Dover Councilman Committed to Offensive Material
As a private citizen, David Anderson can be as determined to be offensive as he wants to be. As a Representative of the City of Dover, I would think that Andersen could rethink this position.
“The piece trivializes the Holocaust. It draws inappropriate comparisons that offend the sensibilities of Holocaust survivors and those who appreciate the gravity of one of the most tragic episodes in human history,” read the letter to Anderson, signed by ADL regional director Barry Morrison.
Anderson maintains that the video, posted Sept. 20 by site contributor Fay Voshell of Wilmington, has nothing to do with the Holocaust.
For the record, if this drags on and voters in Dover get a true sense of who David Anderson is – I’m all for him sticking to his guns.
Have mercy.
As if this blog doesn’t have enough trouble having to bear witness to the litany of idiocy from local teajadis dropping their idiocy all over this place, we now have another post giving their idiocy another airing.
These are people who will ban folks from their own blog for language that they don’t like, but are tolerant of Hitler metaphors pointed at the President of the United States. And who spent 8 years berating liberals for not being adequately “respectful of the office”. The hypocrisy is part of the conservative plumage — it is part of their DNA.
Jason330
You’re so full of crap, it is starting to leak out your ears. All of bunk you write is derogotory to somebody. I’m new to this but people like you make my stomach turn.
I’m not real interested in your weak constitution. What I’d like to know is whether Dover voters approve of Mr. Anderson’s totalitarian leanings.
Point taken Cassandra.
Delaware Liberal also bans commenters for silly stuff like satirical spellings of the President’s name or criticisms of Democrats from other liberals, so you can climb down from your high horse, too, cassandra_m.
Personally, I enjoyed the part of the News Journal article where they point out that Anderson thinks the Hitler/AttackWatch video is funny, but when Fay posted the same parody a few days later with Hitler/Bush, Anderson said it was “offensive.”
Shitcom this isn’t about Jason offending anyone, it’s about Fay Voshell and David Anderson posting and supporting a video that offended and entire group of people to the extent that a well known and recognized organization had to smack them down for it.
Take your fake outrage and shove it up your ass. Or wait until you go to Hell and Hitler can shove it up there for you.
No one was banned because of satirical spellings of the President’s name, but you (A1) are one of our resident known liars, so I guess we are talking par for the course.
A1, your inability to get over yourself is off putting.
I suggest a new strategy, A1 – let the Wookiee win.
Jason330
Aren’t you the scumbag that was outed on DP for being so foul that people thought you were here on earth to only waste good oxygen that a productive person could use.
yes.
I applaud DL for carrying this story, and pointing out their own use of the video in the past with a decent dose of humility.
However, Jason and MJ are not elected officials running a blog, while David Anderson is an elected official running a blog.
As a private citizens it stands to reason that Jason and MJ wouldn’t be held up to the same scrutiny as Anderson, who sits on the Dover City Council and was elected to represent all of the people of his District.
didnt you get the memo? it is no longer neccesary in america to consider how your words may effect other people. If a Holocaust surviver is offended at what David Anderson did, it is their fault for taking so long to get over the whole thing. No one forced them to watch the clip all the way through. It’s just like all those people upset over WBC. No one MAKES them listen to what the good christians have to say. There is nothing more American than making horrible comments and not having to suffer and consequence or moral guilt because of it.
Right David?
Great point anon2. Also, nipples! (I have to keep my rep for vulgarity intact.)
Godwin would be spinning in his grave if he weren’t still alive.
Jason330
Look I’m new to blogging but couldn’t write something more like news instead of the extreme bunk that you write, just to get comments on your post.
Breaking News! Dover city councilman rebuked by a major civil rights group. Film at 11:00
The story made the Delaware State News.
Good political satire is always offensive to somebody. And so is bad political satire. With all the hate posted here by DL writers like MJ, who apparently also works for the government, it is pretty laughable to see you all riding your high moral horses about this.
Not that I don’t understand why you’re doing it, but it is pretty funny.
It’s also not very liberal, except in the sense that some modern-day liberals think they’re the political correctness police. Seriously, if a clip of Hitler offends you, why are you watching it? And trying to smear David Anderson with this sounds like the type of childish thing the right-wingers do constantly.
“Childish?” I disagree. When a City Council member gets taken to the woodshed by the ADL its news that should be covered. Voters in Dover and in Delaware have a right to know. State newspapers have a responsibility to the people to report it, and a blog on the opposite side of the political spectrum from the Council Member would be stupid to not cover it.
Normally I’d agree with Geezer there – but Anderson is unguarded about his totalitarian sympathies. That changes things for me a bit.
I guess personally knowing some of the Chilean intelligentsia that David would have had Pinochet murder for the crime of being intelligentsia puts this in a different category for me.
Anderson is a horrible specimen of humanity. I’ll take any opportunity to point that out.
I am happy to say I am the “disgruntled” person who advised the JDL that David Anderson and Fay Voschell were posting Hitler movies as anti-Obama jokes. If you read the NJ article David says the disgruntled me was banned for “threatening people”. My threat was – I would send a link to Delaware’s Jewish Community to see if they thought it was funny.
To top it off, after erasing all my critical comments of Fay and her Obama Hitler movie, Fay Voschell and David Anderson both say they are defending freedom of speech.
David owes me an apology for leaving the impression people were “threatened”. Banning me from his blog means one less dissenting voice. Totalitarian Tea spitting on the Founders Values.
A1=fool.
I have nothing to say to you. You are not worth talking to. Your words are empty.
Anderson supported the North Korean government when it imprisoned two female American journalists, so Jason is spot on abut his totalitarian sympathies. Still, supporting the current President who has assumed the privilege to execute American citizens at will and in-secret also demonstrates a certain amount of totalitarian sympathies, don’t you think?
But, as François de La Rochefoucauld famously said, “Hypocrisy is a sort of homage that vice pays to virtue.”
If that clip passes as offensive I better stop watching The Three Stooges.
dont we all have anything better to do than pick on a Teahadist Nothing councilman from DOVER? Dont you realize that the enemy of the liberals is the friend of the Wingnuts? Every time you dedicate thought to his “offenses” you grow his support. If Councilman Anderson ever gets higher elected office, im blaming the elevated profile given to him here.
Good point SB. We are burnishing the conservative “victim” credentials.
The Three Stooges Hitler spoofs were 1) made prior to the US entry into WWII and during a time when there was scant mention of the genocide going on in Europe in US publications and news agencies and 2) the Stooges were Jewish, which takes away the possibility that their Hitler spoofs were the product of anti semitism. I cant’ make that same jump when it comes to Fay Voshell or David Anderson.
Someone on DelawarePolitics pointed out that the ADL and Jewish groups have been going after this video on websites for several years, even back when the subject matter was Bush, the Super Bowl Halftime Show, and even Kanye West.
There is a Downfall video where Hitler orders some Three Stooges DVDs and finds out they are all Shemps.
If David Anderson wrote the post himself, those smearing him with this have a point. Otherwise, you’re just like Hube, who excoriated the entire site because ONE poster made an intemperate comment. Guilt by association is an ugly game to play. If you agree with it here, then Obama becomes guilty of listening to Rev. Wright without protest and therefore responsible for his statements. If that’s bullshit — and it is — then so is this.
like how Obama is totally responsible for everything any Black leader ever said.
Cain says Obama is not black enough.
For some reason I can’t edit the comment above, so:
Perhaps I’m more sensitive about this because this is exactly the sort of tactic that led to my inability to comment under my own name. Claiming that David has some “special responsiblity” over someone else’s behavior because he’s in elective office is nothing but a cheap, cowardly attempt to censor him. Don’t even bother pretending it’s something else.
Geezer, first, Anderson RUNS the site. When you run a site, you are responsible for the content posted on it. Anderson seemed to understand that a while back when, on an immigration thread, Rick made a comment about solving the immigration problem with “5 guys in a pick up with shotguns” and Anderson did the right thing and pulled the entire post down.
I guess Anderson needed the hispanic vote more than he needs the Jewish vote.
And secondly, TNJ points this out:
“A week after the Attack Watch parody was posted, Voshell posted another “Downfall” video, this time with Hitler’s audio swapped out for sound clips of President George W. Bush.
In the comments section of that post, Anderson posted this:
“This video is one that I do find deplorable. Why? It isn’t funny or well done.””
Making fun of Obama using Hitler = “funny”
Making fun of Bush using Hitler = “deplorable”
Except that Anderson is the owner of that blog — Obama was not the owner of that church. He is the owner of a blog that says it has standards for discourse — so that cursing apparently gets you banned, while Hitler metaphors from contributors do not. So that even the so-called Free Speech he claims to defend still is subject to what the blog owners decide it is. And apparently they are OK with the Hitler metaphors.
I fail to see any harm in pointing that out, since conservatives are busy in the “do as I say, and people on my Team are exempt from that rule” AND that the subject is fairly tiresome since hypocrisy is the coin of the realm over there. Pretending that there is something normal about that or even what they say is the media’s job, not ours.
Geezer – I can tell you with 100% confidence that I have no desire to censor David Anderson and force his totalitarian sympathies underground. If this post is motivated by anything other than covering a news story, it is motivated by my sense that his views need to be aired out.
I think DL benefits by the logic that in a group blog, each contributor is responsible for their own content. I see no reason to expect differently for DP. David as the owner is under no obligation to take down the video. He was free to defend it, or to criticize it. He chose to defend it. He is only being criticized for it now because he sprang to defend it.
There’s no harm in pointing it out. But it does mean you are now on their level, justifying censorship based on your own, or in this case MJ’s, emotional outrage.
Frankly, I find this sensitive stance — that using this clip in this manner is offensive to Jews and, by extension, all humanity — could be leveled at something on just about every episode of “Saturday Night Live,” from its inception until today. Also every issue of The Onion.
The offense was committed not by those using this for satire, but those who produced the original movie. They actually profited from the public’s ongoing grotesque fascination with Hitler; I find that far more offensive than using a clip from it for low-brow humor.
But hey, I’m the only one offended by that, apparently. I don’t have to have it validated by an outside entity to find it offensive, but then, I’m not trying to censor anyone, either.
This is getting meta. Just read David Anderson’s remarks here, and tell me what the warmth and fondness that he expresses for a dictator that killed 4,000 of his own people tells you about the guy.
“Except that Anderson is the owner of that blog — Obama was not the owner of that church.”
Nobody asked Obama to fire Wright; he could have distanced himself, and quickly did when Wright held his feet to the fire.
Anderson “owns” his blog about as much as you, or any other DLer, own this one. I have not seen him pull down another contributor’s posting; I seem to remember disagreements among contributors causing quite a stir on DL a while back.
I would hate to think that, should one of the contributors at DL run for office, opponents could use one intemperate comment about rounding up people and shooting them with your blessing — because, after all, you didn’t kick him off the blog, you must sympathize with those sentiments (I know I occasionally do).
Isn’t all this sensitivity policing tiring? Couldn’t you find a more tolerant hobby?
Geezer if you think that DP wouldn’t use past comments made by a DL contributor on this blog against them if they ran for office, you’ve lost your mind. DP is more than happy to out liberals, and smear people to get what they want, while crying victim when anyone takes a shot at them.
Anderson pulled the “shotgun” post, yet he defends the Hitler post in the face of criticism from the ADL. Look at his Council District in Dover, and figure out why some speech is allowable on his blog and some speech is censored on his blog.
But the larger and more important issue is this: The people have a right to know when the ADL takes a swing at an elected official. If people don’t believe in that basic principle, then all is lost.
I’m with Geezer on several points, not the least of which is that I find nothing offensive about using the Downfall clips for humor and satire. And while some may have apologized for DL using a Downfall video, I am the author of that post, and I do not apologize for it.
I also think that ADL should find themselves better things to worry about.
Nobody asked Obama to fire Wright; he could have distanced himself, and quickly did when Wright held his feet to the fire.
Actually, they did — in the only way that a parishioner can fire a preacher. By leaving. The Wright comparison fails in another pretty big way too — that this demand and outrage over Wright was largely promulgated by people who spend no time in African-American churches.
I would hate to think that, should one of the contributors at DL run for office, opponents could use one intemperate comment about rounding up people and shooting them with your blessing — because, after all, you didn’t kick him off the blog, you must sympathize with those sentiments (I know I occasionally do)
And when you find a DL’er who would defend those comments (I’m not sure anyone here is asking for Fay to be fired), you might have a point.
“Geezer if you think that DP wouldn’t use past comments made by a DL contributor on this blog against them if they ran for office, you’ve lost your mind. DP is more than happy to out liberals, and smear people to get what they want, while crying victim when anyone takes a shot at them.”
So that justifies doing the same? Isn’t that a lame argument when the right uses it?
“The people have a right to know when the ADL takes a swing at an elected official. If people don’t believe in that basic principle, then all is lost.”
The elected official did not post the material, merely stood up for the right of the person to do so. That’s the basic principle I’m interested in. I would not want an elected official who believed in censorship.
Someone called in the ADL just to try to smear David Anderson with the group’s condemnation. I’m sure the ADL would condemn any use of it, including the original movie. But that’s not a standard I would use against someone, just as I would not want it used on me.
I see a low motive, and I don’t like it.
“And when you find a DL’er who would defend those comments (I’m not sure anyone here is asking for Fay to be fired), you might have a point.”
Oh, I’m sorry. I was under the mistaken impression you stood for free speech in that case. I should have guessed you hadn’t when you stated your support for warrantless stop-and-frisk operations in the city.
Thank heavens you’re a liberal, or who knows what heavy-handedness you might endorse?
“Actually, they did — in the only way that a parishioner can fire a preacher. By leaving.”
Only after the second outburst. By then it was of course too late for him to avoid the smear, which persists to this day in the wingnutosphere.
“this demand and outrage over Wright was largely promulgated by people who spend no time in African-American churches.”
If you’re arguing context matters, I agree. I think the ADL is populated by people who pretty routinely find themselves offended by Hitler, Nazi and Holocaust jokes promulgated by the less sensitive among us. With all due respect to all concerned, who gives a fuck what they think of David Anderson?
“Anderson pulled the “shotgun” post”
It wasn’t a post, it was a comment. They pull comments all the time.
We liberals tend to put a bunch of rules on ourselves when it comes to confronting the scumbagy right wing scumbags like Anderson.
The scumbags are blissfully exempt and wholly unbound by any rules.
My outrage, Geezer, is that (1) the Holocaust should not be used to score political points on either side and (2) I lost family in the camps. I found the use of the video by Fay & David to be offensive. Light a Yahrzeit candle for your relatives each year that you lost in the Holocaust and tell me you’d feel differently.
BTW, did you even read the article in the NJ?
What Holocaust references were in the videos?
1) How do you separate the Holocaust from Hitler?
2) It wasn’t DL who went to the ADL, if you look in the comments, think123 took full and happy responsibility for it.
3) The ADL sent out the letter condemning Anderson, not DL.
4) DL did what any blog or news organization would have done when they found out about the letter, they ran it. Just like TNJ did and The Delaware State News did.
Well, the point has already been made that Hogan’s Heroes was set in a Nazi camp. The Nazi’s were not depicted sympathetically there or in any of the Downfall parodies. If someone uses concentration camp scenes from Schindlers List for parody, fine, that’s crossing the line.
But should all depictions of Hitler be serious? Must we treat him with solemnity because he was evil? Is it wrong for me to laugh at stupid things that Nazis do in Indiana Jones movies? Or South Park?
It was David Anderson who jumped in to defend and justify Glen Urquhart’s comments about “asking your liberal friends why they’re Nazis” if they talk about separation of church and state.
This isn’t an isolated incident on Anderson’s part, it starting to look like a pattern of Anderson justifying using Nazi imagery for crazy right wing talking points.
Mel Brooks life mission has been to make people laugh at Adolph Hitler.
What does everyone here think of The Producers?
‘Stalag 17’ was an awesome movie.
complete with drag queens!
I pointed out the difference before with the Three Stooges. The Stooges and Mel Brooks are Jewish, so when they make jokes about Hitler, you can be confident it’s not because they hate Jews. I don’t have that same level of confidence when it comes to Fay or David.
Well Hitler also killed Gays….. so ……
I don’t think DP posted the video to offend Jews. I think their sole purpose was to simple-mindedly attack Obama and Democrats in the strongest terms they knew – Hitler – and were completely clueless about the additional connotations. All they could see was Obama-hate. And oddly they thought it was funny.
No, the Downfall video is a canvas. It’s a knock-knock joke or a why did the ____ cross the road. On it, you can paint a funny joke or a poor attempt of a joke.
Actually the movie from which that parody and many others were created was terrific. It certainly wasn’t sympathetic to Hitler and the Nazis in anyway.
Too bad MJ can’t have the same sympathy and sensitivity for the plights of other oppressed and murdered people that he piously demands for himself.
Finally, DL censors liberal comments for having opinions critical of Democrats. And if some here say that they don’t, they either aren’t aware of what their fellow bloggers are doing or they are lying.
A1 – you’re so full of shit your eyes are brown. How would you know who I feel sympathy for? Are you Kreskin?
Well, for one, when you respond to the killing of an unarmed American by Israeli soldiers by saying “he deserved it” for trying to bring humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, it is pretty clear who you don’t have any sympathy for. Palestinians, like Jews, are people, too. And they don’t deserve to have there homes stolen or to be starved to death because of the actions of Hamas. But collective punishment an entire people is something both the Israeli government and the German Nazi government have in common.
Plus, your constantly hateful language towards people here who disagree with you is another clue.
What would Dover Councilman David L. Anderson think of a couple of New York-Florida (wink, wink) residents celebrating the news “parody” of a good ole fashion southern lynching.
Think Don Ayotte would think that ‘parody’ is funny.
And a little while back, while running for GOP Chairman, DP/Anderson/Ayott cut off a comment cuz “Not Don Ayotte” was ‘offensive’…
I wish I was a moderate again. This ‘new’ leadership in some areas is making me go batty.
Well, I live in Dover, Mr. Anderson is not my City Councilman, but I’ll invest some shoe leather to help out his next opponent. I’ll even invest. If you are running against Mr. Anderson when he’s up next year, I’ll give you some free design work, business cards, website & printing, etc. I can do THAT. Just let me know.
I am speechless at these shenanigans. Godwin rules.
A1 – that’s your opinion, and it’s not worth the paper (or ether) it’s written on. And I don’t believe I use hateful language. I just despise your “I’m more of a liberal than you” bullshit, as do a lot of people.
If you want to talk about Palestinians, move it to the Open Thread or wait for a blog post on the Middle East. Ain’t gonna follow you down that rabbit hole.
Just wanted to stir some mud… (That’s why I waited)
One, shaming Mr. Anderson because someone put something on Dave Burris’s blog that Mr. Anderson has now taken over and is administrator, can be equated with say… blaming John Kerry because some unknown person said he once exhibited cowardice as captain of his Swift Boat during the Vietnam War.
I wasn’t comfortable with that action then. (I thought it was immoral (I was right, too)) I’m not comfortable with it now.
Both cases, we are forcing a connection between one person… and another. Did Mr. Anderson post it? Did John Kerry run away? No to both.
In both cases, the controversy is coming from what another person (both times, someone in the opposite camp) says. With the Swift Boat controversy, it was a couple of dummies, who got drunk off their ass, and then started the charge. That accusation picked up steam, kept getting re-reported, even though it was later conclusively proven, that it had no truth.
Everyone of you who has read David’s writings since 2007, can be pretty confident that he harbors no animosity to those who believe in the same Father Almighty as does he, even if they choose not to follow the teachings of that Father’s Son. I know that Mr. Anderson, would do everything he could to stop a pogrom from forming, if he ever became aware of one that was.
So to viciously attack him (for what? Insensitivity?) in allowing Fay to post a doctored Hitler video.. is misplaced. Just like attacking John Kerry because two drunks got together and concocted a Big Fish story, is equally misplaced…
So, let’s analyze the connection between Mr. Anderson, and the act he is being tied to by this blog and the media today. A diagrams shows it to be nothing more than this.
6 million dead > Gas Chamber > SS Troops > Himmler > friend and confident of Hitler > Adolf Hitler > History > Theatrical History > Director Oliver Hirschbiegel > Downfall > YouTube > RNC operative > email feed > Fay Voschell > Delaware Politics Blog > Blog Administrator > David Anderson.
So yes, I’ll agree with you. There IS a connection; one that is stretched quite thin. The question lies in just how far one goes before one considers “it has gone too far”. I’m sure, if one were still around who actually survived Dachau or Auschwitz and read of this controversy, it would stir up dull roots like a spring rain… as well it should, based on what those marvelously resilient people had to live through…
But I think you are stretching that connection way too far, as did those two drunks who came up with the Swift Boat controversy and made an equally loose, or looser connection with John Kerry.
That controversy, may have helped Bush get the presidency 2004, … but it definitely fanned the anti-Bush resentment across “real America”, mainly by proving that Republicans would lie without blinking, if they knew it would help them to win an election.
With the Swift Boat, we now had solid proof that they were bad people. And in 2006, we crushed the party of incontinence.
Today, with so much at stake, we stand at another major crossroad for this nation. One wonders under what horrible existence we would have grown up, had Hoover, not Roosevelt, been elected. The upcoming 2012 election is probably just as, if not more important, than that one.
The election of 1932 was an election of policy. Whose policy was better? Which Direction did America want to go? Would America choose the Republican Way (it ruined the economy); or the Democratic Way (it gave hope to the middle class)?
In 1932, America repudiated everything the Republican Party stood for!. Overwhelmingly! It took republicans 64 years to regain ownership of just one of the Houses of Congress.
They could only do so then, because all those who had previously lived through the Republican era during the 1920’s, .. died out, and with electronic voting so widespread, could no longer vote.
🙂
But that is the beauty of a land of free speech. Yes that person can say, “This I find offensive.” The rest of us can make up our own minds, all the while knowing that it is really in numbers whether or not it matters
kavips, I agree with you about David Anderson being a decent guy who means no harm. Nobody is accusing David of anti-semitism or liking Hitler. David is being accused of poor judgement and not telling the truth to the News Journal. The whole deal is pretty stupid.
David is responsible for Delaware Politics. Great that he took the movie down today. It was cheesy. God forbid somebody out of state googles Delaware and Politics and comes up with some sleazy President as Hitler movie.
Now the only thing left for David to do to make things right is apologize to think123
I love to pop over here every once in a while to soak in your petty, self-important hypocrisy. It makes me feel infinitely better about my own shortcomings.
Kudos to Kavips and Geezer for being the adults in the room.
The rest of you would be hilarious if you weren’t so fucking scary-stupid. I can’t believe you take yourselves so seriously.