"Little Eichmanns" and "Digital Brownshirts"

[Tigermike 3,048]

March 18, 2005

"Little Eichmanns" and "Digital Brownshirts"

Deconstructing the Hitlerian slur

by Victor Davis Hanson

National Review Online

The effort to remove fascists in the Middle East and jump-start democracy, for all its ups and downs, has been opposed not just by principled critics who bristled at tactics and strategy, but also by peculiarly vehement cynics here and abroad — whose disgust was so often in direct proportion to their relative political impotence.

One of their most hackneyed charges, begun almost at the beginning of this war, has been the Bush/America as Hitler/Nazi Germany comparison. True, fast-changing events in the Middle East recently have left many of these hypercritics either embarrassed, discredited — or desperately reinventing themselves into the “I told you so” crowd. But we should not forget these slurs — nor expect them to disappear entirely inasmuch as they reflect a deep sort of self-loathing among Western elites.

Immediately after September 11, Ward Churchill compared the victims in the Twin Tower to “little Eichmanns.” Sen. Robert Byrd (D., W.Va.) more recently likened President George W. Bush’s political methodology to what transpired in Nazi Germany. Earlier during the run-up to the Iraqi war, German Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin smeared Bush with a similar Hitlerian analogy.

In fact, what do Linda Ronstadt, Harold Pinter, Scott Ritter, Ted Rall, and George Soros all have in common? The same thing that unites Fidel Castro, the European street, the Iranians, and North Koreans: an evocation of some aspects of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany to deprecate President Bush in connection with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At first glance, all this wild rhetoric is preposterous. Hitler hijacked an elected government and turned it into a fascist tyranny. He destroyed European democracy. His minions persecuted Christians, gassed over six million Jews, and created an entire fascistic creed predicated on anti-Semitism and the myth of a superior Aryan race.

Whatever one thinks of Bush’s Iraqi campaign, the president obtained congressional approval to invade and pledged $87 billion to rebuild the country. He freely weathered mass street demonstrations and a hostile global media, successfully defended his Afghan and Iraq reconstructions through a grueling campaign and three presidential debates, and won a national plebiscite on his tenure.

In a world that is almost uniformly opposed to the democratic Jewish state, Israel has no better friend than Bush, who in turn is a believer in, not a tormentor of, Christianity. Afghanistan and Iraq, with 50 million freed, have elected governments, not American proconsuls, and there is a movement in the Middle East toward greater democratization — with no guarantee that such elected governments will not be anti-American. No president has been more adamantly against cloning, euthanasia, abortion, or anything that smacks of the use of science to predetermine super-genes or to do away with the elderly, feeble, or unborn.

So what gives with this crazy popular analogy — one that on a typical Internet Google search of “Bush” + “Hitler” yields about 1,350,000 matches?

One explanation is simply the ignorance of the icons of our popular culture. A Linda Ronstadt, Garrison Keillor, or Harold Pinter knows nothing much of the encompassing evil of Hitler’s regime, its execution of the mentally ill and disabled, the systematic cleansing of the non-Aryans from Europe, or mass executions and starvation of Soviet prisoners. Like Prince Harry parading around in his ridiculous Nazi costume, quarter-educated celebrities who have some talent for song or verse know only that name-dropping “Hitler” or his associates gets them some shock value that their pedestrian rants otherwise would not warrant.

Ignorance and arrogance are a lethal combination. Nowhere do we see that more clearly among writers and performers who pontificate as historians when they know nothing about history.

On occasion, those who are tainted, sometimes unfairly, with past charges of rightist extremism, find some psychic release in calling an American democratic president or his conduct Nazi-like. Thus, a German politician, who de facto unfortunately operates under the suspicions of the post-Nazi world, gains the moral high ground and moral fides by gratuitously deflecting attention to an American — not as the descendant of the liberators of the Europe, but as the true inheritor of the German Hitlerian mantel.

George Soros can nearly destroy the Bank of England in his hyper-capitalist financial speculations but somehow find spiritual cover among the leftists of Moveon.org, which he subsidized and which ran ads comparing the president to Hitler. Sen. Byrd, who suffers from the odium of an early membership with the racist Ku Klux Klan, perhaps finds it ameliorative to associate others with the tactics of the 20th century’s premier racist.

Entire continents can play this game. If Europe is awash in anti-Semitism, then one mechanism to either ignore or excuse it is to allege that the United States — the one country that is the most hospitable to Jews — is governed by a Hitler-like killer. Americans, who freed Europe from the Nazis, are supposed to recoil from such slander rather than cry shame on its promulgators, whose grandfathers either capitulated to the Nazis or collaborated — or were Nazis themselves.

If the sick analogy to Hitler is intended to conjure up a mass murderer, then the 20th century’s two greatest killers, Mao and Stalin, who slaughtered or starved somewhere around 80 million between them, are less regularly evoked. Perhaps that omission is because so many of the mass demonstrators, who bore placards of Bush’s portrait defaced with Hitler’s moustache, are overtly leftist and so often excuse extremist violence — whether in present-day Cuba or Zimbabwe — if it is decorated with the rhetoric of radical enforced equality.

The flood of the Hitler similes is also a sign of the extremism of the times. If there was an era when the extreme Right was more likely to slander a liberal as a communist than a leftist was to smear a conservative as a fascist, those days are long past. True, Bill Clinton brought the deductive haters out of the woodwork, but for all their cruel caricature, few compared him to a mass-murdering Mao or Stalin for his embrace of tax hikes and more government. “Slick Willie” was not quite “Adolf Hitler” or “Joseph Stalin.”

But something has gone terribly wrong with a mainstream Left that tolerates a climate where the next logical slur easily devolves into Hitlerian invective. The problem is not just the usual excesses of pundits and celebrities (e.g., Jonathan Chait’s embarrassing rant in the New Republic on why “I hate George W. Bush” or Garrison Keillor’s infantile slurs about Bush’s Republicans: “brown shirts in pinstripes”), but also supposedly responsible officials of the opposition such as former Sen. John Glenn, who said of the Bush agenda: “It’s the old Hitler business.”

Thus, if former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore breezily castigates Bush’s Internet supporters as “digital brownshirts”; if current Democratic-party chairman Howard Dean says publicly, “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for" — or, “This is a struggle of good and evil. And we're the good"; or if NAACP chairman Julian Bond screams of the Bush administration that “Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side by side,” the bar of public dissent has so fallen that it is easy to descend a tad closer to the bottom to compare a horrific killer to an American president.

Is there a danger to all this? Plenty. The slander not only brings a president down to the level of an evil murderer, but — as worried Jewish leaders have pointed out — elevates the architect of genocide to the level of an American president. Do the ghosts of six million that were incinerated — or, for that matter, the tens of millions who were killed to promote or stop Hitler’s madness — count for so little that they can be so promiscuously induced when one wishes to object to stopping the filibuster of senatorial nominations or to ignore the objection of Europeans in removing the fascistic Saddam Hussein?

There is something profoundly immoral for a latte-sipping, upscale Westerner of the postmodern age flippantly evoking Hitler when we think of the countless souls lost to the historical record who were systematically starved and gassed in the factories of death of the Third Reich.

Finally, in such a debased climate, it was no accident that Alfred A. Knopf published a novel, Checkpoint, about musing how to kill Bush. Nor was it odd to hear of a New York play, “I’m Gonna Kill the President,” apparently centered around killing Bush. Late last year, a columnist in the Guardian, Charles Brooker, wrote to his British readers on the eve of the election :

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?

All this venom is not so funny when we now witness a Saudi American young man, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, currently under indictment for allegedly planning just such a murder. After all, when it becomes a cheap and easy thing to compare a president to a century’s great criminal, then it becomes even cheaper and easier to dream — or plan — to kill him.

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged. No doubt Abu Ali’s lawyer one day soon will say that his disturbed client’s “musings” were no different from what he read from Knopf or in the Guardian — or that he simply fell under the influence of Moveon.org and thought it was his duty to remove the Bush/Nazi threat that even U.S. senators and presidential candidates had identified and warned about.

The final irony? The president who is most slandered as Hitler will probably prove to be the most zealous advocate of democratic government abroad, the staunchest friend of beleaguered Israel, and the greatest promoter of global individual freedom in our recent memory. In turn, too many of the Left who used to talk about idealism and morality have so often shown themselves mean-spirited, cynical, and without faith in the spiritual power of democracy. What an eerie — and depressing — age we live in.

©2005 Victor Davis Hanson

http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson031805.html

[rexbo 104]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head. Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

[TexasTiger 12,998]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

[rexbo 104]

Uh, I said leftist BS, not the far right BS. Besides, he did address your point on some level; but the purpose of his article was leftists comparing Bush to far-right fascisits, while noting that (leftist) mainstream press and politicians did not compare Clinton to hateful, mass-murdering leftists. Don't worry, those Clinton haters will be coming back out of the wordwork in 2008, and you will have plenty of rightwingers to point at for unfairly calling Senator Clinton Senator Hitlary.

True, Bill Clinton brought the deductive haters out of the woodwork, but for all their cruel caricature, few compared him to a mass-murdering Mao or Stalin for his embrace of tax hikes and more government. “Slick Willie” was not quite “Adolf Hitler” or “Joseph Stalin.”

[TexasTiger 12,998]

Uh, I said leftist BS, not the far right BS.  Besides, he did address your point on some level; but the purpose of his article was leftists comparing Bush to far-right fascisits, while noting that (leftist) mainstream press and politicians did not compare Clinton to hateful, mass-murdering leftists.  Don't worry, those Clinton haters will be coming back out of the wordwork in 2008, and you will have plenty of rightwingers to point at for unfairly calling Senator Clinton Senator Hitlary.

True, Bill Clinton brought the deductive haters out of the woodwork, but for all their cruel caricature, few compared him to a mass-murdering Mao or Stalin for his embrace of tax hikes and more government. “Slick Willie” was not quite “Adolf Hitler” or “Joseph Stalin.”

151695[/snapback]

Yes, you did only praise his ability to see through "left-wing BS", but the "principled" nature of his position is nonetheless undercut by his huge blindspot. I focused on this quote:

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

Somebody sent Daschle anthrax through the mail into his Senate office. A WMD used in an attack on a US Senator, after 9/11 and still unsolved. Daschle pointed out that some of the same hateful extemism of right-wing radio might have the same influence as Hanson suggested above, and even though he was a target of an attempt on his life, he was lambasted by the Right for suggesting such a thing.

Long before Dubya was a gleam in the Right Wing's eye, Rush was making mega bucks and getting mega dittos for calling liberal women "feminazis". Most Right Wing people I know thought it was funny. How does one point to a type of behavior while ignoring what similar behavior preceded it? So it is not just a question of waiting until 2008. Mr. Hanson purports to state a "moral" positon. Morals are partisan, are they?

[AURaptor 1,126]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd. 'Femanazis' is funny, because it was meant to be funny. I've yet to hear Kennedy, Gore or Byrd cheerfully refer to the GOP as NAZIs.

[TexasTiger 12,998]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd.

151710[/snapback]

While I may see him as a drugged out clown, which I guess is an entertainer of sorts, alot of folks see Rush as a source of info. In any event, this isn't really a topic on which you have a lot of credibility:

Probably not w/ the trailer trash inbreds who pluck on their banjos all day from their front porch, but given the choice between Hitlery and Condi, I'll go for Dr. Rice every day.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...&st=0&p=147559&

[AURaptor 1,126]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd.

151710[/snapback]

While I may see him as a drugged out clown, which I guess is an entertainer of sorts, alot of folks see Rush as a source of info. In any event, this isn't really a topic on which you have a lot of credibility:

Probably not w/ the trailer trash inbreds who pluck on their banjos all day from their front porch, but given the choice between Hitlery and Condi, I'll go for Dr. Rice every day.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...&st=0&p=147559&

151715[/snapback]

How does that remark in any way reflect on my 'cred' ?

[TexasTiger 12,998]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd.

151710[/snapback]

While I may see him as a drugged out clown, which I guess is an entertainer of sorts, alot of folks see Rush as a source of info. In any event, this isn't really a topic on which you have a lot of credibility:

Probably not w/ the trailer trash inbreds who pluck on their banjos all day from their front porch, but given the choice between Hitlery and Condi, I'll go for Dr. Rice every day.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...&st=0&p=147559&

151715[/snapback]

On what are basing the credability of my comments per this issue? Beyond your arbitrary standards of simply not agreeing w/ what I say, that is....

151716[/snapback]

Well, it certainly doesn't bother me that you dissed the Republican banjo playing base, but with your Hitler comparisons, who are you slam Bird?

[AURaptor 1,126]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd.

151710[/snapback]

While I may see him as a drugged out clown, which I guess is an entertainer of sorts, alot of folks see Rush as a source of info. In any event, this isn't really a topic on which you have a lot of credibility:

Probably not w/ the trailer trash inbreds who pluck on their banjos all day from their front porch, but given the choice between Hitlery and Condi, I'll go for Dr. Rice every day.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...&st=0&p=147559&

151715[/snapback]

On what are basing the credability of my comments per this issue? Beyond your arbitrary standards of simply not agreeing w/ what I say, that is....

151716[/snapback]

Well, it certainly doesn't bother me that you dissed the Republican banjo playing base, but with your Hitler comparisons, who are you slam Bird?

151717[/snapback]

Who am I (to ) slam Byrd? I was never a KKK Wizard, that's who.

[TexasTiger 12,998]

VDH always hits the nail right on the head.  Of the current political writers, this guy sees right through all of the leftist BS clearer than anyone...

151691[/snapback]

At some point a Gore, Byrd, or Soros has a moral responsibility not to employ Nazi analogy, if for no other reason than to prevent unleashing even greater extremism by the unhinged.

I missed his column when he took Rush to task for the term "feminazi" and scores of others for calling Hillary "Hitlery". Got a link to that one?

151692[/snapback]

If you can't see the difference between a parody used by satirist/entertainers and politicians who equivocate the GOP to actual nazis, ( and I susepct you do) then this discussion is going no where. Rush isn't on the same level as Gore or e Byrd.

151710[/snapback]

While I may see him as a drugged out clown, which I guess is an entertainer of sorts, alot of folks see Rush as a source of info. In any event, this isn't really a topic on which you have a lot of credibility:

Probably not w/ the trailer trash inbreds who pluck on their banjos all day from their front porch, but given the choice between Hitlery and Condi, I'll go for Dr. Rice every day.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...&st=0&p=147559&

151715[/snapback]

On what are basing the credability of my comments per this issue? Beyond your arbitrary standards of simply not agreeing w/ what I say, that is....

151716[/snapback]

Well, it certainly doesn't bother me that you dissed the Republican banjo playing base, but with your Hitler comparisons, who are you slam Bird?

151717[/snapback]

Who am I (to ) slam Byrd? I was never a KKK Wizard, that's who.

151718[/snapback]

Changing the subject to deflect your own hypocrisy. The issue here is Hitler comparisons. If you want a thread on what Byrd did 50 years ago, start one.

[AURaptor 1,126]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue. Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys.

[TexasTiger 12,998]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys. 

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

[AURaptor 1,126]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys. 

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

151722[/snapback]

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

2nd, you're the one who can't make up your mind... either it's about me , or it's not about me but I'm trying to deflect something... you clearly are floating about like a ship w/ out a rudder. Make up your gorram mind and stop w/ this petty insult fest. If that's all you have, then take a hike.

[TexasTiger 12,998]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys. 

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

151722[/snapback]

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

2nd, you're the one who can't make up your mind... either it's about me , or it's not about me but I'm trying to deflect something... you clearly are floating about like a ship w/ out a rudder. Make up your gorram mind and stop w/ this petty insult fest. If that's all you have, then take a hike.

151724[/snapback]

"Left who is morally bankrupt"; "phony clowns on the Left." Insults are all you have. What do you expect in return?

[AURaptor 1,126]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys. 

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

151722[/snapback]

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

2nd, you're the one who can't make up your mind... either it's about me , or it's not about me but I'm trying to deflect something... you clearly are floating about like a ship w/ out a rudder. Make up your gorram mind and stop w/ this petty insult fest. If that's all you have, then take a hike.

151724[/snapback]

"Left who is morally bankrupt"; "phony clowns on the Left." Insults are all you have. What do you expect in return?

151727[/snapback]

Yes, the Left IS morally bankrupt when they absurdly, inanely try to compare the GOP to the NAZI party. Such a baseless charge is an insult to every American who fought to defeat those b*****ds. Those on the Left know there's no basis for such a comparison, but they do it anyway, as a means to demagogue what ever issue they're trying to fool the public on that day. It's dirty politics and nothing but a red herring tactic that attempts to fear monger the issue by keeping the public from thinking critically and instead react emotionally.

Why are you so upset that I make my comments toward the likes of Kennedy, Gore and Byrd. They are the ones guilty of this nonsense. I direct my words toward them, and you direct your insults toward me. Does that seem right to youi?

If it does, then please try to explain .... I'd love to hear this one.

[TexasTiger 12,998]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys. 

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

151722[/snapback]

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

2nd, you're the one who can't make up your mind... either it's about me , or it's not about me but I'm trying to deflect something... you clearly are floating about like a ship w/ out a rudder. Make up your gorram mind and stop w/ this petty insult fest. If that's all you have, then take a hike.

151724[/snapback]

"Left who is morally bankrupt"; "phony clowns on the Left." Insults are all you have. What do you expect in return?

151727[/snapback]

Yes, the Left IS morally bankrupt when they absurdly, inanely try to compare the GOP to the NAZI party. Such a baseless charge is an insult to every American who fought to defeat those b*****ds. Those on the Left know there's no basis for such a comparison, but they do it anyway, as a means to demagogue what ever issue they're trying to fool the public on that day. It's dirty politics and nothing but a red herring tactic that attempts to fear monger the issue by keeping the public from thinking critically and instead react emotionally.

Why are you so upset that I make my comments toward the likes of Kennedy, Gore and Byrd. They are the ones guilty of this nonsense. I direct my words toward them, and you direct your insults toward me. Does that seem right to youi?

If it does, then please try to explain .... I'd love to hear this one.

151729[/snapback]

Yes, AU Raptor IS morally bankrupt when he absurdly, inanely tries to compare Sen. Clinton to Adolf Hitler. Such a baseless charge is an insult to every American who fought to defeat that b*****d. He has to know there's no basis for such a comparison, but he does it anyway, as a means to demagogue what ever issue he's trying to fool the public on that day. It's dirty politics and nothing but a red herring tactic that attempts to fear monger the issue by keeping the public from thinking critically and instead react emotionally.

Why are you so upset that I make my comments toward you? You are one of the ones guilty of this nonsense.

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

I don't know any other way to make you see it. I respond to what you say.

In this thread, Tigermike makes a post, Rexbo comments on it, I engage him on the merits of the article, no insult, he responds on the merits, no insult, I engage back on the merits, no insult, and then you jump in the fray saying if I can't see things the way you see it, the discussion is going no where. Such a reply is a bit of insult, and I pointed out that you are one of those people who have compared a sitting Senator to Hitler. You claim to see no connection between your comment and the issue at hand. I think the hypocrisy is pretty glaring, but you can't/refuse to see it. Where does discussion go from there?

Last night you responded to my revealing that Poppa Bush was the source of the quote referring to privatization as "nutty" by praising Dubya and sleighting the "Left" even though you didn't notice the obvious clues that Dubya hadn't said it. You said the quote was proof the Left was wrong about Bush. Playing on your comment, I simply replied that your comment supported the notion of the uninformed Bush supporter. A little jab, sure, but fairly inoccuous and in response to a somewhat cocky, and clearly erroneous comment, i.e. the kind that invites some kind of retort. You somehow interpret it this way:

Sounds like a typical Left winger... .everyone who doesn't vote for their guy must be 'dumb', or 'uninformed'

Another of your typical slam the whole left comments, even though you, once again, were being hypocritical as I pointed out when you said this:

Sadly, while Kayla may be cute as a button, she displays about the  same attention span  and education level as your typical Kerry/Edwards voter.

The typical person who doesn't vote for your guy has a short attention span and poor education level. That's awful close to saying "dumb."

According to your logic, you're a left-winger!

We obviously see the world through a different lens. That's okay, but there needs to be some overlap in frame of reference to even carry on a rational discussion. For whatever reason, at least in regard to politics, you and I don't seem to be able to. I may think that is mostly your fault, you may think it is mostly my fault, it really doesn't matter. The bottom line is, both of us are probably wasting our time when we try. I don't really care to swap petty insults ad infinitum, either. Take care, brother.

[Piglet 0]

I VOTED FOR NADER!!!!!!

I HATE ALL OF YOU!!!!!!!

AND I HATE ALL THE BANDS YOU LIKE!!!!!!!!

[AURaptor 1,126]

You brought up the comparison. Yes, the topic here IS Hitler and NAZI comparsions. And it's clearly the Left who is morally bankrupt by demaguging the issue.  Not Rush, not me, but those phony clowns on the Left who pretend to be for the 'little 'guys.

151721[/snapback]

It's never you, huh? Could you be more full of ****?

151722[/snapback]

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

2nd, you're the one who can't make up your mind... either it's about me , or it's not about me but I'm trying to deflect something... you clearly are floating about like a ship w/ out a rudder. Make up your gorram mind and stop w/ this petty insult fest. If that's all you have, then take a hike.

151724[/snapback]

"Left who is morally bankrupt"; "phony clowns on the Left." Insults are all you have. What do you expect in return?

151727[/snapback]

Yes, the Left IS morally bankrupt when they absurdly, inanely try to compare the GOP to the NAZI party. Such a baseless charge is an insult to every American who fought to defeat those b*****ds. Those on the Left know there's no basis for such a comparison, but they do it anyway, as a means to demagogue what ever issue they're trying to fool the public on that day. It's dirty politics and nothing but a red herring tactic that attempts to fear monger the issue by keeping the public from thinking critically and instead react emotionally.

Why are you so upset that I make my comments toward the likes of Kennedy, Gore and Byrd. They are the ones guilty of this nonsense. I direct my words toward them, and you direct your insults toward me. Does that seem right to youi?

If it does, then please try to explain .... I'd love to hear this one.

151729[/snapback]

Yes, AU Raptor IS morally bankrupt when he absurdly, inanely tries to compare Sen. Clinton to Adolf Hitler. Such a baseless charge is an insult to every American who fought to defeat that b*****d. He has to know there's no basis for such a comparison, but he does it anyway, as a means to demagogue what ever issue he's trying to fool the public on that day. It's dirty politics and nothing but a red herring tactic that attempts to fear monger the issue by keeping the public from thinking critically and instead react emotionally.

Why are you so upset that I make my comments toward you? You are one of the ones guilty of this nonsense.

First of all, there was no hypocrisy what so ever for me to try to deflect in the 1st place.

I don't know any other way to make you see it. I respond to what you say.

In this thread, Tigermike makes a post, Rexbo comments on it, I engage him on the merits of the article, no insult, he responds on the merits, no insult, I engage back on the merits, no insult, and then you jump in the fray saying if I can't see things the way you see it, the discussion is going no where. Such a reply is a bit of insult, and I pointed out that you are one of those people who have compared a sitting Senator to Hitler. You claim to see no connection between your comment and the issue at hand. I think the hypocrisy is pretty glaring, but you can't/refuse to see it. Where does discussion go from there?

Last night you responded to my revealing that Poppa Bush was the source of the quote referring to privatization as "nutty" by praising Dubya and sleighting the "Left" even though you didn't notice the obvious clues that Dubya hadn't said it. You said the quote was proof the Left was wrong about Bush. Playing on your comment, I simply replied that your comment supported the notion of the uninformed Bush supporter. A little jab, sure, but fairly inoccuous and in response to a somewhat cocky, and clearly erroneous comment, i.e. the kind that invites some kind of retort. You somehow interpret it this way:

Sounds like a typical Left winger... .everyone who doesn't vote for their guy must be 'dumb', or 'uninformed'

Another of your typical slam the whole left comments, even though you, once again, were being hypocritical as I pointed out when you said this:

Sadly, while Kayla may be cute as a button, she displays about the  same attention span  and education level as your typical Kerry/Edwards voter.

The typical person who doesn't vote for your guy has a short attention span and poor education level. That's awful close to saying "dumb."

According to your logic, you're a left-winger!

We obviously see the world through a different lens. That's okay, but there needs to be some overlap in frame of reference to even carry on a rational discussion. For whatever reason, at least in regard to politics, you and I don't seem to be able to. I may think that is mostly your fault, you may think it is mostly my fault, it really doesn't matter. The bottom line is, both of us are probably wasting our time when we try. I don't really care to swap petty insults ad infinitum, either. Take care, brother.

151742[/snapback]

You clearly lack the abiliity to decipher the tricky concept of ' context ' . Me referring to Hillary as 'Hitlery' is merely a show of contempt for Mrs Rodham Clinton. IMO,she is a cold, calculating, power hungry and ruthless bitch. But she's no NAZI . There's clearly a tone of parody w/ that as 'Hitlery' is a play on words. However, when Senators and higher ups in the political world directly refer to the GOP as NAZIs and the like, that is far , FAR more damaging and dangerous. For the reasons listed above, when Kennedy and his ilk make such references, its because they are intentionally trying to divide this country, spew venom and fear monger issues all for the puropse of advancing their own political ideas. They don't give a DAMN about the country, only that they view it's control to be theirs by birth right, and anything else is completely unacceptable.

I had already adressed my faux pas on the GHW Bush quote, so why you decided to fill up space here about it again, is unclear. Any references to that are moot, as I acknowledged my mistake. Get over yourself.

My generalizations about the Left aren't mine alone, and they've been proven to be correct ...eg) Nancy Soderberg on The Daily Show. That you felt the need to bring up some obscure reference I posted in a thread which dated back over 5 MONTHS ago suggests to me that you really do need a life outside of this board.