The Obama Hitler Mustache Caper


colbertobamahitlermustache1 laroucheobamahitlermustache

 As you see, Stephen Colbert and the members of the Lyndon Larouche Organization have come to the same comedic routine.  It’s worth comtrasting how the two handled the joke.  The Colbert bit took less than ten seconds, and what you see in this image is the conceit of the mock – O’Reilly asking “Did you put up the Hitler Mustache image?” — meaning even in this parody he recognizes it as an absurd parody.  It’s taken off, and he moves on the Obama Fly-Swatting story.  The LYMers, on the other hand, are taking the joke on the road, and standing on street-corners for hours on end (as oppsoed to a few seconds) with the “Hitler Mustache” placard. 

There is at least one outraged reaction against Colbert’s image — a bit different than the Seattle reaction.  As for the Larouchies, when I saw them standing in front of a Portland mall, they didn’t have the overhanging Larouche image that you see in the image shown at the top of this post.  I suggest that this might clarify a problem for them.  For some not entirely apt reason, there are people running into the Mustached Obama image who will assume this is a neo-nazi organization.  The giant image of Larouche will clarify iit, “Oh.  Okay.  It’s even lamer.  It’s the Larouchies.”

A bit of sympathy, of sorts.  Unlike the Obama Monkey “double standard” conundrum, which is a violation due to the historical nature  of considering blacks as sub-human — though in the famed April of 2008 speech Larouche more than violated the “same insult leveled at Bush” line by explicitly running to the racialist problems of miscegenation — the “same as Hitler” line is just too second nature as mindless invective.  If Carter, Bush I, Gore, and Cheney Can be imposed with a Hitler Mustache or compared to Hitler, why can’t Obama?

I suppose there’s the problem of Hitler’s Master Race conflicting with the message.  The need to arrive at a higher ground in the way of piddling political invective is shown with how this rather innocuous youtube video of Obama’s fly-swat brings out “n”-word practioners in the comments section (which I saw flooding the page 1 yesterday — today, it’s buried a bit deeper) .

Yes, I wonder what former Civil Rights activist Amelia Boynton Robinson , now in her elderly years, bizarre Larouche validator, has to say about such an image.

The good news for the Larouchies, I suppose, is that the Obama’s Care plan’s path through the Senate has hit some set-backs this week.  This has nothing to do with the whole campaign of wandering to street corners and putting Obama Mustached pictures up, but the delusion that it does can safely fill their mind.  Likewise, I can almost imagine Larouche (a big fan of Stephen Colbert, I hear) might just assume that Colbert’s handful of seconds of showing an image of Obama with a mustache is evidence of some influence or other.
Comments from these postings, and a couple “talk radio pundits”, showing wherefor the Larouchies are aligned right now:

whitemale08 (???)  People who are smart and can connect-the-dots, can see on the horizon, a British Empire of Worthless Derivatives and Credit-Default Swaps Neo-Fuedalism and Serfdom posed as Malthusian Parasites and Ticks

There certainly isn’t anything preventing Obama, given his incredibly high public support, from becoming the next Hitler or Lincoln.

It seems like there are many of you commenting that are confused about what the LaRouche youth are doing. What they are doing is trying to save you from a renewal of the same nazi policies (“useless eaters”)implemented by Hitler in 1939 being imposed by the apparently captive President Obama with his “new” health care limitation initiative. The President appears to be a captive of his advisors (Larry Summers,Peter Orszag), who themselves are selling this country down the river. Whether the President is a willing captive or not remains to be seen.
And for the rest of you (you know who you are) that are threatening these kids, there is a special place in Hell for you waiting – but you know that, don’t you? You are already living there.

More mainstream with a bigger platform:
Mark Levin: Let me tell you what I think you’re doing, Mr. President. You want this economy to crash. You want this currency to crash. Because what a magnificent opportunity to rearrange and remake society once its basic institutions have failed. That’s what you’re up to. I’m the only one with the guts to say it, because I know history. I know economics. I know your mentors. I know what you’re doing. You have a huge chip on your shoulder. And a really sick philosophical point of view. That’s where you’re taking us.
(Yes, it’s a bit like Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine, isn’t it?)

And the inestimable Glen Beck here.

Then again, we can stay a bit closer to home — switch topics considerably from domestic policy concerns to world intrigue, and see this bit commending Webster Tarpley.:

”  Webster Tarpley is a gifted historian who generally eschews mention of Jewish bankers in favor of euphemisms like “Venetians.”  Therefore it is unusual for him to state bluntly that King Edward VII was in the pay of the Rothschilds and was responsible for World War One.  “

Or we can go to a current news hot spot (in terms of twittering, I’d say the spot) and see who’s blaming the British right now.
As well the Zionists.

I sort of have a suspicion of where the Larouchies stand on the election crisis in Iran.  Came to me seeing Ahmadinejad posing with Russian President Medvedev.  They don’t take their orders from Russia so much as deign to ingratiate themselves with the Russia’s line.  It helps that the Ayotallah is blaming the British and the Zionists.  Crudely speaking, it serves the all-important purpose of making sure Larouche is mentioned at some point on Russian television so that the designated Larouche wikipedia Team can perform the all-important task of getting Russian mentions into the lede, which will thus allow a pittance of LYM recruit prospects to get the impression that the man is taken seriously somewhere or other.
Will Weback, June 14:  Many of the interviews seem to be justifications for the invasion of South Ossetia, which is understandable from a state-run company. Other Americans who are interviewed include Alexander Cockburn and Paul Craig Roberts.
And notable for the purpose of wiki-editing: is “Was interviewed on a Russian television show” mentioned in the wikipedia profiles for Cockburn or Roberts?

But the cult needs to hawk their validators.  An interesting observation, taking off on the factnet observation about his complete irrelevance to even what he’s come into contact with — this book about Eugene McCarthy, a book which covers plenty or virtually all of his political actions during his irrelevant stage of his career (a career where everything besides his 1968 presidential run is an asterisk, and a career where he essentially contrararian-ed himself to as irrelevant a position as he could find) — has no mention of his campaign on behalf of Larouche.  McCarthy relevant enough that the dailykos posting on the “monkey” quote tagged it with “Eugene McCarthy“, to some bafflement.

And this book on George Soros?  The best I can come up with I’ll post in the comments.  Where I’ll also stick up a mainstream blip regarding Webster Tarpley (who Larouche would like to make clear is in no way associated with) and an item on a long list of pro wrestling urban myths which is rolling around the pro wrestling blogosphere.

4 Responses to “The Obama Hitler Mustache Caper”

  1. Justin Says:–1714990

    448. William Regal hates the US but is forced to work here out of fears of prosecution in the UK; it seems he was a middleman in the whole Queen Elizabeth drug dealing thing Lyndon LaRouche exposed in the ’80s.


    Looking to the index of Soros: The World’s Most Influential Investor, Robert Slater, brings these passages…
    Vicious and sometimes anti-Semitic smears began to appear on the Internet. One such smear entitled “Satan Lives in George Soross” compared him to Shylock and said that “Jews rule the world by proxy.” […]

    The title sounds about right, though a Larouchian publication would never mention “jews”, even if it may as well compare him to Shylock. I suppose we’ll be content that they’d just be picked up by some of the same websites to publish Larouche’s line of attacks on Soros.

    Some attacks came from nonfringe people. In August 2004, Dennis Hastert, the Republican Speaker of the House, insinuated to Fox News that Soros was funded by “drug groups” — a mistruth for which Hastert supplied no substantiation. Asked to explain his charge, Hastert added fuel to the fire by saying, “The fact is, we don’t know where his money comes from.” The accusation that Soros was linked to the illegal narcotics trade was quickly broadcast in Kazachkstan, where Soros’s Open Society Institute had been fighting corruption.

    The Democratic blogosphere quickly attributed Soros as parroting Larouchianism, but sometimes I just have to suggest it’s an easy thing to throw out, and it could come from erstwhere.


    The best moment was during a presentation by one Webster Tarpley, an animated gent who made a presentation on the conspiracy between Obama and the bankers. At one point he showed pictures of the heads of Citigroup, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs. When no one in the audience could identify all three, he began ranting, “These are the people who rule the world! Never mind the politicians, these are the real rulers! Maybe if you put down your UFO book and paid attention we’d be better off!”

  2. Justin Says:

    a deleted blog entry:

    Louise on the left: How Lyndon LaRouche stole $150Jun 20, 2009 … But, what the hell was LaRouche saying about Obama? Other than suggest he is in league with Nazis? Well, this is where Young White Male #1 and Young White Male #2 informed me that it was beneath them to answer this question when I could taken their literature and read it myself. Actually, what Young …

    We’ll see if she opts to post it again.
    Jun 19 2009 @ 09:26am:
    crypter27I recently joined the Lerouche action committe! (Congratulations?)

    Jun 19 2009 @ 10:23am:
    freeserbDoes Jones have beef with LaRouche???
    I dig LaRouche a lot.

    I have no patience with Ron Paul supporters. They are one step away from being as retarded as Lyndon Larouche (sp?) supporters.
    Posted by Rotten666 on June 19, 2009 at 3:17 PM

    @7 – Ron Paul and Lyndon Larouche supporters are different people? And how do they venn diagram with Truthers?
    Posted by SoSea Resident on June 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM
    Oh, and the not altogether remarkable prediction that they’d soon claim their street corner Obama Mustached photos as the reason for the fairly standard political set-backs/ defeats?

    June 19, 2009 (LPAC)—Those who claimed that the Obama Nazi health-care plan could not be stopped have now been proven wrong; it can be stopped. The question is whether they will now have the courage to join with Lyndon LaRouche and LaRouchePAC to stop it.

    On June 18, the White House held a freaked out, closed door meeting which was kept secret until it was over, on the opposition to their health care “reform.” Then, a gag order was issued preventing anyone who attended from talking to the press. The issue: the Nazi health care railroad is not running on time, and President “Nero” Obama is not pleased.

    It was the offensive by Lyndon LaRouche and LPAC that caused White House insiders to push the panic button weeks ago, privately admitting that LaRouche’s labelling of the health package a reincarnation of Adolph Hitler’s T-4 program to eliminate “lives not worthy to be lived,” was killing the bill. The White House was so afraid of the LaRouche PAC interventions that it engineered the total suppression of its own press conference on June 2, given by Larry Summers, Peter Orszag and others. It was only LPAC’s own transcript that informed the world what Obama’s Nazis said.

    Can I get a diagram showing the mental gymnastics it takes for the true believers of the “movement” to believe this?

  3. Louise Says:

    Hey, Justin,

    I only deleted my “deleted” (gasp!) blog post long enough to rewrite it as a longer entry. It’s been reposted on my blog all along and your —

    So, you are welcome to reread my thoughts on this Larouche idiocy right here:

    Have at it, pal.

  4. Louise Says:

    Hey, Justin,

    I only deleted my “deleted” (gasp!) blog post long enough to rewrite it as a longer entry. It’s been reposted on my blog all along.

    So, you and your most peculiar Pro-Larouche buddies are welcome to reread my thoughts on that particular idiocy right here:

    Have at it, pal.

Leave a Reply