Daily Kos Poster Tells It Like It Is On What's Nazi and What's Not

This is one of the most insightful stories I have seen of the efforts by Republicans, their allied right-wing talk show hosts, and assorted teabaggers to falsely equate President Obama and any one else they don't like with Adolf Hitler and the rest of his murderous Nazi horde.
The author of the post isn't without any background in the subject. Here's what he writes:

I think I know a fair bit about Nazis. All four of my grandparents were survivors of the Holocaust, three of them the sole survivors from their own very large families. My mother's parents met in Auschwitz shortly before liberation; my father's parents met in a displaced persons camp not long after the war ended. They all eventually made their way to safety and freedom in the Milwaukee area. And I have had more than my fair share of confrontations with contemporary Nazis, some of which I wrote about here -- note that my antagonists in the incidents recounted there are the very profile of the teabagger base.

The author then defines what is Nazi and what is not and ends his piece with this passage:

Responsible members of the press will remember these facts and deny the liars their platform. That means that when someone like Jim DeMint, the wingnut Senator from South Carolina, claims that allowing the uninsured to buy vouchers with TARP money would decrease the number of uninsured without costing the taxpayers anything, he will be exposed for the buffoon he is. It means that when Republican House leaders John Boehner and Thaddeus McCotter claim the healthcare reform plan promotes euthanasia, they will be rebuked for attempting to defraud the American people. It means that when no one has proposed "death panels" as part of the healthcare reform plan, a liar like Sarah Palin who uses her parents and son as props to claim otherwise will be ridiculed like the Republican teabagger she is. (And who are we kidding, using Facebook to make a major policy statement?!? God, I hope Palin is the Teabag Party's nominee in 2012!)
So how about it, Republicans? Do you want to grow up, accept that you lost the election because, frankly, your "ideas" stunk the first time you tried them 50 years or more ago, and participate in rational discussion about one of our biggest problems as a nation? Or do you want to just reinforce your status as a fringe, regional, racist and otherwise bigoted party with a weird obsession with sexual imagery (e.g., "teabaggers" and the "Fuck you faggot. Suck my cock you pervert." kind of nonsense we see weekly in the Saturday hate mail-apalooza)?
And how about you, traditional media types? Do you want to rein in the inflammatory, offensive, obnoxious, sometimes criminally inciting rhetorical excesses of your more extremist, hypocritical members? Or do you want to continue to marginalize yourselves by defending them in the guise of the First Amendment while censoring those who oppose them?
On both accounts, don't worry. I know the chances of either group behaving responsibly are about the same as Harry Reid growing a spine. I won't be holding my breath.

After seeing that passage, I am more determined to see real health insurance reform pass and those on the right get even more marginalized with the more violent-tongued of them (examples: Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity) getting their media forums taken away from them.