Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011

The First Sign Of Trouble Was When They Named The Kid Adolf Hitler

I kid you not.

Three New Jersey siblings whose names have Nazi connotations have been placed in the custody of the state, police said Wednesday.

Holland Township Police Sgt. John Harris said workers from the state Division of Youth and Family Services removed 3-year-old Adolf Hitler Campbell and his younger sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, from their home Tuesday.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

27 Responses to “The First Sign Of Trouble Was When They Named The Kid Adolf Hitler”

  1. Duros62 says:

    The father of 3-year-old Adolf Hitler Campbell, denied a birthday cake with the child’s full name on it by one New Jersey supermarket, is asking for a little tolerance.

    Heh. Good luck with that, dude.

  2. Duros62 says:

    Karen Meleta, a spokeswoman for ShopRite, defended the supermarket. She said the Campbells had similar requests denied at the same store the last two years and said Heath Campbell previously had asked for a swastika to be included in the decoration

    “I think people need to take their heads out of the cloud they’ve been in and start focusing on the future and not on the past,” Heath Campbell said Tuesday in an interview conducted in Easton, on the other side of the Delaware River from where the family lives in Hunterdon County, N.J.

    “There’s a new president and he says it’s time for a change; well, then it’s time for a change,” the 35-year-old continued. “They need to accept a name. A name’s a name. The kid isn’t going to grow up and do what (Hitler) did.”

    He just lacks ambition.

    Douchenozzle.

  3. ed says:

    Republicans.

  4. Johnnymags says:

    Next up, Pol Pot Campbell, Idi Amin Smith and Josef Stalin Taylor…haha!
    The fact that this person has prduced offspring offends me. How about naming the kid Jeffrey Dahmer? Ted Bunndy? oh sorry, they’re mere pikers to the Millions Hitler killed.

  5. Jay says:

    I was wondering how long it would take before somebody called them Republicans or conservatives. The Douchetastic Award goes to ed.

  6. Malacandra says:

    Any relation to Howard W. Campbell?

  7. ed says:

    From Nixon’s Southern Strategy to Jay Tea to The Schloz to these jokers. Nobody could have predicted….

    I wonder if these DefinitelyNotRightWingers also refer to certain people as “mold spores.” I wonder if they agree with the late president of the NRA about why the U.S. has a high level of gun violence. Is it irresponsible to speculate?

  8. ed says:

    …or even just Jay…

  9. Duros62 says:

    Hey, now, there is no evidence to suggest that these folks are Republicans. Douchebaggery is a non-partisan trait.

    However, I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that they voted for Obama, or for any Democrat.

  10. C.S.Strowbridge says:

    Jay: “I was wondering how long it would take before somebody called them Republicans or conservatives.”

    Southern. Strategy.

    Until you change that, your party isn’t allowed to complain about being called racists.

  11. ed says:

    However, I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that they voted for Obama, or for any Democrat.

    It is likely that these people of unknown political leanings don’t care for all them “Welfare Queens” or “mold spores,” if you know what I mean (heh-heh). Or the “mixed ethnicity” of the U.S. They prob’ly prefer “Small Town Values” (and not “San Francisco Values”) and “States’ Rights.” But yeah, it’s the height of douchebaggery (way worse than anything The Schloz or these jokers did) to speculate as to their political leanings. You’d never hear Rush do something like that.

  12. Robert says:

    But wait – weren’t the Nazis _liberals_?

    That’s the Big Lie that certain wingnuttian
    eminences have been peddling for some time
    now. It’s always reminded me of the graffito
    I saw at university years ago;
    HITLER WAS RIGHT
    and underneath, in smaller letters
    WELL, HE SURE AS HELL WASN’T LEFT

  13. mike edwards says:

    Campbell? That’s a bastardized version of the Scottish name. From Jersey?

    This freak is a Scot from Jersey? well, there’s your problem right there.

  14. I dont think this story has any real political slant to it. Its stupid people having children and giving them stupid ass names.

  15. Dkelsmith says:

    Jay
    Jan 14th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
    I was wondering how long it would take before somebody called them Republicans or conservatives. The Douchetastic Award goes to ed.

    Jay,

    I agree with you, to assume that these people have anything to do with a normal Republican, or a normal Democrat, is pretty extreme. However, I would have to say that when you look at hotair.com’s take on this, the comment section is unbelievable.

    LINK

    The fact that someone can say they understand the “basis” of their argument and saying that the kids should not have been taken. Unbelievable. You wouldn’t see any wimpy, soft on terror, doves Democrats like me making that point.

  16. SFC B says:

    I dont think this story has any real political slant to it. Its stupid people having children and giving them stupid ass names.

    It’s a government agency taking children from their parents on the basis of the parents’ political orientation. There have been no allegations of wrong-doing, abuse, or maltreatment of the children, and yet NJ’s Division of Youth and Family Services was allowed to take three children from their parents. So these kids have ignorant fucks for parents. So what?

    You wouldn’t see any wimpy, soft on terror, doves Democrats like me making that point.

    I realize that it’s sterotypical to assume that a Democrat is for even more government control of our lives, but Dkelsmoth, are you incapable of seeing any way which this precedent could come back and bite members of a protected group you support? No way at all? Are you really sure that you want “ignorant fuck” to be a justification for the taking of children? I don’t know if you’re a parent, but if you are I sure hope you never, ever say or do anything stupid ever. And if you do, don’t do it in Jersey.

  17. Enlightened Liberal says:

    “It’s a government agency taking children from their parents on the basis of the parents’ political orientation. There have been no allegations of wrong-doing, abuse, or maltreatment of the children, and yet NJ’s Division of Youth and Family Services was allowed to take three children from their parents. So these kids have ignorant fucks for parents. So what?”

    Except there is no evidence that’s the case. Dyfs isn’t allowed to talk about individual families, as you could understand.

    From the article:
    Harris said family services did not tell police the reason the children were removed. Agency spokeswoman Kate Bernyk said it does not comment on specific cases.

  18. Duros62 says:

    Yeah, I have a feeling it’s more than that they have stupid names. And stupider parents.

    I develop newborn pictures for the local hospital’s nursery.
    Stupid baby names isn’t technically child abuse, nut it’s pretty close.

  19. C.S.Strowbridge says:

    “I develop newborn pictures for the local hospital’s nursery.
    Stupid baby names isn’t technically child abuse, nut it’s pretty close.”

    In Quebec it can be considered child abuse and the government can veto your choice. ‘Latrine’ is the example that sticks out the most in my mind.

  20. Duros62 says:

    I thought that was Latrina.

    Well, for a girl.

  21. Duros62 says:

    [b]ut it’s pretty close.”

  22. Vanessa says:

    Horrible case. I feel bad for these kids. I’m not sure the gov’t has the right to take the children based solely on their names, however (even if the names are hateful and ignorant). I wonder if there is more information of which we are unaware.

  23. SFC B says:

    “Except there is no evidence that’s the case.”

    The local PD says they’ve never had any issues w/ the family and none of their neighbors say that there are any issues. Heck, the only hint of anything is from the wife making a comment in a conversation w/ a neighbor about how she and her husband had an argument about something. There is no evidence that these parents are anything other than poor racists living on welfare but still managing to love and care for their children. Is that really a class of parent the state has an interest in taking kids from? More importantly, is that a class of parent that Democrats should be supporting the taking of?

    “Yeah, I have a feeling it’s more than that they have stupid names. And stupider parents.”

    It’ll be some argument that, because their parents are ignorant fucks, the DYFS needed to step in, take the kids, and intervene in the family. They’ll trot out some psychologist who will make the brilliant observation that the beliefs of parents can have an effect on their children. The parents will be strong-armed into doing whatever the family court says because they don’t have the means to hire a lawyer good enough to defend themselves.

  24. Bruce Henry says:

    I almost hate to say this, but SFC B is exactly right. Unless these parents did something else to their kids, there is no reason to take them away. And it is true that, if the state could take your kids away because you’re a Nazi, they could use the same reasoning to take your kids away for being gay, or Communist, or liberal, or brunette, or left-handed.
    Although, I admit, those left-handed motherfuckers can’t be trusted.

  25. Amused Observer says:

    Of course he is right. He is standing on clear cut principle not liberal emotion.

  26. Duros62 says:

    I almost hate to say this, but SFC B is exactly right. Unless these parents did something else to their kids, there is no reason to take them away.
    See that? Something we can agree on. Douchebaggery knows no party.

    Although, I admit, those left-handed motherfuckers can’t be trusted.

    Hey, watch it pal. I’m left-handed. So is the new President. So is John McCain. :-)

  27. SFC B says:

    Hey hey hey! Don’t go impugning my motives by assuming I have principles. My defense of Nazi fucks is entirely in my own self-interest. I’m worried that some day, some state agency will try and take my future kids because I think the movie Zardoz has some redeeming features. If we live in a world where Nazi sympathizers can have their kids taken, then people who like cheesy 70’s movies featuring Sean Connery in a loin cloth, and an overly-freckled topless woman with A-cups will be living in fear as well.