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 (337214)	5/11/2007 11:35:21 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575174

The same point I made to Taro in response to his implication that FDR and Hitler where highly similar applies to your arguement. Just substitute "Bush" for FDR. "There are some distant similarities, between FDR and Hitler, but focusing on them distorts things because the difference are far larger and more important. You can find things that are similar with Hitler and a lot of people, but using them to imply that person X and Hitler are the same or almost the same, usually is neither accurate nor reasonable. Also comparing FDR to Hitler, distracts people from arguments about actual problems with FDR. When you exaggerate so much in making criticisms, you cause some people who otherwise would have read/listened to your message to tune you out. You give people who would have debated the issue, and easier way to attack your argument, and you make some people who would have been on your side if you where making more reasonable criticism, instead argue against you." Message 23535280 As for trying to pack crowds with supporters, sure Hitler probably did that, and Bush does as well, but then politicans of all stripes do that. Using that to imply some significant similarity between Bush and Hitler is like using the fact that they both wore shoes to say that they are the same. Do you think this is the behavior of a president who believes in democracy? Yes he was democratically elected. Democracy, doesn't imply that a politician automatically chucks and policy when it becomes unpopular. Bush apparently believes in democracy with the "selection model" more than the "incentive model". See Message 23534289 then maybe the next presidential election you might consider electing a leader who thinks more about his country and democracy then about favoring his patrons with tax cuts. The tax cuts probably where implemented in order to benefit this country and they have had that effect. To the extent that I might support a statement remotely like yours it might be something like - "then maybe the next presidential election you might consider electing a leader who thinks more about his country and democracy then about favoring various constituencies with large spending increases"; but then I can't find any candidate who I think is likely to really reign in spending.