Response to Santorum Hitler Remarks and Video

Earlier today, Senator Rick Santorum, on the floor of the United States Senate, compared Senate Democrat attempts to preserve the rights of the minority party to Adolph Hitler's invasion of France.

I wanted everyone to know that while others sleep, we are doing what we can to push this story into the mainstream media.

We have video on the website of the remarks and our press release went out about a half hour ago.  The text of Chuck's statement, and link to the video for your distribution can be found in the extended entry.  

-- Tim

Update [2005-5-19 22:40:40 by Chuck Pennacchio for US Senate]: We just sent out an email to supporters with the video (you may have received it). We are going to attempt to distribute this video much as we did with the "Hey Hey, Ho Ho Social Security has got to go" video. Please consider contributing to the campaign and help us get this out. -- Tim

Upon hearing about Rick Santorum's speech on the floor of the United States Senate earlier today, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate, Chuck Pennacchio, released the following statement:

"As an historian of Holocaust-era Germany, I find Rick Santorum's comment to be offensive, divisive, and destructive.  Rick Santorum should immediately issue a public apology, and then retreat with conscience to consider the lasting damage he has done to the United States Senate and to the memory of 12 million Holocaust victims."  

"How ironic is it that he would make such an extremist comment comparing Senate Democrats to Adolph Hitler while his own political party seeks to consolidate all governmental power in its own hands?"  

Pennacchio continued, "This is embarrassing to all Pennsylvanians.  Unfortunately, Rick Santorum's hate-filled and heated rhetoric is completely consistent with the junior Senator's past behavior."

Rick Santorum's Hypocrisy:

Just two months ago, Rick Santorum said Senator Robert Byrd "lessen[ed] the credibility of the senator and the decorum of the Senate," when he obliquely referred to Hitler in a March 1 speech.  [Charleston Journal 3/11/2005]

Website:  http://www.chuck2006.com
Video of Santorum Remarks: http://www.chuck2006.com/blogDetail.asp?id=139

•  Where's the Anti-Defamation League?

       Awaiting their condemnation...

  by David Boyle on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:05:48 PM PDT

  •  Contact info:

    http://www.adl.org/main_contact.asp

    by Eternal Hope on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:08:43 PM PDT

    •  Byrd & the ADL

      the ADL blasted Byrd (& gave the Rethugs cover to follow suit) when the Senator (see diary update) refered to Hitler in a speech.  that was wrong IMHO.

      the ADL is necessary & does good work (Byrd incident aside) but the ADL needs to say something about Santorum & don't tell me they need to be contacted -- i'm sure they've heard about it.

      Bush, What Price Did You Pay?

      by krazypuppy on Fri May 20, 2005 at 09:17:56 AM PDT

      •  Can't have it both ways

        We can't expect the ADL to only call out those on the other side, now can we? If you find Santorum's comparison reprehensible, you kinda have to deal with the fact that Dems should be held to the same standard, don't you think?

        by segmentis on Fri May 20, 2005 at 11:01:32 AM PDT

        •  i agree on not having double standards

          but i don't believe Byrd's statements were AT ALL disrespectful of the Holocaust & Jews.

          Santorum, an image focused hack, is nothing compared to Byrd, a well-read historian of substance.

          i didn't like the ADL's criticism of Byrd b/c Byrd wasn't IMHO diminishing the Holocaust & it really gave a pro-Republican Jewish group (not to mention Santorum) cover to criticize Byrd for partisan purposes.

          my opinion.

          Bush, What Price Did You Pay?

          by krazypuppy on Fri May 20, 2005 at 01:33:36 PM PDT

  •  Well, they did bitch-slap Novak

    So I wouldn't be surprised if they bitch slap Sen. Man-on-dog, too.

    by Categorically Imperative on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:09:06 PM PDT

    •  And Wal*Mart

      by segmentis on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:41:52 PM PDT

      •  Walmart: Only the ADL? I think not!

        From what I hear in the news about Wal*Mart's business goings-on, they're being bitch-slapped by a lot more than the ADL.

        by BullitNutz on Fri May 20, 2005 at 01:46:31 AM PDT

        •  So that negates

          the ADL's efforts? From what I can tell, as regards the deeply offensive Nazi book-burning ad in AZ (that is what we're talking about, right?), it was absolutely the influence of the ADL that generated retractions and apologies. While I would agree that grassroots efforts like Wake Up Wal*Mart were instrumental in publicizing the offense, I also believe that it was the ADL that acted as the big stick. Do you have some evidence to the contrary?

          by segmentis on Fri May 20, 2005 at 10:58:59 AM PDT

    •  ADL on Novak

      full press release here

      Robert Novak is at it again.  It is one thing to oppose the Senate filibuster, but it is another to compare an American democratic process to the horrific spectacle that took place in the shadow of the Nazi gas chambers - the selection process that led to the murder of six million Jews and others, which still scars the memory of Holocaust survivors.

      One would hope that Mr. Novak will wake up and realize how abhorrent, how deeply offensive and insensitive his remarks are, especially for survivors of the Holocaust and their families.  He owes them, and the American people, an apology for distorting an important issue with such an inappropriate comparison to the Holocaust.

      -- Stu

      by sdf on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:46:04 PM PDT

      •  By the way I would add

        That they were prompt and extremely courteous in their response to my original email asking that they respond to Novak, and the regional director who responded (personally) made clear that I should contact her directly if I had any other concerns.  And, so I did, as it turns out.  I expect a good bitchslap of Santorum.

        And no, you don't have to agree with everything they do or say to appreciate their acting as Godwin's Law watchdog.

        -- Stu

        by sdf on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:52:11 PM PDT

  •  ADL is bad news

    The ADL is a pretty creepy outfit.  I would keep them far away. In my experience they have aided and abetted the ability of the Klan and white nationalists to hold rallies in large cities by viciously slandering any opposition other than craven prayer services.

    Readers here may appreciate this comment.

    Anti-Defamation League Director Abraham Foxman has played the holocaust card for the Republicans, saying "It is hideous, outrageous and offensive for Senator Byrd to suggest that the Republican Party's tactics could in any way resemble those of Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party.

    http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0307-22.htm

    Hal C.
    

    by Hal C on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:20:53 PM PDT

    •  ADL is not all bad

           I have occasionally donated to B'nai B'rith even, since while not Jewish myself I feel they do some good work.
           ...If nothing else, they are sometimes good about complaining about misuses of the comparison to Hitler.....    

      by David Boyle on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:31:13 PM PDT

      •  See my comment below

        I do not want to hijack this thread, but the point is important.
        Hal C.

        by Hal C on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:14:33 AM PDT

    •  So...

      ...they'll hold Santorum to the same standard, I promise you.

      I have problems w/ the ADL's Zionism, but what other organization is working as hard to prevent another Holocaust? If you know of a better equivalent, I'd love to hear about it.

      by segmentis on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:43:45 PM PDT

      •  ACLU, hands down. [nt]

        by wu ming on Fri May 20, 2005 at 12:50:27 AM PDT

      •  On the contrary

        The ADL has a long history of slandering those who would stop the racists.  In Philly, they tried to close a benefit for a 12 year old girl and others injured and arrested when a Nazi drove his truck into a crowd.

        White supremacists held a rally in front of the public library in York. Far-left activists from Philadelphia Anti-Racist Action and others confronted the hate groups...

        Members of Anti-Racist Action held a benefit concert to raise money for the legal defense of those arrested and medical treatment for the injured 12-year-old. The benefit raised $700 and was peaceful. The concert was held in a private house in West Philadelphia after the original venue, the Killtime on Lancaster Avenue, was shut down just hours before the concert was to begin. The Department of Licenses and Inspections closed down the club, but it was the Anti-Defamation League that tipped off the authorities in the first place. According to L&I spokeswoman Andrea Swan, the building was shut down because it was operating as an illegal, unlicensed dancehall.
        link
        

        
        A band member wrote:
        

        LTE the ADL should really examine the community they choose to interfere in before they start making phone calls. While they didn't succeed in shutting down the show, they did put the future of one of the few underground all-ages venues left in Philly in jeopardy. We have a scene here, where bands that care about issues of racism, sexism and homophobia can play and share their views. The ADL has come crashing in, like the proverbial bull in a china shop, and thrown everything into chaos. They have effectively impeded an outlet for disseminating the very information that they care the most about. They are working against their own goals.
        

        For a more comprehensive background see the following article.

        How The Anti-Defamation League Turned the Notion of Human Rights on Its Head, Spying on Progressives and Funneling      Information to Law Enforcement

        By Robert I. Friedman
        The Village Voice, May 11, 1993, Vol. XXXVIII No. 19

        In the late 1940s, the ADL spied on leftists and Communists, and shared investigative files with the House Committee on Un-American Activities and the FBI. The ADL swung sharply to the right during the Reagan administration, becoming a bastion of neoconservatism. To Irwin Suall, a repentant Trotskyite who heads the ADL's powerful Fact Finding Department, the real danger to Jews is posed not by the right -- but by a coalition of leftists, blacks, and Arabs, who in his view threaten the fabric of democracy in America, as well as the state of Israel. In the tradition of his ideological soulmate William Casey, Suall directed the ADL's vast network of informants, who were given code names like "Scumbag," "Ironside," and -- for a spy reportedly posing as a priest in Atlanta --"Flipper." [...]

        While the ADL may be able to rationalize its close monitoring of Arabs, and even left-wing gay revolutionaries, it has a far harder time explaining its obsession with spying on anti- apartheid activists. [...]

        But many believe the ADL is increasingly in the defamation business. Ask Jesse Jackson, James Abourezk, or the leaders of the New Jewish Agenda -- all past targets of ADL smears. (At the same time, the ADL exonerated the fascist World Anti-Communist League, which assisted Ronald Reagan's covert war against Nicaragua, a policy endorsed by ADL leaders.)
        Reprinted here
        

        This outfit is very bad news.
        Hal C.

        by Hal C on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:13:04 AM PDT

        •  You better have more

          Than just "the ADL has a few bad apples" before you smear the organization as a whole.

          You conveniently left out this part of the Village Voice piece: "The ADL was established in New York City in 1913 to defend Jews, and later other minority groups, from discrimination. It led the
          fight against racist and fascist groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party, and in the 1960s championed the civil rights movement."

          Just because you might have had to deal with a few shitheads in Philly doesn't merit your condemnation of the group in toto.  Instead, try this on for size:

          http://www.s-t.com/daily/12-99/12-04-99/a05sr043.htm

          by Chippendale on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:28:14 AM PDT

          •  ADL work for apartheid

            juan cole writes:

            He therefore would have been intimately acquainted with the case of the Anti-Defamation League, which spied on anti-Apartheid and pro-Palestinian demonstrators in California in the late 1980s and early 1990s. ADL's San Francisco chief spy, Roy Bullock, was also an agent of the racist Apartheid government of South Africa. The ADL spied on US citizens, compiled dossiers on them, and shared those dossiers with the Israeli and South African governments, as well as trying to pass them to SF law enforcement. Their activities contravene California's strict privacy laws (at the very least), and they were busted in 1992. The case dragged on, however, and was only settled in 2002 when ADL paid damages to some of the plaintiffs.
            

            by Hal C on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:08:30 AM PDT

            •  Again

              Just a few bad apples.

              The Democratic party has had a few bad apples in its history. Does that mean the Dems are a piece of shit too?

              Oh. And the Southern Poverty Law Center and tolerance.org are both affiliated with the ADL. I guess those groups suck just as bad, huh?

              by Chippendale on Fri May 20, 2005 at 10:19:18 AM PDT

        •  Good news

          I just received this via email from the ADL in response to my complaint:

          AFTER SANTORUM APOLOGIZES, ADL REITERATES CONCERN ABOUT USE OF NAZI IMAGERY IN FILIBUSTER DEBATE

          New York, NY, May 20, 2005 ... After Senator Rick Santorum apologized for his remarks comparing the Democrats use of the filibuster to oppose judicial nominees to "the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942," the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reiterated its concern about inappropriate comparisons to Nazis and the Holocaust in political debates, which are becoming all-too common in Washington.

          "Once again, Nazi imagery was used in a political debate, where it has no place," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director.  "Whatever your views on the Senate rules relating to the use of the filibuster and judicial nominations, it is inappropriate and insensitive to compare American democratic procedures with actions taken by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party."

          After learning of his remarks on the Senate floor yesterday, ADL wrote a letter to the Pennsylvania Senator, urging him to repudiate his words and apologize for "distorting an important issue with such an inappropriate comparison to Hitler." Sen. Santorum later issued a statement saying the reference "was meant to dramatize the principle of an argument, not to characterize my Democratic colleagues.... Nevertheless, it was a mistake and I meant no offense."

          In March, the League criticized similar comments on the filibuster debate by West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd.

          "This kind of language makes no sense," said Mr. Foxman. "America's elected officials must refrain from invoking Hitler, the Nazis and the Holocaust, which have no place in our nation's political discourse."

          The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

          by segmentis on Fri May 20, 2005 at 04:18:01 PM PDT

          •  The letter written to Santorum

            is here:
            http://www.adl.org/holocaust/Letter_santorum.asp

            Hal C

            by Hal C on Fri May 20, 2005 at 04:36:04 PM PDT

    •  What crack are you smoking

      And where can my students of tolerance get some.

      by Chippendale on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:12:12 AM PDT

      •  See my response above n/t

        by Hal C on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:15:36 AM PDT

  •  What does that comment have to do with

    the Holocost?  I hate Ricky Boy just as much as the next raging progressive, and see the huge irony of his comments, but why does mentioning Hitler automatically equal offending victims of the Holocost?  

    by Stoy on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:37:46 PM PDT

    •  Agreed...

      Senator Santorum's remarks were not directly related to the holocaust.

      That doesn't make them acceptable, though: there is no comparison between Democratic procedural wrangling with an aggressive and deadly war on a sovereign nation and so forth.

      by Shapeshifter on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:24:09 PM PDT

      •  "An aggressive

        and deadly war on a sovereign nation"

        (church lady voice)  
        Could that be.................... Iraq?
        (/church lady voice)

        by nargel on Thu May 19, 2005 at 11:52:37 PM PDT

        •  like your..

          .. sig line :-)

          by nika7k on Fri May 20, 2005 at 04:33:58 AM PDT

          •  Thanx

            It's been a while but is that a Dirk Gently line?

            by nargel on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:09:03 PM PDT

    •  Separate

      I don't see how you can separate a slur of "You're like Hitler" from every evil, horrible thing Hitler did or caused to be done. This isn't some scholarly discussion of the life of Adolf Hitler, where details are being carefully sifted. This isn't some careful comparison along the lines of "Hitler's rise to power can be compared to Mussolini's."

      No, Santorum is making the comparison only to offer up a venal, wretched insult. As I say, he is invoking Hitler-as-the-ultimate-evil, which incorporates everything he ever did. In this vein, Hitler is the man who caused World War II, invaded most of Europe, slaughtered millions in the Holocaust, and caused countless deaths in war.

      And he's also comparing all Dems to this incarnation of Hitler. If Hitler's victims make a special claim to being offended by this comparison, then I do not begrudge them.

      by DavidNYC on Fri May 20, 2005 at 12:15:18 AM PDT

•  Nice Rapid Response

  I'm impressed that you got a statement out so fast and it didn't even use the term, "batshit crazy"

  by Bob Brigham on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:12:31 PM PDT

  •  But you've got to give bonus points

    For this many adjectives:
    Offensive, divisive, destructive, lasting damage, ironic, extremist, embarrassing, unfortunately, hate-filled, and heated.

    While it may not have the elloquence of "basshit crazy," that's impressive list for three short paragraphs!

    by michael in chicago on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:23:47 PM PDT

  •  News reports being scrubbed?

    Jeff Seemann For Congress has posted a new diary this morning suggesting that news reports of Santorum's Hitler remark are being scrubbed from the internets.

    235 of them so far.  Not too bad.

    However, after scanning through the Google page to see the names of the papers, I decided to start clicking on the articles.

    The first 10 articles I clicked on ALL had pages that read "404 Error - Page not found".  All of the error pages were on the individual paper's online letterhead.  

    Some of them are still there, but of the 30 that I have personally checked so far, 27 of the articles are no longer available.

    I'm not surprised; however, if such a purge is happening, it needs to be addressed.

    by wanderindiana on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:23:04 AM PDT

•  Glad to see a response

  I was looking for a way to notify the campaign earlier, but I see now that it wasn't necessary.

  by NonemptySubset on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:18:59 PM PDT

•  Please tell me that the release

  said "all governmental power in its own hands" and not "all governmental party in its own hands".  Love ya Tim (and Chuck), but this is what editors are for.  Little errors like this detract from the power of the message.  Go get 'em.

  by smithbm on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:29:15 PM PDT

  •  We got it right

    http://www.politicspa.com/Press_Releases/051905pennacchio.htm

    That's the release on PoliticsPA.

    Thanks,

    Tim

    by ttagaris on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:44:20 PM PDT

    •  Oops...

      D'oh!  In the press release, one sentence after mentioning that Mr. Pennacchio is a historian of holocaust-era Germany, they spell "Adolf" incorrectly.

      It's not "Adolph."

      You're thinking of "Dolph Lundgren."

      Oopsie.

      by dmauer on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:15:15 AM PDT

•  All blog alert

  Every single liberal blog should have the link to that video on their website.  Every. Single. One.

  This isn't Rick-on-Dog playing off-the-cuff.  This is one very disturbed and mentally unstable individual who has become so obsessed with power, he thinks he can say whatever he wants and not have to account for it.

  Well, he does.  And he will.
  

  by LeftofArizona on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:31:38 PM PDT

  •  Mine does

    Check it out--  
    www.kalamazoopost.blogspot.com
    Yes, there really is a Kalamazoo.

    by Grodge on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:16:40 PM PDT

•  FLIP FLOPPER !!!!

  Sen. Man on Dog -- he was against it, before he was before it !!!

  by Al Rodgers on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:32:22 PM PDT

•  Thank you for running

  against this lunatic.  He, like Frist, look so bedazzled in the Senate chamber.  Its that deer "what the hell am I doing here" in the headlights look.  

  by AllenB101 on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:34:34 PM PDT

•  I can't recall

   ... anyone calling on a politician to not only apologize, but "retreat with conscience" to reflect on what they've done.

  I like it. Has a great combination of gravity and condescension.

  by BriVT on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:34:39 PM PDT

•  I don't see Bob Casey on top of this.

  One Chuck Pennacchio would be worth a half dozen milquetoast Democratic Senators.

  by ignu on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:52:27 PM PDT

  •  I've been wondering

    Why does Pennacchio fail to even show up on any polls.  I have yet to see a poll even acknowledge that Pennacchio is running.  Pretty hard to get your campaign any name recognition when you don't even have any name recognition amongst pollsters.

    by cwech on Thu May 19, 2005 at 11:39:00 PM PDT

•  Adolf

  It's "Adolf," not "Adolph." I hope "an historian of Holocaust-era Germany" got it right in the actual release.

  I know it's nitpicky, but really, it does make the historian look sloppy.

  However, many thanks for calling Santorum out on his (typically) egregious behavior.

  by hyperstation on Thu May 19, 2005 at 05:56:58 PM PDT

  •  Yes, and not nitpicky...

    Those with German relatives named "Adolph" tend to not care much for Hitler's name being misspelled.

    ;-)

    by MH in PA on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:00:48 PM PDT

  •  You are correct...

    You are too nit-picky.  Settle.

    by Grodge on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:05:51 PM PDT

    •  Back to English class...

      Taking care to spell something correctly is not nit-picky.  It shows research and proofreading.

      by cclough on Fri May 20, 2005 at 03:25:46 AM PDT

    •  Definitely not nitpicky

      in this case
      

      by stevej on Fri May 20, 2005 at 05:14:04 AM PDT

  •  The diary was posted by Tim, not Chuck.

    I'm not sure who Tim is but he must be an aide of Chuck's. and it appears that he posted the diary for Chuck. So perhaps it was Tim who misspelled Adolf as Adolph and not Chuck.

    by Seemabes on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:30:02 AM PDT

•  Invoking Hitler,

  or any WW II reference for that matter, smacks of desperation.  First Novak, and now Santorum...  perhaps the tide is turning.

  by Grodge on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:04:24 PM PDT

  •  If I had a nickel...

    ...for every time I'd heard someone say "perhaps the tide is turning" in the past 4 years...

    I'd have enough money to survive nicely as a Republican.

    by dmauer on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:17:42 AM PDT

•  The sight of that freak

  waving his arms in high dudgeon over what he calls the Democrats' hubris is dangerous to breakable objects about my person.

  May the stars align against him, his rudderless party and all who sail in it.  

  by bumblebums on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:05:22 PM PDT

  •  I agree, baton down the small children

    I read Kay Bailey Hutchinson's remark the Priscilla Owen is "soft-spoken" and that that trait is one we should prize above all. I almost put my fist throught the subway door, and had to settle for biting the fleshy part of my inner palm.

    by mrblifil on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:16:50 PM PDT

•  Thanks, this is great!

  THIS stuff is why I'm glad Chuck Pennacchio is in the race.
  

  by MH in PA on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:10:05 PM PDT

  •  Yes

    Ah, yes, thank you for pointing this out. Win or lose, a nimble, smart, net-savvy campaign like Pennacchio's is a plus to the PA senate race. This very post is evidence of the kind of positive effect even a small, low-budget and low-name rec campaign can have.

    by DavidNYC on Fri May 20, 2005 at 12:19:11 AM PDT

•  Email him

  This is a good opportunity to email Senator Santorum and politely educate him to the dangers of using false analogies--comparing the Senate Democrats' take on the filibuster to Hitler's march on Paris.  I'm sure he had a point there but perhaps it was far too nuanced for my understanding:>  On the other hand, perhaps his point was to invoke the name of the most reviled man of the 20th century; tossing in Hitler's name is a lot easier than building an argument as to why Bush deserves to have all his judicial nominees approved.  Now if the press is doing its job, we should be hearing every thirty minutes on the radio how Santorum equated the Dems to Hitler in much the same way we heard about Kerry's use of the word lesbian in reference to Cheney's daughter during the debates.

  by profmomak on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:16:35 PM PDT

•  Did no one on the floor object?

  Where was Schumer or Lieberman while all this was going on? That should've been the story of the day. No offense to Pennachio, whom I have high hopes for, but someone with clout should've delivered the smackdown to Santorum then and there.

  by mrblifil on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:20:16 PM PDT

•  Missing the point

  As an historian of Holocaust-era Germany, I find Rick Santorum's comment to be offensive, divisive, and destructive.  Rick Santorum should immediately issue a public apology...

  This is great and all, but Pennacchio should have gone a step further and Santorum's idiocy and not just offensiveness.  

  Offensive, divisive and destructive fail to address, head on, why the statement might be inapt or preposterous.  A comment might be offensive, divisive and destructive and still be true; framing it this way misrepresents the issue as one of politics (or even, god forbid, political correctness) when really Pennacchio should make clear, in no uncertain terms that Santorum may be offensive, but more to the point, he's an ignoramus.  

  by weeping for brunnhilde on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:21:20 PM PDT

•  Never Liked the Analogy Questions on the SAT

  Okay, I'm just not good at analogies.  Never have been.

  But I just do NOT understand Santorum's point at all.  And I'm sure there's lots more folks like me out there.  So, aside from the absurdity of invoking the inflammatory name of Hitler in a discussion of arcane parliamentarian procedures, Santorum probably only succeeded in confusing the hell out of most of his Pennsylvania adherents.

  Intelligent design no longer scares me as much as Santorum does.

  by happiness cat on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:43:05 PM PDT

  •  It was pointless

    I'm just not good at analogies

    Neither is Santorum, apparently <g>.  Not that I would ascribe any other resemblance, of course.

    And while he's probably confusing his smarter constituents, the ones that would prefer a substantive comparison, at least, the fact is that he's only speaking to the stupid & the inattentive-- he's just pushing "Dems = Hitler."  

    by latts on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:37:54 PM PDT

•  just orwell

  making another revolution on the rotisserie
  of Truth

  by demnomore on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:49:26 PM PDT

•  I think I understand...

  ...Santorum's thinking:

  1. I don't like Nazis.

  2. I don't like Democrats.

  3. Therefore, Democrats are just like Nazis.

  This is consistent with his reasoning on gay marriage:

  1. I don't want to have consensual gay sex.

  2. I don't want to have sex with a dog.

  3. Therefore gay sex is just like having sex with a dog.

  G'ahead -- try it your own self.  Anything can be just like anything else...

  by Roddy McCorley on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:57:52 PM PDT

  •  Or, more in keeping with today's GOP:

    1. I hope nobody finds out about all the gay sex I'm having.

    2. I really hope nobody finds out about all the dog sex I had that one time.

    Therefore, gay sex is just like dog sex.

    by speranza on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:11:26 PM PDT

    •  Well, you know,

      if it's warm and damp and vibrates....

      by TracieLynn on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:25:21 PM PDT

  •  Lemme Try

    1. I Like Universal Health Care
       
    2. I Like Canada
       
    3. Therefor, Canada has Universal Health Care

    Hmmmm ... so far, it works!

    1. I Don't Like George W Bush
       
    2. I don't like assholes
       
    3. Therefor, W is an asshole

    -- i can seriously see how santorum could get caught up in this logic!!!!

    by josephk on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:39:36 PM PDT

    •  There is something there...

      Let's see:

      1. I despise Cheney
         
      2. I really despise Cheney
         
      3. Therefor, Darth Cheney is a major asshole

      ----You're right, this works pretty well!

      by nargel on Fri May 20, 2005 at 12:13:52 AM PDT

•  nonsense indeed

  Santorum continues his remarks, making an analogy with Sarbanes-Oakley law that was necessary because "few companies were abusing loopholes in the existing laws".

  If Democrats "are abusing loopholes in the existing rules", that kind of admits that these rules exist, doesn't it?  And that invalidates the nuclear option approach.

  Assuming, wrongly of course, that Santorum wants to be consistent for an entire week.

  Actually, Santorum's remark were rather incoherent.  Something about "too many laws", "limiting 99% of the citizens [by Sarbanes-Oakley]".  

  by Piotr on Thu May 19, 2005 at 06:58:44 PM PDT

  •  His speech yesterday was so contradictory...

    that my head almost exploded trying to dechipher it all.

    by Seemabes on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:31:17 AM PDT

•  Does Santorum use a generator of random words?

  Is there any historical truth on someone bombing or invading Paris in 42, and Hitler or any other pervert using these words. I'd like to see the German
  translation of
  'I'm in Paris. How dare you invade me. How dare you bomb my city?'

  Who did say that? Answer: Santorum
  When? 2005
  Why? Kadavergehorsam! (check http://dict.leo.org/)

  I'm sorry for this useless distraction from the main issue here.

  by heinrich on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:01:42 PM PDT

  •  good point

    Santorum is not only stupid, obnoxious and ridiculous - his history is fucked-up.

    My goodness, I'm SO happy that morons like this are governing my country!!

    by hrh on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:36:21 PM PDT

  •  the facts

    The Renault factory in Paris was in fact bombed on March 3, 1942 by the UK...

    As for the quote it appears to be a purely hypothetical one.

    by baahl on Thu May 19, 2005 at 08:59:34 PM PDT

•  Nice turnaround

  "How ironic is it that he would make such and extremist comment comparing Senate Democrats to Adolph Hitler while his own political party seeks to consolidate all governmental power in its own hands?"

  Here he is denouncing a republican for equating democrats with Hitler and then coming out here subtly making the same equation with Republicans.  However, because he does it only implicitly nobody can call him on it.  Great rhetorical twist!

  by kenjib on Thu May 19, 2005 at 07:30:34 PM PDT

•  from Atrios

  [Santorum] recently:

      "Senator Byrd's inappropriate remarks comparing his Republican colleagues with Nazis are inexcusable," Santorum said in a statement yesterday. "These comments lessen the credibility of the senator and the decorum of the Senate. He should retract his statement and ask for pardon."

  (emphasis mine)

  by Persimmon on Thu May 19, 2005 at 08:01:46 PM PDT

•  One question???

  Where is the outrage from the Domocratic senators? They should be calling for Sanitarium's resignation immediately!

  by grizzly on Thu May 19, 2005 at 09:54:58 PM PDT

•  wait a minute

  looney-tune wingnuts like rick "man-on-dog" santorum hate france, right? i mean they absolutely despise every single frenchman, including the marquis de lafayette.

  so given that, it would seem that he thinks the democratic filibusters are a good thing, yes?

  
  
  disclaimer: you better believe this is a joke, yo.

  by zeke L on Thu May 19, 2005 at 10:57:29 PM PDT

•  Tim

  You and the rest of the campaign might also like to be aware of this.  Obviously not as outrageous, but still a lie.

  by NonemptySubset on Thu May 19, 2005 at 11:26:00 PM PDT

•  Question:

  How long must one live in Pennsylvania before being allowed to vote in their senate elections?

  by BullitNutz on Fri May 20, 2005 at 01:42:32 AM PDT

  •  Heck

    Heck, you apparently don't even have to live in Pennsylvania to run as the Senator from that state!

    by TxTiger on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:43:43 AM PDT

•  Republicans...

  When will they ever figure out who Godwin is and what his law is all about?

  by BullitNutz on Fri May 20, 2005 at 01:48:14 AM PDT

•  Here's the scorecard

  Politicians who have compared members of the other party to Hitler or Nazi Germany:

  Democrats:    0
  Republicans:  346

  Frankly I'm tired of listening to Republicans complain about Democrats comparing Bush to Hitler or the GOP to Nazis when the only comparisons to Hitler or Nazis of which I'm aware of have either come from Republicans or politicians from other countries.

  Out of curiosity, can anyone here name one Democrat politician who has compared a Republican to Hitler or Nazi Germany? I know that I can't.

  by rogun on Fri May 20, 2005 at 04:01:17 AM PDT

•  Give him a call!

  at 202-224-6324

  I like the concept of "he was against it before he was for it" and will steal that line when I call:-0

  I plan to ask if he is aware that Hitler did NOT protect the rights of the minority...would he be willing to step out and protect the minority to prove he is a Hitler-Hater?  Otherwise, given his own logic, what's to stop sex between Republicans and Nazi's?
  Geez, you're either with us or against us...right?

  by lam2b2g on Fri May 20, 2005 at 05:02:11 AM PDT

•  He's at it again--Santorum REPEATS the Hitler line

  Speaking on WHYY, the local NPR Affiliate here in Philly, Santorum once again used the "This is Adolf Hitler standing in Paris and saying 'this is mine.'"

  At first, I thought they were just repeating his line from the floor debate, but NO! It was a separate quote!

  At some point, Ricky is going to say that he "misspoke" on the floor. Let's not let him get away with that. It's clearly in his TALKING POINTS! It's his stock line, and that's just not OK.

  by blue goose on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:18:15 AM PDT

  •  I still fail to see...

    ... exactly, in all seriousness, how in any reality that metaphor works.  I mean, is he trying to say the Dems have invaded the Senate and got pissed that the Republicans are bombing it?  This is the most random and incoherent comparison, and it seems like he stretched it just so he could throw in a Hitler reference to make Dems look like Nazis.

    But I still don't see exactly what he was trying to compare here.  Someone please help me understand so I can start being outraged about it.

    by The Party Plague on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:10:16 AM PDT

•  Non-Sequitor

  Not only was his comment inappropriate and offensive, but it was also a complete non-sequitor. I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out what he might have meant.

  Senator Rick Non-Sequitorum - spouting random nonsense without any point.

  by TxTiger on Fri May 20, 2005 at 06:41:54 AM PDT

•  Byrd's comments

  Anyone have a link to Byrd's comments?  I keep hearing his reference to Hitler/Nazis described as either "tangential" or "oblique".  I would like to be able to back those adjectives up with the quote itself.

  by ThomasAllen on Fri May 20, 2005 at 07:21:16 AM PDT

  •  Digby covers it conclusively

    Senator Byrd's comments were factual and appropriate.

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_05_15_digbysblog_archive.html#111656853003490838

    by TomB on Fri May 20, 2005 at 07:40:08 AM PDT

•  when i hear this guy speak

  it is like he is a character in a movie about an alternate universe...

  by joewlarson on Fri May 20, 2005 at 08:00:41 AM PDT

•  When will everyone learn

  to stop bringing up Hitler?  There are other historical references.  Are we looking for moral absolutes?  

  I am so sick of someone saying "at least the Nazis didn't.." and the response being "You're comparing blahblah to Hitler!  That's ridiculous!"
  Every time a Democrat complained about Swift Boat lies last year, Republicans brought up that stupid MoveOn contest Hitler ad and stonewalled the argument.

  SOOO Annoying.

  Please, everyone, leave Hitler alone.  Read some more history.  You can find a better comparison.

  by Cream Puff on Fri May 20, 2005 at 09:13:50 AM PDT

  •  Santorum calls Hitler quip `mistake'

    In a Reuters story that came out about half an hour ago, Senator Man-on-Dog asserted that it was a mistake and he meant no offense.

    I don't buy it--that nugget came in remarks prepared for delivering on the Senate floor, and were not off the cuff.  If he didn't intend to offend someone, he should fire whichever staffer composed those remarks.

    by sam3am on Fri May 20, 2005 at 02:07:26 PM PDT