# @ Wednesday, March 31, 2004 5:11 PM

I hate sounding like an overly sensitive bleeding heart, but comparing Bush to Hitler is minimizing the murder of millions - millions - of Jews. While it is true that W is connected to the death of hundreds, maybe thousands, to compare him to a man who actively planned the destruction of a race is . . . I dunno, the thought causes me inease. Saddam might be a better comparison to Hitler. How odd, you a Republican, joking about W being Hitler, and I a Democrat-ish person, defending him. Whoa, I never thought this day would come. I've been labeled a Busher-hater previously!

epiNole

# @ Wednesday, March 31, 2004 5:38 PM

To even mention the whole genocide thing totally undermines the point being made here. (Although that's what the point ulimately points to) The way that Hitler came into power, changed the system, enacted himself all powerfull etc is very similar to what Bush has been doing. The point is (despite if or how he uses it) there has been too much power flowing through the Bush reich and the companies that benefit from enpowering him. Hitler is an example when too much power is given to one person or group. I'm fearfull that if Bush get's a 2nd term that he will approach the whole gun control thing. Let's not forget that it was gun control that gave Hitler the final step to wage war on the Jews as they couldn't legall own guns (to defend themself). Don't think Bush is this "oh so holy" person that would never do such a thing. That was the same ignorant mindset that made everybody in Germany love Hitler. Heck to compare Saddam to Hitler is an insult to Hitler. He was way smarter and way more loved by his people.

travisowens

# @ Thursday, April 01, 2004 2:15 AM

Hitler got democratically elected once too - I had to remind somebody of that just today. They were advocating suspension of habeas corpus and other drastic measures to "keep us safe" and I suggested that might put us on the slippery slope to fascism. We already have the "us" vs. "them" mentality being pushed in Washington - activating the populace against some perceived external threat is a cornerstone of fascism. -B-

bschorr

# @ Thursday, April 01, 2004 11:58 PM

You know, the most interesting question that was asked of Mr. Bush during the Tim Russert interview was "What will you do if you lose?" Reading it in a transcript did not convey the tone, which seemed to indicate a suspicion that a normal transfer of power might not be in the offing. Add to that the famous comment he made about how great a dictatorship would be, as long as he was the dictator, and some threatening rumblings from corporate supporters that there might be damage to the economy if he is not re-elected, and Bush as a possible dictator does not seem like much of a stretch. Bush's response to the question was, "I'm not going to lose."

Ogman

# @ Friday, April 02, 2004 7:27 PM

How else would you answer it, really? And regarding Hitler: sorry, you can't mention the dude's name without bringing up genocide - the two words are inextricably linked forever. To think so is folly.

epiNole

< October 2004 >
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
26	27	28	29	30	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31	1	2	3	4	5	6

Subscriptions

• RSS 2.0
• Atom 0.3