Calling the president’s rhetoric smearing the Republican budget as “Social Darwinism,’ “vile and ugly”, Sonicfrog wonders “how the press would react if the previous President” had “said anything like this about his political opponents”:
Think about the term and how it’s been used over the last century and more. It has been justification for all sorts of atrocities and prejudices, from racism to eugenics to Nazism to state sterilization of the mentally challenged and infirm. I generally scoff at the notion that people use “code words”, which is usually an accusation tossed at Conservatives by Liberals to try and portray Conservatives as racists.
Glenn Reynolds offers a slightly different read on the remarks:
SO IF THE REPUBLICAN BUDGET IS, AS OBAMA SAYS, “SOCIAL DARWINISM,” then does that mean that Obama’s approach is some sort of Social Creationism?
Because I’m not seeing any evidence of an Intelligent Design there. . . .
Alternate tagline: They told me if I voted Republican, we’d see rampant anti-Darwinism in the White House, and they were right!
UPDATE: Another smart blogger chimes in, with my friend David Boaz offering that “Those who deploy the charge are“, among other things,
. . . accusing both Republicans and actual supporters of free markets of believing in “the survival of the fittest” and, as Wikipedia puts it, “the ideas of eugenics, scientific racism, imperialism, fascism, Nazism and struggle between national or racial groups.” “Social Darwinism” is nothing more than a nasty smear.
The president should be embarrassed, and those who call for civility in public discourse should admonish him.
Read the whole thing. Via Instapundit.
Consider the president admonished. From this blog at least.