Gross Hypocrisy: Laura Ingraham, the Code Red Rally & Holocaust Poetry
- United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Press Image
As most of you know, I am a big fan of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. It might even be the thing that keeps me sane as our Democratic congressional majority gets sucked into a quagmire of conservative politics over health care reform, world leaders struggle to come to any sort of agreement on Climate Change in Copenhagen and the U.S. announces plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan–one of which is likely to be my husband, many more friends of ours.
So like many of you, I watched the December 16 episode hoping for some comic relief. And I got it. For sure. He is so good at pointing out idiocies on the national political stage that, even when I am appalled, I laugh. That was true during this episode too. But there was one story…a bit he included in his coverage of a Tea Party rally…that floored me. Not his take on it (which I love), but that someone, anyone–even a right wing ass bag like Laura Ingraham–would dare.
As you may have heard by now, Ms. Ingraham unabashedly made some changes to Martin Niemöller’s famous poem about the failure of German intellectuals to stop the Holocaust. According to Amanda Sterling of CBS News.Com, Ingraham closed her remarks with this:
“First they came for the rich,” Ingraham said. “And I did not speak out because I was not rich. Then they came for the property owners, and I did not speak out because I did not own property. Then they came for the right to bear arms, and I did not speak out because I was not armed. Then they came for me and denied me my medical care, and there was no one left to speak for me…”
Really? WTF? Of course, I’m with Jon Stewart on this one. The comparison of Obama and pro-health reform Congresspeople to the Nazis is…hyperbolic and paranoid. I’m also with him (and most of the other people who have written/commented on this), in that I think it is definitely important to call her out on this comparison.
My mother taught me the original version when I was very young–those familiar words are, for me, a call to speak up for others, a powerful reminder of my duty to employ whatever privileges I might have in ways that not only do not oppress, but that help address oppression–even if it is not the oppression I face.
My commitment to the spirit of Pastor Niemöller’s words alone is great enough that Ms. Ingraham’s shameless evocation would piss me off to no end. But, aside from the obvious disregard for both the ridiculousness of such a comparison and the pain of those who endured those particular horrors–and that degree of oppression–I am struck by something else.
The poem, in its original form (and as it was taught to me), goes like this:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
How many times have you heard/read/seen some idiot “teabagger” say that Obama is a Communist/Socialist? Of course the two aren’t the same, but he’s been called both–as well as any number of other things–repeatedly.
SO. Ms. Ingraham. You are, indeed, shameless, callous, arrogant and just plain wrong in comparing health care reform to the march of the Nazis. But I have to add this:
For your twisted, adulterated, sick version of this work you ERASED the communists, trade unionists and Jews and replaced their oppression with the hardships of being rich, owning property and carrying a gun? Really? Are. You. Serious?
Beyond your apparent lack of appreciation for irony, THE WHOLE POINT OF THE POEM IS THAT YOU HAVE TO STAND UP FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN’T LIKE YOU OR THERE WILL BE NO ONE TO STAND UP FOR THOSE WHO ARE. Yet you are willing to steal these famous words, greedily co-opt them and distort them to serve your own agenda…but I, a person covered by excellent health insurance, am a terrorist because I stand up for those who are not?
May you be tormented forever more by The Hypocrite Fairy.
1tailspin
wrote on 19 December 2009 at 19:58
Concerning your remarks about Obama being called a communist or a socialist by “teabaggers”…here are some things for you to keep in mind: Frank Davis, a prominent member of the American Communist Party in the ‘70s, mentored Obama as a teenager. In,” Dreams From My Father,” Obama talks of choosing his friends carefully when he first attended college in L.A., most notably, his “Marxist professors.” Later, when he attended Columbia Univ. in New York, he was known to speak openly of his affinity for Marxist philosophy. It was only when he moved on to Harvard that he began keeping these ideas to himself. But his leftist associations continued with Rev. Wright, a preacher of Black Liberation Theology, which is rooted in Marxism. After being elected President, he appointed open Marxists such as Van Jones and Mark Lloyd to administration positions, and Anita Dunn as communications director, who claims Mao as one of her favorite philosophers. He also frequently talks about the redistribution of wealth, or “spreading the wealth around,” which is one of the main tenants of Marxism. And you said communism and socialism aren’t the same — the line between the two is often very thin, with many former and current communist countries calling themselves socialist republics or states, such as the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). Call Obama what you want, but his background, associations and political philosophies speak for themselves.
2Mrs. Mastro
wrote on 20 December 2009 at 14:53
Tailspin–My post does not speak at all to whether or not I think Obama is actually a socialist/Marxist/communist or not–what I’m speaking to is the fact that Ingraham’s willingness to steal the words to this poem and her blatant use of its message to further her own agenda smacks of hypocrisy, particularly given her willingness to denigrate Obama for what she sees as his socialist/communist/Marxist ideas–the whole point of the poem is that we have an obligation to stand up for people we might not agree with. Clearly, Ingraham and those of her ilk are not interested in standing up for Obama. Nor are they interested in standing up for the trade-unionists.
As to the difference between Socialism and Communism–they are different–typically it is uniformed commentators that blur the line between the two. As I am sure you would agree, to live in Communist China is different than to live in Socialist Holland–and both are different than living in the U.S.
3tailspin
wrote on 21 December 2009 at 4:42
Mrs. Mastro, it seemed in your article that you were quite outraged at Obama being referred to as a Socialist/Communist when you said this:
“How many times have you heard/read/seen some idiot “teabagger” say that Obama is a Communist/Socialist? Of course the two aren’t the same, but he’s been called both–as well as any number of other things–repeatedly.”
I assumed your outrage was because you think he is neither, so I explained why many think he is one or the other, which as history shows, can often be one and the same. In recent years, Hugo Chavez has championed his “socialist revolution” while he nationalizes one industry after another, which is right out of the communist handbook. One of the main inspirations for his brand of socialism is Fidel Castro, who is an avowed Marxist. You mentioned socialist Holland and communist China as an example of how the two systems differ, yet it could be argued the China’s aggressive capitalist reforms make it more progressive, at least economically, than Holland. And Holland is, at best, an example of “light” European socialism. I agree that from an academic standpoint the two systems differ, but in the real world those differences become blurred to the point where one is often substituted for the other, and one often becomes the other.
And let me state that I am an independent voter who is pro-choice and strongly for the separation of church and state, yet at the same time very conservative on economic and national security issues. I also support the Tea Party movement, which recent polls show has greater support than either the Dem or Repub parties. Though the mainstream press dismisses its importance, it continues to grow in popularity. The movement is about fiscal responsibility and is not tied to the Republican Party, though most who participate are conservative or libertarian in their ideology. Referring to those of us who identify with it as “teabaggers” is extremely insulting, since the term refers to a specific sexual act. As someone who writes for a Feminist publication, I was surprised to see you use a sexually laced term to describe a group of people. I understand the liberal press uses it with wild abandon, and I’m certainly no prude, but aren’t feminists outraged when men use sexually derogatory terms to describe women? I support women’s rights and have no tolerance for women being referred to in disrespectful ways…so are you not disrespecting me when you call me a “teabagger”? Are you not disrespecting Ingraham when you call her an, “ass bag”? I think you should consider your own hypocrisy when you use this type of name-calling to further your point.
4Mrs. Mastro
wrote on 22 December 2009 at 20:37
Tailspin–my outrage over people referring to Obama as a socialist/communist stems not from the relative accuracy of the term (something it seems you and I aren’t going to agree on), but from the fact that those doing it are employing a rhetorical strategy that specifically dismisses his ideas as unworthy of contemplation–no matter what he suggests, he does it because he is a socialist and he wants to ruin America therefore we should not entertain anything he says.
I may not agree with Obama on everything, but I think it is unwise to dismiss everything he comes up with simply on the grounds that he is a socialist–it is a logical fallacy, for one and for two, it stifles the healthy debate I think this country needs.
I am not impressed with the Tea Party movement, generally. Though I am deeply concerned about U.S. fiscal policy and with defense–my husband is a U.S. Marine–I think the tea party movement is misguided and the few examples I’ve seen of members who aren’t right wing/religious extremists are given a bad name by the rest of the group. I think most of its members are possessed of a fundamental misunderstanding of history, politics and government. However, my use of the term was not intended as a sexual reference at all…you’ll note that it appears in quotation marks–it is not a term I chose, but rather, is one others have used before me. I used it, in this case, because it is easily understood by my readers. Since the term is also potentially problematic–for the reasons you site–I placed it in quotes.
As to disrespecting Ms. Ingraham, absolutely. I think she is one example of all that is wrong with media and, as Jon Stewart said, she’s hyperbolic and paranoid. Plus I think she is dead wrong politically.