or Powell's or me• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show
•
"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket
•
"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming
April 04, 2006
Dear Bush Speechwriters: Please Find Another Book To Swipe From
This sounds like pretty standard rhetoric from the Bush administration, doesn't it?
"America cannot tolerate continuous disturbances in these areas...Therefore the United States, in keeping with the law of self-preservation, is now resolved to intervene decisively to rebuild the foundations of a reasonable order in the Middle East....U.S. history has already proved that, thanks to the greatness and qualities of the American people, it alone is called to undertake this task."
It's not, though. (See below.)
As you may have guessed, that's actually Hitler, with a few words changed. It's from his speech upon the March 15, 1939 invasion of rump Czechoslovakia:
"The German Reich cannot tolerate continuous disturbances in these areas...Therefore the German Reich, in keeping with the law of self-preservation, is now resolved to intervene decisively to rebuild the foundations of a reasonable order in Central Europe....[German] history has already proved that, thanks to the greatness and qualities of the German people, it alone is called to undertake this task."
â€â€ÂThe Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 449
I'm not saying the Bush administration are Nazis. I'm just saying it would be nice if they stopped justifying wars with Nazi rhetoric.
Posted at April 4, 2006 11:26 PM | TrackBackHmm, it took me a while to understand that the first paragraph wasn't actually a Bush speech just based on presentation and not liklihood at all. But I'm tired.
Posted by: Saheli at April 5, 2006 03:25 AMIt's not so much that they use 'Nazi' rhetoric to justify wars. After all, *everybody* uses this kind of rhetoric to start their wars. The problem is the general acceptability of rhetoric as justification for war, not any specific historical comparison. It's always the same: yes, but Hitler was a bad guy. When we say dumb bullshit, it smells good, because we are good.
American leaders are not to be judged by their actions, but by their stated intentions.
My copy of the recent Kiplinger Letter: Forecasts for Management Decision Making tells me that there is no chance that a future Democratic congress or presidency would repudiate Bush's doctrine of preemptive war. All parties agree, I am told, that we do not have to wait to be hit first before responding militarily to any threat we see.
Naturally, this right is reserved to the US and favored clients only. We can't have just everyone responding militarily to perceived threats -- that'd be madness of course.
Posted by: Half at April 5, 2006 07:18 AM
