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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (72389)	2/14/2005 11:13:09 AM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

"Are Parallels To Nazi Germany Crazy?" I don't know - are clever distortions and appeal to authority arguments inherently crazy? We're supposed to accept this guy's labelling of Bush as Hitler II because some German son of a Nazi soldier, who has "been there, done that", says he sees some unspecified parallels? LOL. And look at the "evidence" your writer presents: "even while starting two wars during his brief tenure." Does he really not accept that the invasion of Afghanistan was a response to an attack on the US and not just Bush "starting a war"? Does he not understand the difference between counter-attacking Al Qaeda, deposing the Taliban sheltering them and then replacing them with a democratically elected Afghan government on the one hand, and invading neighboring countries for the purpose of conquest and domination? Is he really ignorant enough to think making a deal with Stalin to split up Poland is the same thing as deposing Saddam Hussein so that the Iraqi people can elect their own government, will be less inclined to support terrorists, and will represent an example of freedom and democracy for the rest of the Muslim world? This so-called "parallel" doesn't remotely hold up to scrutiny. "How comfortable do American-born Arabs feel in the United States today?" Well, tens of thousands of non-American-born Arabs felt comfortable enough to drive hundreds of miles to vote in the Iraqi election, some even voting for communist candidates. I doubt you can find one that feared retribution form George Bush for doing so. There are also many here, born here or not, who openly criticize the administration's policies - including in Iraq, toward Iran, and toward Israel - all without retribution from Bush. Does your writer present a single case of political oppression of Arabs (or anyone else) in the US? No, of course not. "Whether by chance or design, George W. Bush is the most powerful American president in modern history. Not only does he have both houses of Congress beholden to him, but the majority of the Supreme Court is acting like a quintet of Bush lapdogs. And it all appears legal." ROTFL. Let's see, Jimmy Carter had "control" of both houses of congress. So did LBJ, I believe - plus he had J. Edgar's FBI spying on American citizens. FDR surely did, and even tried to stack the Supreme Court. FDR also exercised war powers that clearly infringed upon the constitutional rights of citizens. But Bush is the Nazi because the American people gave the GOP control of congress and a bunch of justices he didn't even appoint tend to agree with him on certain issues. That's laughable as an argument, and it's just plain stupid of you to fall for it. And BTW, the "lapdog" tag is a favorite of purveyors of baseless propaganda. I could go on, but I think you know his arguments are rubbish and I think you don't care that they are. They coincide with your own warped views and attack Bush, which is all that matters to you. As demonstrated by their adoration of Michael Moore, the left is more than willing to engage in the worst kind of propaganda. No lie is too big if made for the cause.