NOYB wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
NOYB

Comparing Bush to Hitler is outrageous.
That would be on par to stating that people who exercise a first amendment
right to criticize the government are all traitors. No
person with a shred of intelligence would do so.

It takes more than criticism of the government. For instance:

--wishing terrorist attacks will hit the fly-over areas of our country

*If* they do, that's a reasonable wish. Those of us in the civilized
zone have already taken our hits. If there is another attack, let it be
in Bush Country. BTW, you do know what *if* means, eh?


--constantly denigrating the intelligence and capabilities of our troops

For a huge percentage of our armed forces, the military is the employer
of last resort. As for their capabilities, well...there have been two
large-scale, contested wars involving us since our victory in WW II. In
Korea, we fought to a draw. In Vietnam, we lost. Since then, we've been
involved in skirmishes, mainly, against poorly-led, poorly-motivated
troops of greater inferior capabilities. You want to hazard a guess as
to how we'd do in a non-nuclear war against, say, the People's Republic
of China?

Of course, the PRC doesn't have to fight us: it has won without shooting
a shot. We're going downhill, towards an impoverished nation ruled by
fascists and corporate greed, and the PRC is going to the top. Within
your lifetime, the United States will be bankrupt, its currency worth
zip, its wealth looted for others, and its cities unprotected from
enemies who want to strip out the copper piping.

Your boy Bush is setting the stage for our demise.




--wishing ill health or harm on a sitting president

Those kind of comments would make someone a traitor, IMO.





--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Within
your lifetime, the United States will be bankrupt, its currency worth
zip, its wealth looted for others, and its cities unprotected from
enemies who want to strip out the copper piping.


No wonder you're so friggin' grumpy. Can't your wife get you some SSRI's?
Or at least move back to Jacksonville...cause your SAD is getting the better
of you.



Your boy Bush is setting the stage for our demise.

The stage for our demise was set when the previous administration sold US
policy to the highest bidding foreign government.

NOYB wrote:

January 4, 2004

SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER CRITICIZES MOVEON.ORG FOR POSTING AD COMPARING BUSH
TO HITLER

The Simon Wiesenthal Center sharply criticized MoveOn.org for accepting and
posting an ad comparing President George Bush to Adolf Hitler.


Indeed. Although they're both odious, Hitler takes the prize. And on
another level, the comparison isn't fair: Hitler was smarter than Bush.


--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

January 4, 2004

SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER CRITICIZES MOVEON.ORG FOR POSTING AD COMPARING
BUSH
TO HITLER

The Simon Wiesenthal Center sharply criticized MoveOn.org for accepting
and
posting an ad comparing President George Bush to Adolf Hitler.


Indeed. Although they're both odious, Hitler takes the prize. And on
another level, the comparison isn't fair: Hitler was smarter than Bush.

Most of the truly ****ed up sociopaths are extremely smart people...which is
the *only* reason why I'm inclined to believe that Harry really is an
extremely smart person.

In article . net,
says...

Let's compare the two Hilter ads submitted by people nobody ever heard
of to the current spiritual leader of Republican anti-tax initiatives...

I give to you the formidable Grover Norquist...



Out of Their Anti-Tax Minds

By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, January 6, 2004; Page A17


This is the way things happen in my business. In October the extremely
influential GOP activist and White House insider Grover Norquist was
interviewed by Terry Gross on her National Public Radio program, "Fresh
Air." By December a portion of that interview was reprinted in Harper's
magazine, where, over the holidays, I happened to see it. I am writing
about it today because, among other things, Norquist compared the estate
tax to the Holocaust.

This remark, so bizarre and tasteless that I felt it deserved checking,
sent me to the transcript of the show, where, sure enough, it was
confirmed. In it Norquist referred to the supposedly specious argument
that the estate tax was worth keeping because it really affected only "2
percent of Americans." He went on: "I mean, that's the morality of the
Holocaust. 'Well, it's only a small percentage,' you know. I mean, it's
not you. It's somebody else."

From the transcript, it seems that Gross couldn't believe her ears.
"Excuse me," she interjected. "Excuse me one second. Did you just . . .
compare the estate tax with the Holocaust?"

Norquist explained himself. "No, the morality that says it's okay to do
something to a group because they're a small percentage of the
population is the morality that says the Holocaust is okay because they
didn't target everybody, just a small percentage." He went on to liken
the estate tax to apartheid in the old South Africa and to the communist
regime of the old East Germany. How he neglected Iraq under Saddam
Hussein I will never know.

It's hard to overstate Norquist's importance in contemporary Washington.
He is head of Americans for Tax Reform, is an intimate of Karl Rove, the
president's chief political aide, and has easy access to the White
House. He presides over a weekly meeting of important Republican
activists and lobbyists where the agenda -- at least Norquist's -- is to
ensure that taxes are reduced to a bare minimum, the government is
starved and everyone, the rich and the poor, is taxed the same, which is
to say almost not at all.

The Bush administration has mindlessly applied this doctrine. It has
three times reduced taxes -- mostly on the rich -- careening the federal
budget from a surplus to a deficit without end. The rich, who can afford
their schools or health care, will not suffer. But the poor and the
middle class will hurt plenty -- and state and local taxes, often the
most regressive, will go up.

To my mind, the Holocaust should be compared only to itself. I make some
allowance for, say, Rwanda or the massacre of Muslims at Srebrenica or
the gulag of Stalin's Soviet Union. But when it comes to legalized
murder by a state, almost nothing can approach it -- not in its size,
not in its breadth and not in its virtually incomprehensible bestiality.
The morality of the Holocaust, I would argue, is somehow different from
that of the estate tax.

For some time now, the estate tax has been a demagogue's delight.
Republicans, including George Bush, like to call it the "death tax." It
is said to have produced the demise of the cherished family farm --
although the government can offer not a single example. It is, however,
the tax most hated by those who hate taxes the most.

Inexplicably, Norquist's "Holocaust" has somehow left quite a few
survivors. Among the 10 richest Americans, for instance, are five
Waltons -- heirs to the fortune left by the storied Sam, the founder of
Wal-Mart. Forbes magazine says they are each worth $20.5 billion. The
rest of Forbes's list of the 400 richest Americans is peopled by other
heirs, although some got only a billion or two.

In fact, the moral equivalency Norquist concocts is his own -- and it
speaks volumes about the morality of anti-tax Republicans. To them, the
rich owe nothing -- just like the poor, they would say. (The difference
between rich and poor escapes them.) This is unbridled selfishness in
the guise of ideology and makes wealth the moral equivalent of ethnicity
or religion or even sexual preference. To Norquist, distinguishing
between rich and poor is like making a selection at Auschwitz. It not
only trivializes the Holocaust, it collapses all moral distinctions.

When Trent Lott praised Strom Thurmond, the longtime segregationist (and
laundry room Lothario), he revealed a mentality that not even Senate
Republicans could publicly support -- and Lott had to resign as majority
leader. Norquist has gone even further, likening the morality of mass
murder to the imposition of a tax on the rich. At his next meeting of
GOP activists, someone ought to ask him if he's out of his mind. If no
one does, it's because they all are.

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:37:17 -0800, jps wrote:

In article . net,
says...

Let's compare the two Hilter ads submitted by people nobody ever heard
of to the current spiritual leader of Republican anti-tax initiatives...

Article snipped.

jcs, how many times are you going to post the same thing?

Read the following excerpt please:
***********************************
"Excuse me," she interjected. "Excuse me one second. Did you just . ..
compare the estate tax with the Holocaust?"

Norquist explained himself. "No, the morality that says it's okay to
do something to a group because they're a small percentage of the
population is the morality that says the Holocaust is okay because
they didn't target everybody, just a small percentage."
**************************************

Norquist did not compare the estate tax to the Holocaust. He compared
'moralities' of a group who would tax estates because only 2% were
affected and a group who would say the Holocaust is OK because only a
small percent were affected.

Norquist himself answers the question, "No..." He then goes on to
explain the reasoning in a fairly straightforward manner. It is
Richard Cohen who makes something out of this that it is not. It is
simply showing more of the Washington Post's liberal bias.

Do I disagree with the estate tax? That question was not addressed.


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!
John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

In article . net,
says...

This wouldn't be news if it weren't for the RNC. The two ads were
submitted to MoveOn under a contest and MoveOn took no position as to
their validity or worthiness.

Both ads were given very low marks and never had the slightest
possibility of airing. That didn't stop Ed Gillespie, ****ing idiot,
from claiming that MoveOn could end up using these ads in a national
television campaign.

In fact, the contest brought hundreds of creative ads from all over the
country. The finalists are a far cry from comparing Bush to Hitler.

This would be a big yawn if the RNC hadn't have made hay of it.

This wouldn't be news if it weren't for the RNC. The two ads were
submitted to MoveOn under a contest and MoveOn took no position as to
their validity or worthiness.

Typical.

Whatever the most extreme person on the left says, the rw establishment grabs
hold, raises it aloft, and says "See! This is what *all* liberals think!"

When Pat Robertson makes a statement that God has already called the 2004
election in favor of GWB, he's dismissed as a lovable old kook, not a
spokesman.
When Anne Coulter accuses everyone left of center in the country of "treason",
it's defended as freedom of speech.

The right needs to walk carefully. Very easy to trip over a double standard and
land smack on your nose.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
When Pat Robertson makes a statement that God has already called the 2004
election in favor of GWB, he's dismissed as a lovable old kook, not a
spokesman.
When Anne Coulter accuses everyone left of center in the country of
"treason",
it's defended as freedom of speech.

The right needs to walk carefully. Very easy to trip over a double
standard and
land smack on your nose.


It sounds to me like you are doing the exact same thing you accuse the
"right" of doing. Many conservatives find the right wing radio host boring
and predictable, and do not listen to them, but still consider themselves
conservatives.

In article GXIKb.78889$xX.558024@attbi_s02, says...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
When Pat Robertson makes a statement that God has already called the 2004
election in favor of GWB, he's dismissed as a lovable old kook, not a
spokesman.
When Anne Coulter accuses everyone left of center in the country of
"treason",
it's defended as freedom of speech.

The right needs to walk carefully. Very easy to trip over a double
standard and
land smack on your nose.


It sounds to me like you are doing the exact same thing you accuse the
"right" of doing. Many conservatives find the right wing radio host boring
and predictable, and do not listen to them, but still consider themselves
conservatives.

I disagree, since I work with and count as personal friends many who
consider themselves conservatives who consider Rush a buffoon. I'm
certain that Chuck has a similar experience.

Conversely, there's a number of fools in this group who utter dittospeak
on regular occasions, regular enough to recognize their
Rush/Savage/Coulter political pedigree.