April 29, 2003
This Is The Song That Never Ends
I asked Steve to tell me, point for point how Bush=Hitler. The following is his response:
Very good article on the subject here.
Just a few quick points I can come up with off the top of my head:
The Bush administration is fascist; they fit the dictionary definition to a T. (Prescott Bush was deeply involved with the Nazis and had his assets frozen for trading with the enemy.)
Oh. More condemnation of a man for the sins of his father...er....grandfather, eh? If we're gonna go this route, why don't we look at the Kennedy Democrats? I asked about George W. Bush. Not Prescott Bush.
We can't even stay on topic/task in the first point!
9/11 has more in common with the Reichstag fire than with Pea[r]l Harbor.
Not everyone compares September 11, 2001, with Pearl Harbor.
Stereotyping is stereotyping...(all of us not sharing his thoughts are lumped together)...regardless of political affiliation. Both are significant events and tragedies in American history, but each is unique in the execution and the intent.
By the way, I never mentioned Pearl Harbor.
Bush has publicly expressed his desire to be a dictator.
No links for this one? I'll not hold my breath.
The media has helped the Bush administration foster a climate where dissent is akin to treason. Look how Clear Channel has blackballed artists who dared to speak in opposition to the war, (i.e. the Dixie Chicks) while also organizing pro-war rallies across the country. As Herman Goering said: "Naturally the common people don't want war; but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
Clear Channel isn't the spokes-entity for the country - or the world. They're free to adopt policy as they see fit....whether or not the rest of us agree with their choices. They don't represent or own everything and everyone. (Yep, I looked that one up!)
"The Bush Administration is invading other countries. Look, PNAC had this all planned out long before Bush was selected to the presidency. One of the position papers suggests there needs to be a event similar to Pearl Harbor to justify an invasion of Iraq. That document can be found here.
Ah! He brought up Pearl Harbor!
I'm glad he included the link. Otherwise I'd have thought he was referring to this PNAC. Or, possibly even this.
What bothers me most is this: "One of the position papers suggests there needs to be a event similar to Pearl Harbor to justify an invasion of Iraq"...meaning our own country manufactured the events of September 11th? (His words, not mine!)
Bush clearly believes he has god on his side.
Note: Steve is part of the Freedom From Religion organization. (An Aside: at the convention they held in San Diego last December, Julia Sweeney was one of the speakers.. Which I find odd...considering her play was called God Said Ha!)
I'm all for freedom of speech and thought. I don't like other people telling me what I can and can't think, though.
The appeal to citizens to turn in their neighbors and many other chilling aspects of "Homeland Security" and the Office of Information Awareness.
The appeal. So...how many of us actually did this? I'd love to see the logbooks on the calls that came in on this one.
The list goes on but it's pretty obvious to anyone who cares to be observant.
Anyone who disagrees with Steve is, obviously, not observant.
Honestly, I'm still waiting for the real list.
You commented that you had given me you[r] email for personal use. I can think of very few things as personal as politics.
I can! Family, health, personal tragedy, children, upbringing, morals, dreams, sex.....do I really need to continue?
It was clearly a mistake to include your address on that list. In fact, it was a mistake to even keep your address.
This is what I'm saying!
If you weren't interested, you should've treated it the same as every other piece of uninteresting mail and hit the delete key.
How could I have known? The first e-mail said "I'm fundraising" as the subject. For all I knew, he was raising money for an animal shelter.
IIRC, we met one evening over a couple of beers and you knew my political leanings full well even before we agreed to meet. I was very up-front about that.
True, to some extent. He said he was very involved in restructuring the Democratic Party. I didn't know he was fanatical.
I like to talk politics. I'm not adverse to exchanging ideas. I'm curious, like talking with people, and am willing to hear a great many different ideas.
And in our conversation you certainly led me to believe you held similar views.
I had similar views on a few topics. Not necessarily what he remembers. Sometimes, when one person is the only one speaking, one cannot hear what anyone else is saying. Frequently, those who do all the talking don't care that someone else might have something to contribute to the discussion.
In retrospect, I'm very grateful it never went beyond that first meeting.
Exactly my thinking!
I'm not going to sink to your level of name-calling and ad hominem attacks; just make sure this is last time I ever hear from you. And get my address off your blog.
In all fairness I did call him an UltraLiberal. I also said he was a bonehead and an asshole. (I only called him that when he said I couldn't possibly be thinking clearly, having been brainwashed by The Man, I only disagreed with him because of his politics, and because I was a part of the "the borrow and bomb party.") Hell, I call 'em as I see 'em.
I stand by my beliefs that we are all free to choose what we believe in this country. I believe it's one's right to speak freely on one's beliefs. I challenge those who offer up the same argument over and over again because they haven't taken the time to research any of the rhetoric they hear others spout.
I asked for a point by point comparison of George W and Hitler. This is what I got.
Poor argument. He wins no points with me.
My post stands as it is. I may not be the most articulate person around, nor am I the most well-informed. However, I do my research as I challenge my own stance and I form my own opinion without resorting to a 'party' line. Most importantly, I respect the right of others to think for themselves. I know and respect many who don't share my thoughts on the war in Iraq. Steve doesn't.
Steve may not appreciate that his e-mail is in that post....he's welcome to use that DELETE key he keeps handy when people write to challenge his ideas.
Posted by DaGoddess at April 29, 2003 12:35 AMYou know, Joan, that's what I like about you. It seems to me that just about everyone (on the Web anyway) seems to have created an imaginary line in the samd regarding politics (war versus anti-war). And anyone not on their side on THIS SINGLE ISSUE is summarily dismissed as "unworthy" of social interaction with them.
There's a lot more to life than one's political views. They do, to some extent, shape a person's behavior. But good grief, do you ask your gynecologist what his beliefs are? The pizza delivery boy? The mailman?
People who share opposing views CAN coexist peacefully (an oxymoron perhaps?), and even maintain friendships.
But the key here, which you hinted at in this post: Both of them must be civilized in order for this to work!
Great post!
Posted by: Joni at April 29, 2003 03:33 AMHi ya, Joanie. I just LOVED your post. There's nothing like politics, religon or sex to get people worked up. By the way, you can't have a civilized conversation with a bonehead (You being civilized and steve [notice all lower case letters] being the bonehead).
Posted by: Colin at April 29, 2003 04:26 AMYou know, when I read steve's response, I get the impression of someone who uses a lot of heresay as "fact". I find it very funny, that the people who always shout free speech the loudest, seem to be the ones also shouting DOWN the other side of the argument the loudest. It's sorta like I said in my blog piece about the Dixie Chicks that I caught hell for from one commentor...........how come my viewpoint doesn't have validity and how come I don't have a right to exercise my free speech and my right to choose? How come that makes me an idiot?
For what it's worth, and I am not exactly an unbiased observer, being a worshiper of Da Goddess from afar for months now........I do not see a bit of proof, nor substance in steve's viewpoints he tries to make. I certainly haven't heard any of the "proof" remarks that he alledges to. Like "Bush has expressed the desire to be a dictator" Where the HELL did that one come from?
Again, I am far from a Bush supporter. I wouldn't have voted for the guy if I was old enough to vote. Well, anyway, I am getting into bloggin territory again LOL.
Love ya Joanie!!!!
Posted by: zander at April 29, 2003 05:06 AMI can't muster zander's exuberance, but that was pretty dang cool.
Posted by: Joe at April 29, 2003 06:35 AMhe said, I couldn't possibly be thinking clearly, having been brainwashed by The Man
This is a common refrain amongst the (pseudo) academic, UltraLiberals (great description btw). If I had a nickle for everytime I've heard this . . .
Posted by: Chris at April 29, 2003 06:37 AMThe media has helped the Bush administration foster a climate where dissent is akin to treason. Look how Clear Channel has blackballed artists who dared to speak in opposition to the war, (i.e. the Dixie Chicks) while also organizing pro-war rallies across the country.I've seen many more publicized ANTI-war rallies, than pro-war. Posted by: jl at April 29, 2003 06:41 AM
An authoritarian, dictatorial, shit, I married a fascist.
Posted by: Dave at April 29, 2003 07:12 AMIt's easy:
A. Hitler was a mammal; Bush is a mammal.
B. Hitler breathed oxygen; Bush breathes oxygen.
C. Hitler was a biped; Bush....etc.
I could go on like this. You all can see the overwhelming evidence.
Too funny, Joan, too funny.
I wish I could stand up to others as you do !!!
;o)
Mark is right.....I am beginning to see a pattern here....
Posted by: Bill at April 29, 2003 01:05 PM'course, volk like steve fail to see the obvious... and must read all this extraneous shit into what goes on. Bush=Bush. Hitler=Hitler.
You DO know what the Martians are doing to the soil?
Posted by: pril at April 29, 2003 02:07 PM'course, volk like steve fail to see the obvious... and must read all this extraneous shit into what goes on. Bush=Bush. Hitler=Hitler.
You DO know what the Martians are doing to the soil?
Posted by: pril at April 29, 2003 02:07 PMHow DARE you throw logic into an argument with an UltraLiberal?? What a weenie. You GO, girl.
Posted by: margi at April 29, 2003 06:30 PMI think it's in your best interest to give up on him now (in spite of your most excellent fisking). You're just wasting your breath. I know people like this and have learned that you cannot reason with them. But I do constantly remind them that I own guns and know how to use them.
Posted by: MarcL at April 29, 2003 06:40 PMWow! Your really body-slammed that ultraliberal asshole.
Everyday I thank God for the second amendment, because I live for the day when I can put a nice 9mm hollow-point in the back of every one of their empty heads. And that day IS coming! I find it hard to believe we’re not rounding up these drugged-out “peaceniks” and putting them in camps so they can’t bring harm to our troops fighting the glorious wars of liberation.
There’s another liberal asshole out there who goes by the name of “Bartcop”. (Might even be the same guy!) The site www.bartcop.com is a rich fount of the same leftist anti-American garbage spouted by “steve”. You should check out the site because “Bartcop” is continually whining that no conservative—he calls real Americans “monkeys”—is brave enough to debate him in a chat room. I’ve yet to meet a liberal who had one single fact to back up any argument and “steve” is no exception. Judging by the way you handled that godless fudge-packer, I’ll lay down money that you can be the one to finally get that “Bartcop” dickhead to shut the fuck up.
BTW, there was no link to “good article” the faggot mentioned. I assume the cocksucker had smoked so much dope, he forgot to include a link? God liberals are so fucking stupid, I can’t wait to start killing them.
Posted by: jesus4u at April 30, 2003 09:47 AMJust FYI, I do recall Bush cracking a joke once when he was asked if he were frustrated with a recent vote in Congress that didn't go the way he wanted. He smiled and cracked a joke about how much easier life would be if this were a dictatorship. Everyone laughed.
This is almost certainly what your ultra-Leftist correspondent was referring to.
And please, let's stop calling them "liberals." That requires a commmittment to fair-mindedness and tolerance, and an avoidance of dogma, that he obviously completely lacks.
Posted by: Dean Esmay at May 7, 2003 10:42 AMJesus4u... hey, there; a little less red meat, OK?
Dean: The correspondent in question wasn't much for facts, either, considering his willingness to equate 9/11 with a manufactured firebombing... which is what the evidence strongly points to in the Reichstag case.
Unless, of course, the fellow thinks we HIRED bin Laden... which would hopefully srain even HIS credulity.
Posted by: Bill Ernoehazy at May 7, 2003 10:50 AMYou neglected the biggest difference of all between Bush and Hitler. Hitler was democratically elected!
Posted by: Mike Finley at May 10, 2003 08:25 AMYou neglected the biggest difference of all between Bush and Hitler. Hitler was democratically elected!
Posted by: Mike Finley at May 10, 2003 08:26 AMThere is a certain laziness, a preference for denial over research, and a proclivity to preferring hearsay over factual reality... these mark the left- no, make that 'losers' of today.
Unwilling to take the time or make the effort to ascertain what is REALLY happening, they find it easier in a small, dull, mean and short-sighted way, to just name-call, obfuscate, invalidate, calumniate and generally look foolish, small, mean and vindictive.
But then, this is just an Eye Opener!
Posted by: Eye Opener at May 12, 2003 08:00 PM