Originally Posted By ecdc I've noticed the administration's new tactic is to compare the War on Terror to fascism and Nazism. Bush, Cheney, and the other Usual Suspects have been repeatedly referring to Hitler in their speeches. Three guesses for who came up with this ridiculous, boneheaded comparison. I'll give you a hint: It rhymes with "cove."
Originally Posted By gadzuux <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/09/05/EDGF4KTFC71.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/09/05/EDGF4KTFC71.DTL</a> A war we can all agree on Eugene Robinson, Washington Post Writers Group Tuesday, September 5, 2006 (excerpts) >> Democrats have a decent chance of taking the House of Representatives and even an outside shot at the U.S. Senate. That's where all the administration rhetoric about Nazis, commies, fascism and appeasement has to be coming from, because absent the political context it makes no sense. It's all heat and no light. OK, one more from Cheney. To those who point out that Iraq wasn't a nexus of terrorism until we invaded, Cheney responds, "They overlook a fundamental fact: We were not in Iraq on Sept. 11, 2001, and the terrorists hit us anyway." Huh? The terrorists who attacked on Sept. 11 didn't come from Iraq. Except in Cheney's mind, I don't know where the fact that we were attacked by terrorists trained in Afghanistan (and sent by Osama bin Laden, who's probably now in Pakistan) somehow mitigates the fact that we've made Iraq a hotbed of terrorism. He called the jihadists "the successors to fascists, to Nazis, to communists and other totalitarians" as well. The fact is that the jihadists are pretty much sui generis -- they aren't fascists or Nazis and certainly aren't communists, but yes, you could make a good argument for "totalitarians." I guess one out of four isn't bad. Rumsfeld went furthest of all in claiming that it is, in fact, 1939 -- that the jihadist terror movement presents the same kind of threat to the world that Hitler did when he invaded Poland. He set up a straw man, warning that those who do not see the threat as clearly as he does are as blind as those who tried to appease Hitler. But he doesn't specify who he's talking about. Who wants to appease terrorists? Is it Democrats? Nervous Republicans who've seen the latest polls? << ----------------------------------------- I'm thinking that this administration is down to the rock-bottom of their bag of tricks. When it comes to scaring the american public, they're now reduced to invoking hitler, who's about as scary as a muppet to anyone younger than fifty. What we're witnessing are the last throes of a desperate regime.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Huh? The terrorists who attacked on Sept. 11 didn't come from Iraq. Except in Cheney's mind, I don't know where the fact that we were attacked by terrorists trained in Afghanistan (and sent by Osama bin Laden, who's probably now in Pakistan) somehow mitigates the fact that we've made Iraq a hotbed of terrorism.> There's nothing like taking a quote out of context. Here's what the Vice President actually said, "I know some have suggested that by liberating Iraq from Saddam Hussein, we simply stirred up a hornet's nest. They overlook a fundamental fact: We were not in Iraq on September 11th, 2001, and the terrorists hit us anyway. As President Bush has said, the hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse." Are you now going to claim that some people aren't saying that going into Iraq has created more terrorists?
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>...they're now reduced to invoking hitler, who's about as scary as a muppet to anyone younger than fifty.<< Hitler is as scary as a Muppet. Noted.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Three guesses for who came up with this ridiculous, boneheaded comparison. I'll give you a hint: It rhymes with "cove."<< And the source for this startling assertion is...?
Originally Posted By DlandDug (P.S. I think that Karl Rove is not even as scary as a Muppet. And he sorta looks like one. So there.)
Originally Posted By gadzuux Those people would be right - going into iraq has created more terrorists. I'm not surprised that you don't see the disconnect in cheney's statement. I'll try and diagram it for you, but honestly I don't know why, because your logic fails whenever it indicates anything counter to your political faith. Cheney's suggestion is based upon continuing the fantasy that iraq was involved in 9/11. He's never stopped contending that, even after most sensible people have. In trying to draw tangents between iraq and 9/11 - something this administration dances around all the time - he dismisses the original contention, and point of the question - that we've made things measureably worse in iraq by our own actions. Instead he answers with a non sequitor about "the terrorists" attacking us on 9/11 - as if iraq had something to do with it. This kind of pretzel logic only works with children and fools. I can understand why he doesn't want to fess up to it - this abject failure has his bloody fingerprints all over it. But I don't understand the denial of facts by "supporters", who's personal investment seems to lie with the politicians instead of the public. On the other hand, maybe you're just an admirer of disingenuous statements. But even then, cheney isn't particularly good at it. You might have noticed by now that it leads to ridicule.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> And he sorta looks like one. So there.) << He DOES look a bit like dr bunson honeydew.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Cheney's suggestion is based upon continuing the fantasy that iraq was involved in 9/11.> No, it isn't.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Now, now, now. Cheney's recent comment does NOT say that Iraq was involved with 9/11. Here it is, expanded: >>I know some have suggested that by liberating Iraq from Saddam Hussein, we simply stirred up a hornet's nest.<< Cheney disagrees, obviously, that the situation in Iraq has created a new terrorist threat. (Parenthetically, I think this latest notion which apparently spontaneously occurred to all the Democrats at the same time is about as silly as "terrorists are Nazis.") >>They overlook a fundamental fact: We were not in Iraq on September 11th, 2001, and the terrorists hit us anyway.<< ie: The world didn't need the imaginary "new terrorists" of Iraq on 9/11; they were here already. >>As President Bush has said, the hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse.<< Got it? Iraq is not a quagmire, it's an issue. And when it is no longer an excuse, we will still have the hatred of the radicals.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd Just because, the known traitor, george bush, always lies, doesn't mean he doesn't want to be honest like us. George bush comparing his enemies to hitler is telling you, he, george bush is acting like hitler. You just have to remember that the only tools parasites can use on you is lying. Denial, censorship, and blocking are their tools. The traitors in the white house are nazi war criminals, plain and simple.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd I find the republicans lie, but if you just reverse what they tell you, you find out the truth. They always attack the victim first also. So, Iran is like hitler, means iran and this guy is winston churchill, and bush is the nazi, hitler fellow, guy, actually cheney is the owner of the industries, who hitler obeys while beating everyone up. I hear the ibm service dept., had clearance to sell suplies of punch cards, and ink, and fixed machines for the nazi's during world war ii at the concentration camps, where they liked to inventory all their war loot.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd So, the ibm representative, even though an american, and based in new york, got to fly to the concentration camps, all during the war, no matter what smells were coming out of those, brick, oven like buildings. But tell the irani's this, they might start to understand.
Originally Posted By friendofdd I do so wish the republicans would be more like the democrats and always tell the truth without putting any spin on it. Even better, they could be like LPers and not even try to put spin on it.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd As soon as all the republicans are gone, and the honest democrats are back in place, where they belong, in complete control of the government, then the problems will cease, and all the lies and crimes, that go with them. Embezzlers are all alike.
