A somewhat sane Republican on the tea partiers

[Ringel05]

It's exactly what you posted. Quit pretending that wasn't your implicit point.

WHAT!!!????????? What kind of mental midget are you????? I implied nothing of the sort nor would I. If you were familiar with my postings you would know this. Therefore one can only surmise it's only your twisted, hateful, partisan imagination working overtime. You need to get professional help or have a drink. Better yet, cross your legs, hold your breath and fart. Maybe you can clear your mind. Stupid partisan hack.....

Why bring it up at all? The TOPIC is the right comparing Obama to Hitler. What is the REASON you inject an anti-war banner that has no relationship to the TOPIC into the discussion?

Read his post then my response to his post and you might just figure it out. It has everything to do with party hacks and short, selective memories. Nothing to do with the OP. Comprende amigo?

 

[Ringel05]

Shovel?

Again, show me where in this thread I posted anything akin to what you hacks are accusing me of posting and/or implying. Good luck.

Did you address the issue? Or did you try to deflect to the 'other guys' doing the same thing?

Once again read what rightwinger wrote. It had nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with his short, selective, partisan memory. Now was that really so hard to figure out? Or is it you're so locked into the OP argument you can't see past it?

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay, Veritas, Rightwinger, and any others who would like to continue or join the side discussion on the role of government, I have moved in HERE:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/94120-what-do-you-want-from-government.html#post1691909

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They both went after big business in their country, they both demonized people in their own country, they both sought to be worshiped by their followers, they both took over their auto industry in order to produce an affordable fuel efficient peoples car.

You're an idiot. I WISH Obama would go after big business and big finance.......he isn't. He had to prop up GM or all the toxic debt based on its existence would have made the great depression look like a hayride. We should just buy GM outright and hope we can keep it afloat. It's only about $5B in concrete assets......a mere pittance to plug the dyke of trillions it holds at bay.

Pay closer attention to current events and you'll make a fool of yourself far less often.

Obama has taken over Wall Street right down to dictating executive pay, just like any Dictator would

 

[ayiakri]

So - not a single real condemnation from any Republicans, of "CrusaderFRank" comparing President Obama with a mass-murdering, genocidal dictator?

I'm shocked, just SHOCKED that the right won't disavow that kind of rhetoric

Just pathetic that any human would compare the democratically-elected President of the United States to the head of the Nazis... please, continue doing so - it makes it SO MUCH EASIER to show the right-wing up as the insane haters they are... and I would say the same about any as$hole making that comparison about a Republican President to Hitler as well.

What a bunch of fuc&ing losers, to resort to trying to compare the President to Hitler, LOL. Just pathetic. Is this the face of the GOP?
I almost hope so, because it's a huge turn-off even to those of us who find Obama wanting.

 

[amrchaos]

Thus far, the only difference between Obama and Hitler's career is Obama is missing is the little mustache

Now, where are the repudiations from sane republicans of this kind of bizarre rhetoric?

What "CrusaderFrank" is saying, literally, that a man launched the largest war in history (invading and conquering most of Europe, as well as raining bombs on Britain in the process), who also rounded up some six million Jews into concentration camps where they were variously worked to death, starved to death, gassed to death or burnt in ovens, is the same in every way (excepting a moustache) with the President of the United States, elected by an outright majority of the voting citizens (which, incidentally, Hitler never was - he never won a majority in any free election held in Germany).

Further, Hitler got his start in the DAP, an extreme anti-Marxist party that advocated ultra-nationalism. Hitler's Nazi party later ruthlessly persecuted gays and lesbians, in addition to other minorities.

So - for all the Republicans here who claim to be disgusted by posters at the protest meeting depicting slain victims of the Nazis - what do you think of CrusaderFrank?

Let us play a game here.


Change Europe to the MiddleEast

Completely Drop out Genocide

And added "started wars or tried to start wars based on false pretenses and playing on the fears of the citizens"

Who else do you have??

 

[ayiakri]

Let us play a game here.


Change Europe to the MiddleEast

Completely Drop out Genocide

And added "started wars or tried to start wars based on false pretenses and playing on the fears of the citizens"

Who else do you have??

But at that point, it's not really a valid comparison. Because Hitler's single biggest atrocity, in the minds of many, was an attempt to exterminate an entire ethnic-religious group, the Jews.

Sure, he also tried to conquer Europe (along with Napoleon, the German Wiemar Republic, and to some extent, Alexander the Great).

George Bush, as odious as he was, and even with launching an unprovoked war in Iraq on completely false pretenses, is not even in the same category of "evil" as Hitler. Whatever he (Bush) believed, there were no WMD, and although his Vice-President outright lied about that, claiming, "there is now NO DOUBT that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction" (2003 - Dick Cheney), when in fact, there was a lot of doubt about it, and Cheney knew it - that still doesn't put them in the same league as a man who not only attacked one nation, but invaded every country in Europe except Spain and Switzerland (and technically their axis partner, Italy).

So - George Bush was probably the worst president in the last 100 years, but even the worst American president in history is leagues and leagues better than Adolph Hitler.

I mean - I could just as well say, "let's play a game: completely drop out genocide, fascism, invading other countries and a violating the treaty of Versaille, and what do we have? A man who loved dogs. And I love dogs, so... "

I stand by my point that "CrusaderFrank" is a sicko, and the astounding silence among the right-wing "conservatives" here, rather than telling him he's stepped over the line of sanity/decency, is a damning indictment of those who pretend patriotism, but in reality simply hate the man who got elected (or are such sore losers, they're willing to let people who simply hate him spew Nazi comparisons).

 

[NYcarbineer]

Again, show me where in this thread I posted anything akin to what you hacks are accusing me of posting and/or implying. Good luck.

Did you address the issue? Or did you try to deflect to the 'other guys' doing the same thing?

Once again read what rightwinger wrote. It had nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with his short, selective, partisan memory. Now was that really so hard to figure out? Or is it you're so locked into the OP argument you can't see past it?

He offered the advice that Republicans should tone it down (it being the Hitler comparisons and the like) You responding by putting up an example of the 'other side' doing something similar. Now, does that mean your position is that the Republicans SHOULDN'T tone it down, because they're only doing something some other radicals supposedly on the left did?
Or are you simply making an ad hominem attack on rightwinger?

If you're acknowledging that the banner you posted is comparable to what Republicans are doing now with this Hitler/Nazi stuff, etc., aren't you really agreeing that the Republicans SHOULD tone it down? Or is your position that the banner was a good protest tactic?

 

[Foxfyre]

Let us play a game here.


Change Europe to the MiddleEast

Completely Drop out Genocide

And added "started wars or tried to start wars based on false pretenses and playing on the fears of the citizens"

Who else do you have??

But at that point, it's not really a valid comparison. Because Hitler's single biggest atrocity, in the minds of many, was an attempt to exterminate an entire ethnic-religious group, the Jews.

Sure, he also tried to conquer Europe (along with Napoleon, the German Wiemar Republic, and to some extent, Alexander the Great).

George Bush, as odious as he was, and even with launching an unprovoked war in Iraq on completely false pretenses, is not even in the same category of "evil" as Hitler. Whatever he (Bush) believed, there were no WMD, and although his Vice-President outright lied about that, claiming, "there is now NO DOUBT that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction" (2003 - Dick Cheney), when in fact, there was a lot of doubt about it, and Cheney knew it - that still doesn't put them in the same league as a man who not only attacked one nation, but invaded every country in Europe except Spain and Switzerland (and technically their axis partner, Italy).

So - George Bush was probably the worst president in the last 100 years, but even the worst American president in history is leagues and leagues better than Adolph Hitler.

I mean - I could just as well say, "let's play a game: completely drop out genocide, fascism, invading other countries and a violating the treaty of Versaille, and what do we have? A man who loved dogs. And I love dogs, so... "

I stand by my point that "CrusaderFrank" is a sicko, and the astounding silence among the right-wing "conservatives" here, rather than telling him he's stepped over the line of sanity/decency, is a damning indictment of those who pretend patriotism, but in reality simply hate the man who got elected (or are such sore losers, they're willing to let people who simply hate him spew Nazi comparisons).

I wonder if there was as much indignation from the left at Hitler and Nazi banners, signs, and comparisons that were prevalent at almost all anti-Bush rallies during his eight years? Or the many similar references in liberal media, websites, and the blogsphere?

And while this was commonplace from the Left, there has been precious little of that sort of thing at the Tea Parties and tax protest rallies. The media of course will zero in on and feature any of that they can find amidst the crowd, but the huge majority of us would prefer that such not be featured at any of our rallies as they are not and do not want to be identified with the extremists.

Nevertheless, there is simply no way to discuss dictatorships and how they come about without referencing those that exist or have existed. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with identifying that which has led to dictatorships in the past and comparing it to what is happening in the present. To draw such parallels is not only healthy, but essential in order for a free people to remain free. It does not suggest that one person is the same as another.

August 8, 2009
Nancy's Nazi Shock: Did She Forget the Bush Years?
By John Leo

Nancy Pelosi is shocked by the presence of some swastikas at protests against Obamacare. Who ever heard of such a thing? Well, any mildly alert American old enough to remember the anti-war protests of 2003-2007. Images of George Bush with a Hitler mustache and a Nazi uniform was everywhere at swastika-choked marches and rallies. "Stop the Fourth Reich-Visualize Nuremburg," said one sign at a Hollywood march. "The Fuhrer already in his bunker," said another. Lots of Nazi regalia appeared at protests in Pelosi's San Francisco as well.

On far-left Internet sites, where basic Bush-Is-Hitler commentary became too familiar to attract attention, Bush aides were quickly assigned Nazi roles; Tom Ridge was the new Himmler and Colin Powell became Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop; Ari Fleisher, Karen Hughes and Karl Rove were all Josef Goebbels figures. Some thought Vice President Cheney was the most important Hitler figure - he commands "storm-trooper legions," said famous crackpot Lyndon LaRouche.

One fevered lefty connected Bush to Nero as well as Hitler, saying "Nero burned Rome, Hitler burned the Reichstag and Bush burned the World Trade Center."

An even more inventive commenter managed to link Rove to Josef Mengele, the depraved Nazi doctor nicknamed the Angel of Death: "Bush made up stories about John McCain, just as Josef Mengele conducted medical experiments on children in Auschwitz." What?

Donald Rumsfeld was the new Rommel. The Action Coalition of Taos, New Mexico, however, thought Rumsfeld was the real Hitler, since, like Adolf, he had a mountain retreat. In an op-ed published in Florida, Air Force veteran Douglas Herman, disagreed, saying Rumsfeld was more like Goering, because both men had been fighter pilots.

Mainstream commentary featured Nazi references too. Both Senator Robert Byrd and billionaire Democrat George Soros said Bush reminded them of Herman Goering.

During the 2004 presidential campaign, Al Gore used the term "brownshirts" (Nazi street thugs) to refer to Republican computer teams assigned to respond to criticism of Bush and the Iraq war.

Vanity Fair magazine nominated Richard Perle for the Goebbels role, running photos of both men under the headline "Separated at Birth?"

New York Times columnist Frank Rich managed to work in a reference to a famous Nazi filmmaker. He said a Showtime program on 9/11 was so favorable to Bush that it is "best viewed as a fitting memorial to Leni Riefenstahl."

The Rev. Andrew Greeley, sociologist and novelist, depicted Bush as a Hitler figure who carried American over to "the dark side."

Federal appeals judge Guido Calabresi offered a comparatively mild Nazi reference, saying the Bush's rise to power was reminiscent of the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, with the Supreme Court pushing him into the presidency with the Bush v. Gore decision.

Bush reminded the left of non-Nazi villains as well. He was depicted as Attila the Hun, serial killer Ted Bundy, Mussolini, Ahab, Hannibal Lecter, the Anti-Christ and Frankenstein's monster (on the cover of the British edition of book by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman).

As far as we know, Nancy Pelosi never complained about any of this. Maybe she didn't notice.
RealClearPolitics - Nancy's Nazi Shock: Did She Forget the Bush Years?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama Hitler Comparisons:

Charismatic Speaker. Check
Promising Change. Check
Using music of the day to sway the masses. mm mmm mmm check
Grandiose rally's. Check (Obama kept those Roman columns, amiright?)
Rose from obscurity with a shady past. Check (However, Prince Alaweed right hand man Khalid Monsour did NOT get Hitler into Harvard)
Robust use of Scapegoats. Check
Supports the Idea of a Master Race. Have you read Ezekiel Emanuel, Holdren and Sunstein before you answer?
Goes to Church - NOT! Check
Took over auto industry. Check
Promoting affordable people car. Check
Socialist. Check

 

[ayiakri]

I wonder if there was as much indignation from the left at Hitler and Nazi banners, signs, and comparisons that were prevalent at almost all anti-Bush rallies during his eight years? Or the many similar references in liberal media, websites, and the blogsphere?

I'm not exactly "the left", although I did vote for Obama, but I also have always rejected any comparison of any U.S. President to Adolph Hitler. Whether the people on the left did or didn't show indignation when the far-left fringe made those comparisons (and I'm aware that it happened), has no bearing on whether it's "right" for the far-right fringe to be doing it now. Two wrongs not making a right, and all that.

And while this was commonplace from the Left, there has been precious little of that sort of thing at the Tea Parties and tax protest rallies. The media of course will zero in on and feature any of that they can find amidst the crowd, but the huge majority of us would prefer that such not be featured at any of our rallies as they are not and do not want to be identified with the extremists.

You simultaneously claim that it was "commonplace from the left", that there is "precious little of [it] at the tea parties", and that the media "zero in on [any] feature of that they can find amidst the crowd".

So, is the media exaggerating it now, but not when the left did it? Do you have any link to some sort of statistics that back up the claim that it was more common from the left than from the right now?

Otherwise, you're just sort of projecting what you wish to be true based on your own anecdotal experiences, I think.

Nevertheless, there is simply no way to discuss dictatorships and how they come about without referencing those that exist or have existed. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with identifying that which has led to dictatorships in the past and comparing it to what is happening in the present. To draw such parallels is not only healthy, but essential in order for a free people to remain free. It does not suggest that one person is the same as another.

You seem to be implying that comparisons of the current, democratically elected administration - for which an outright majority of people voted - to the Nazi party of Germany, which never won a majority of any vote, nor ever held a majority on it's own in German parliament - are valid, since they're needed to discuss how dictatorships have come about.

If we lived in a dictatorship, where some minority party with 30% support burnt down the Capital building, then seized power from the majority, banned opposition, and started locking up or killing off political opponents, maybe you'd have a stronger case.

But we don't. Like it or not, in free and fair elections, over 53% of people who bothered to go to the polls, voted for Barack Obama. In the past two congressional elections (also free and fair), many Republicans were tossed out, and people freely chose Democrats.

That's not a dictatorship. It's a democracy, and in this case, the majority spoke in both 2006 and 2008. It's not analogous to how the Nazi party gained power, especially given their ultra-nationalism, "racial purity" beliefs, religiosity, persecution of religious minorities, persecution of gays and lesbians, and persecution of racial minorities.

I'm not going to speculate as to which of the major political parties in the U.S. that ideology seems to more closely resemble.

 

[goldcatt]

I wonder if there was as much indignation from the left at Hitler and Nazi banners, signs, and comparisons that were prevalent at almost all anti-Bush rallies during his eight years? Or the many similar references in liberal media, websites, and the blogsphere?

I'm not exactly "the left", although I did vote for Obama, but I also have always rejected any comparison of any U.S. President to Adolph Hitler. Whether the people on the left did or didn't show indignation when the far-left fringe made those comparisons (and I'm aware that it happened), has no bearing on whether it's "right" for the far-right fringe to be doing it now. Two wrongs not making a right, and all that.

And while this was commonplace from the Left, there has been precious little of that sort of thing at the Tea Parties and tax protest rallies. The media of course will zero in on and feature any of that they can find amidst the crowd, but the huge majority of us would prefer that such not be featured at any of our rallies as they are not and do not want to be identified with the extremists.

You simultaneously claim that it was "commonplace from the left", that there is "precious little of [it] at the tea parties", and that the media "zero in on [any] feature of that they can find amidst the crowd".

So, is the media exaggerating it now, but not when the left did it? Do you have any link to some sort of statistics that back up the claim that it was more common from the left than from the right now?

Otherwise, you're just sort of projecting what you wish to be true based on your own anecdotal experiences, I think.

Nevertheless, there is simply no way to discuss dictatorships and how they come about without referencing those that exist or have existed. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with identifying that which has led to dictatorships in the past and comparing it to what is happening in the present. To draw such parallels is not only healthy, but essential in order for a free people to remain free. It does not suggest that one person is the same as another.

You seem to be implying that comparisons of the current, democratically elected administration - for which an outright majority of people voted - to the Nazi party of Germany, which never won a majority of any vote, nor ever held a majority on it's own in German parliament - are valid, since they're needed to discuss how dictatorships have come about.

If we lived in a dictatorship, where some minority party with 30% support burnt down the Capital building, then seized power from the majority, banned opposition, and started locking up or killing off political opponents, maybe you'd have a stronger case.

But we don't. Like it or not, in free and fair elections, over 53% of people who bothered to go to the polls, voted for Barack Obama. In the past two congressional elections (also free and fair), many Republicans were tossed out, and people freely chose Democrats.

That's not a dictatorship. It's a democracy, and in this case, the majority spoke in both 2006 and 2008. It's not analogous to how the Nazi party gained power, especially given their ultra-nationalism, "racial purity" beliefs, religiosity, persecution of religious minorities, persecution of gays and lesbians, and persecution of racial minorities.

I'm not going to speculate as to which of the major political parties in the U.S. that ideology seems to more closely resemble.

Damn, and I'm out of rep again.

Could the hacks please stop with the Hitler nonsense already? There are plenty of other inappropriate fearmongering comparisons to be made that haven't alrady been done ad nauseum. At least show some creativity.

 

[The T]

Cantor criticizes Rush for Hitler-Obama comparison - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

Yeah... because nobody else on the right thought that was out of line or disgusting



Jeez ravi.... grow the fuck up

Right...because no one else on the right criticized it...and I need to grow up.

Maybe that's because they understand the Context of the Statement, and you have yet to understand?

 

[Ringel05]

Did you address the issue? Or did you try to deflect to the 'other guys' doing the same thing?

Once again read what rightwinger wrote. It had nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with his short, selective, partisan memory. Now was that really so hard to figure out? Or is it you're so locked into the OP argument you can't see past it?

He offered the advice that Republicans should tone it down (it being the Hitler comparisons and the like) You responding by putting up an example of the 'other side' doing something similar. Now, does that mean your position is that the Republicans SHOULDN'T tone it down, because they're only doing something some other radicals supposedly on the left did?
Or are you simply making an ad hominem attack on rightwinger?

If you're acknowledging that the banner you posted is comparable to what Republicans are doing now with this Hitler/Nazi stuff, etc., aren't you really agreeing that the Republicans SHOULD tone it down? Or is your position that the banner was a good protest tactic?

Gee, If you had actually read all of my responses to you (most importantly the first) you would have figured it out a loooooong time ago and we would have never this conversation. Hacks are hacks, I don't care which side they are on, they're hypocrites one and all. As for whether both sides should tone it down or not, well since you like to read into peoples posts, I'll let you continue to play you little game and decide for yourself, you're going to anyway. Have a nice day.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Once again read what rightwinger wrote. It had nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with his short, selective, partisan memory. Now was that really so hard to figure out? Or is it you're so locked into the OP argument you can't see past it?

He offered the advice that Republicans should tone it down (it being the Hitler comparisons and the like) You responding by putting up an example of the 'other side' doing something similar. Now, does that mean your position is that the Republicans SHOULDN'T tone it down, because they're only doing something some other radicals supposedly on the left did?
Or are you simply making an ad hominem attack on rightwinger?

If you're acknowledging that the banner you posted is comparable to what Republicans are doing now with this Hitler/Nazi stuff, etc., aren't you really agreeing that the Republicans SHOULD tone it down? Or is your position that the banner was a good protest tactic?

Gee, If you had actually read all of my responses to you (most importantly the first) you would have figured it out a loooooong time ago and we would have never this conversation. Hacks are hacks, I don't care which side they are on, they're hypocrites one and all. As for whether both sides should tone it down or not, well since you like to read into peoples posts, I'll let you continue to play you little game and decide for yourself, you're going to anyway. Have a nice day.

So you don't have the courage to actually take a stand on whether or not the Republicans should be running around calling the president a Nazi and the like.

OK, that explains perfectly why you made the original post I responded to.

 

[rightwinger]

So you don't have the courage to actually take a stand on whether or not the Republicans should be running around calling the president a Nazi and the like.

OK, that explains perfectly why you made the original post I responded to.

If that is the best rhetoric that the republicans can come up with ....go with it

It is more of a reflection on them than President Obama

 

[Navy1960]

Let's all be honest here, it is no more honorable to call or compare this President with Hitler as it was to do the same with the last one. What is worth noting is the amount of righteous anger directed at a small number of people who show up at these tea party protests with these signs as if these people are something new and are only something that is the sole property of President Obama. I will only say this, the people that take the time to dishonor the office of the President of the United States are no more honorable than the same ones who did so during the term of the last President. That being said, regardless of how I may feel or anyone else may feel these people are well within their rights to do so under our constitution but do NOT reflect the body as a whole when they do. It's rather like going to a ASU football game when they play Cal. and because 3 people in the stands are wearing Cal. jerseys, therefor every ASU fan is also a Cal. fan. That is the same logic being applied here.

 

[The T]

Let's all be honest here, it is no more honorable to call or compare this President with Hitler as it was to do the same with the last one. What is worth noting is the amount of righteous anger directed at a small number of people who show up at these tea party protests with these signs as if these people are something new and are only something that is the sole property of President Obama. I will only say this, the people that take the time to dishonor the office of the President of the United States are no more honorable than the same ones who did so during the term of the last President. That being said, regardless of how I may feel or anyone else may feel these people are well within their rights to do so under our constitution but do NOT reflect the body as a whole when they do. It's rather like going to a ASU football game when they play Cal. and because 3 people in the stands are wearing Cal. jerseys, therefor every ASU fan is also a Cal. fan. That is the same logic being applied here.

The HITLER comparisons are rather tiring. When Obama, or any other office holder enact and practice what HITLER did, will I belive such comparisons.

Hitler was a real monster, and fooled the German people and 10's of millions of people lost their lives due to him, and his followers.

 

[Navy1960]

In fact, I will add this, Mao killed more people that Hitler did and I wonder where all this anger directed at these small number of people that attend these tea parties, when several high up members of their own party express admiration for Chairman Mao.

 

[rightwinger]

When you compare the President of the United States to Hitler you are trivializing any argument you are trying to make.

If you don't like healthcare...complain about healthcare
Don't like deficits...offer an alternative

But if all you can give is Hitler, Communist, Marxist...who cares what you have to say?