Why don't you liberals ever condemn evil?

I received an email from Randy Rhodes some time back where she offered a relatively lengthy definition of "fascism".

One of the examples it provided describes how fascist groups insist that members of the group loudly, publicy denounce "enemies". This must be done repeatedly.

One would think that by now, everyone has pretty much said everything new there is to say about how evil Husein is/was. He was a bad guy and he's on a path toward appropriate consequences.

Why do the right wing attack dogs keep insisting that we take a momentary break on a frequent basis to denounce him? Or to denounce one of our friends who didn't denounce Hussein enough in the last week or so?

I hear now and then a talking head argue that this is needful because otherwise, somehow, Hussein's evil (murderer of upwards of 300,000 of his countrymen), might be forgotten. Or other evils in the world may be forgotten.

That's hogwash. No one walks around "unhappy that Hussein is on trial". Everyone agrees that when considered in isolation of all extra context, Hussein deserved what he got and will get.

These public demands to denounce this or that patently obvious evil are pure trickery. I'm not a sholar of Stalin, but this sounds a hell of a lot like a Stalin-like technique. Or Fascism.

I bring this up today on account of Lowry once again making that claim, this time directed at David Corn. And David for some reason responding.. It's such a clever trick, they have, the right wing attack dogs. How do you respond? By responding, you give a kind of weird legitimacy to the question... If you don't, it can seem as if you really don't denouce it. A clever little catch-22.

We probably need to come up with some code word for this technique. Maybe just called it "RwT1" for "Right wing technique #1". We can make charts and publish it on the web. Create refridgerator magnet thingies for easy reference... Sounds like a business opportunity.