You Always Lose the Debate When You Invoke Hitler

It's just a basic rule of political/philosophical discourse. Anytime you invoke a comparison to Hitler or his enabler's, you lose the debate. Period. End of discussion.

Even taking the Bush Administration at their word that they were really criticizing Carter's visit with Hamas (which I find contemptible due to their support of terrorist tactics, despite my support for the Palestinian cause), invoking Hitler was not politically smart. Hitler allusions are the last refuge of the intellectually weak who can't justify their positions/opinios without referencing one of the most evil men in history (Stalin and Mao killed more people indiscriminately and therefore arguably were more evil if you count simple bodies. However, the evil of Hitler's agenda, while banal, was well thought out, organized and rationally planned on a level of magnitude far different than the latter two).

To their credit, the Obama campaign was quick to use Bush's address to Knesset as a way of jump starting/ furbishing their weak foreign policy cred and taking the fight to the deeply (and deservedely) unpopular President. In doing so, they not only elevated themselves to the same level as the President by taking Bush on directly, but they further kept Hillary Clinton out of the news for another cycle, and possibly the weekend, thus hindering her campaign efforts in Oregon.

In short, Bush is a moron and Obama possesses a top-notch and savvy political team. Which really shouldn't be unexpected given that many of them were the Daschle Presidential campaign in waiting before John Thune beat him (barely) in 2004).

Obama Owes McCain an Apology (and is just plain weak)

First of all John McCain simply repeated what Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Prime Minister said when he said that Hamas preferred an Obama Presidency. Here's the quote in its entirety:

"We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election." This statement was made in an interview with Aaron Klein and John Batchelor interviewed on WABC.

Now we know why Obama was so sensitive to accusations that Hamas would prefer him as President - one of his advisors had been meeting with members of the radical terrorist group which wants to annilate Israel. The Washington Post piece on the meetings is here. Even Politifact.com - a non-partisan political fact checking website validates McCain's statement is "mostly true." You can find the entire analysis here.

Of course Chris Matthews and the liberal MSM won't discuss this on the Sunday morning shows - it would undermine their efforts to impose a liberal agenda on the nation. Anyone thinking Obama represents a restoration of Camelot misunderstands not only Obama's but also JFK's ideology. JFK was much more conservative than Nixon - an irony the left refuses to acknowledge and he aggressively fought Communism in every corner of the globe.

JFK confronted Communism throughout the Western Hemisphere, in Europe and in Asia. He backed at least one attempted coup against a Communist regime (Cuba) and a war to stop Communist insurgency in Southeast Asia (Vietnam). And he did these both without negotiating with our enemies.

Like it or not for the multi-culti left, Terrorism is the new Communism and the Global War on Terror is the new containment. Even Europe is beginning to wake up to the threats posed by the Iranian backed global terrorist movement (Hamas, Hezbollah and and has begun electing center-right governments which support taking the fight to the extremists before they bring it back here (again).

Obama's Victory Speech Demonstrates Ignorance of U.S. History

Two of the Presidents that Obama cited in his post-North Carolina victory speech as negotiating with U.S. enemies did no such thing. These would be FDR and JFK.

FDR negotiated with the Soviet Union, Great Britain and France in Yalta. However, at the time, the U.S. and Russia were allies against Germany, with whom the FDR did not negotiate, unlike the infamous appeaser Neville Chamberlin. The U.S. and U.S.S.R. did not become become adversaries until the post-World War II period, and the impetus for that actually was Roosevelt's Yalta concessions to Stalin which condemned half of Europe to Soviet Oppression for 50 years. If that's Sen. Obama's model for negotiating with our allies, he has no place in the Oval Office, let alone the U.S. Senate.

Additionally, the Soviet Union, while an adversary and competing power whose values we despised, was not an enemy, which is why the 1945-1991 period is called The Cold War. JFK's conversations/negotiations with them were aimed at preventing conflict and containing their ideology. He never negotiated with actual U.S. enemies such as Cuba's Fidel Castro (whom he tried to overthrow during the Bay of Pigs Invasion and then lost the cojones to call in U.S. air support to help our allies). In fact, JFK negotiated a secret treaty with Cuba promising not to invade in exchange for removal of the Soviet missiles - hardly a profile in courage. JFK also did not negotiate with our enemies in Vietnam, the war against whom he took over from the French.

If these are Senator Obama's models for negotiating with our enemies, I'd hate to see how he handles Iran, Hamas and Al Queda. He might as well just sell out Israel and abandon all hope of human rights and freedom East of the Mediterranen. And let's not forget that the real puppet masters of Hamas reside in Tehran.