Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (156155)	12/15/2002 1:03:26 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578495

Ted Re..Hitler didn't start off talking about hate and discrimination.......he first appealed to German pride and nationality, and noted repeatedly that the Germans had not been treated well. Actually, Hitler did in his book MEIN KAMPF. However, Germany in 19933 was in such a deep depression, that everyone in Germany was focused on poverty, not racism; and like any good politician, Hitler focused on the message that would get him elected. As he consolidated his power, he increased his focus on certain groups and began to blame them for Germany's failures. In many ways, this is an chicken and eggs argument. I believe Hitler used blaming certain ethnic groups, as a path to power, as opposed to him getting the power first. The US typically enters wars begrudgingly; however Bush gives the appearance of eagerly anticipating war. Huh. We were attacked, not only on 9/11, but several times before that, and after. We are in a war now. You may differ with GW as to how to prosecute that war, but we are in a war. All of our presidents have been vigorous once hostilities have commenced. Now you are mincing words. In past posts, you denied Hitler was from the right at all. In any case, the problem was not that he was extreme but that he was mentally disturbed.......most dictators are disturbed to varying degrees. Why are you dwelling upon Hitler having rightist tendencies. Many socialists, especially the communists, are just as dictatorial as the far rightists. Do Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Sung LL, etc spring to mind. By coincidence, while you are sterotyping by groups; Hitler was a heterosexual male, just as you I presume. Does that make you another Hitler. You consider Stalin on the left because communism is considered a leftist theory. But in Russia they did not practice the communism of theory, and Stalin was simply an old fashioned dictator with a right wing bent. LOL Now I have heard everything. Now communism, while leftist, is actually run by rightist dictators. And to think I thought Bill was a master of self deception. How do I know that Lott is not the norm; For the same reason we all know all dems are not a bunch of sexist pigs. It doesn't matter who started the fear. Yes it does. Self defense is a rational for killing as in self defense, or in war. It is one of the only defenses for killing, so it does matter. What bothers me is that Bush is to some degree capitalizing on it. Someone who needs to do that is suspect in my mind...that's all. How delusional can you get. OBL kills more people than were killed in Pearl Harbour, and you think GW shouldn't react to that. In addition, Pearl Harbor was an attack upon military personel, not civilians. OBL and every other terrorist who attacks non combatants, deserves the condemnation of everyone, both rightists and leftists.

To: tejek who wrote (156155)	12/15/2002 4:06:40 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578495

Hitler didn't start off talking about hate and discrimination. Hitler did start out with anti-semetic statements. He might not have campaigned on a slogan of "vote for me and I'll set up death camps". But he did speak hatred from the begining of his political carreer. However, at no time during the Third Reich was there public acknowledgement of genocide and concentration camps. Irrelevant. There was genocide and concentration camps, and they didn't exist contrary to Hitler's wishes. They where part of Hitler's ideas and policies. Bush doesn't and hasn't supported a lesser degree of anything like that. However, where he is similar is that he acts as the aggressor. Its not even vaguely similar. Bush is responding to a potential danger and to a violation of a cease fire agreement. Hitler planned and executed a war of conquest. You can make an argument that Bush is wrong but it isn't anything like Hitler. Not at all. I said most people place Republicans as "moderate right" and Hitler as "extreme right". Now you are mincing words. In past posts, you denied Hitler was from the right at all. Read what I post please. I said "most people" place hitler on the right. I didn't say that I do. But I never said I really wouldn't either. What I have said is that he was not conservative, and he did not resemble a more extreme version of Bush, or Republicans or American conservatives. The terms "conservative" and "the right", mean a lot of different things. You can call Bush part of "the right" and you can call Hitler part of "the right" but only if you use different definitions of "the right". You consider Stalin on the left because communism is considered a leftist theory. But in Russia they did not practice the communism of theory, and Stalin was simply an old fashioned dictator with a right wing bent. Communsm as Marz and others though about it was considered on the left. Communsim as it was practiced by the Soviets and the Chinese communists is also considered leftist and there is good reason to think this way. The Soviets nationalized industries and otherwise promoted socialist ideas. Trent Lott is looking more and more to be a full blow racist.....not thirty years ago but now. That is a big exageration. He made a careless comment, and he might even have some racist ideas (but even that is unceratin) but "a full blown racist"? Please. And even if he is that doesn't meen Bush is or Republican's in general are. I can point to racist democrats does that mean that Clinton and Gore are more moderate versions of Hitler? Nonsense. How do I know that Lott is not the norm Becaue all the evidence points the other way. that Bush currently is bent on securing his power with the intent of implementing the 'real' beliefs of the Rep. party once he feels he can. A paranoid fantasy. And then you tell me Conservatives are not fighting for a little bit of racial hatred? How do I know you are telling the truth? How do I know that you and Bush are talking equality when in reality that's a cover for your true feelings? Are you accusing Republicans of being racist or not. If your not then you have no point. If you are be straight forward about it and go ahead and make the accusation. Most of the comparisons are coming from well educated people in the know who are worried. Most of the comparisons are comming from very partisan people, many of whoom have a record of making unsupported attacks like these against Republicans. It doesn't matter who started the fear. What bothers me is that Bush is to some degree capitalizing on it. What is he doing wrong. Please be specific. Some people have supported him because of fear of terrorists. OK that means they think he is better able to deal with the terrorists. Should Bush say "No don't vote for me."? Bush has been claiming all along to have evidence of Saddam's WMD. The evidence of Saddam's WMD program is not secret, there has been tons of evidence and it has been widly available for years. Tim