Nazis, terrorists and hypocrisy

Soon after George W. Bush's inartful jab at Obama (while in Israel to celebrate 60 years of Israel's existence and ensuing good times in the Middle East, W. compared people who would engage "terrorist leaders" in dialogue to appeasers who wanted to reason with Hitler before the outbreak of WWII), the Dems responded on cue with their canned outrage. I find it interesting that so many years later, few things resonate more acutely than bringing up Hitler and the Nazis. While not referring to Obama by name, it was clear who Bush was referring to. Subsequent White House claims to the contrary are just silly. Even Shrillary came to Obama's defense, saying:

"President Bush's comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is both offensive and outrageous on the face of it, especially in light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address and certainly to use an important moment like the 60th anniversary celebration of Israel to make a political point seems terribly misplaced; unfortunately, this is what we've come to expect from President Bush."

She's right and she's wrong. Comparing Democrats to Nazi appeasers is not outrageous if you hold the view that you should not negotiate with rogue leaders. For the record, I don't think it is a good idea to categorically say you will not speak with any leader. Just because you have a dialogue with them does not mean that you sympathize with them or you have agreed to any concessions. Sometimes in diplomacy you must engage in dialogue with unsavory characters. But, if you hold the view that you should not engage in dialogue with certain leaders, then it is a legitimate comparison, and reasonable arguments can be made for that position.

Hillary was right in saying that it was not an appropriate forum in which to make the statement. As transparent as our political squabbles may be, we should keep a somewhat unified front when traveling abroad. We should leave our internal political battles at the border. It would have been one thing if Bush had made the comment at some press conference in the White House or at a fundraising dinner, but taking political jabs while abroad on a state visit...that is poor judgment. (Are you listening, Jimmy Carter? We should revoke Carter's passport.)

Bush's statement is not even consistent with the actions of his own administration. In the past, Bush has characterized North Korea and Iran as sponsors of terror (and rightfully so). Yet talks have occurred at the ambassador level with Iran, and many people in Bush's own State Department urge more substantial dialogue with Iran. We have also had similar talks with North Korea. True, Bush hasn't gone golfing with Ahmadinejad or invited Kim Jong-il out to Crawford for some bar-b-q, but he has sanctioned diplomatic talks conducted by his administration with both governments. This ties into broad, sweeping statements ("I will not talk with rogue leaders", "I will not raise your taxes") that come back to bite politicians in the ass.

I have always liked Joe Biden. His response to Bush's remarks was a simple: "This is bullshit...Since when does this administration think that if you sit down, you have to eliminate the word 'no' from your vocabulary?" Not surprisingly, Biden was my favorite candidate on the Democratic side.