony.

Topic closed by admin.

Topic continues: U.S. Presidential election 2008