Savage distorted facts to claim double standard by "this hate group, Media Matters"
On the July 18 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Michael Savage likened the Anti-Defamation League's (ADL) criticism of controversial comments by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) to his own July 16 remarks regarding Ellison and stated: "What's interesting is that the ADL agrees with me, and yet this hate group, Media Matters, the homosexual radicals, don't attack the ADL. Isn't that interesting?" Savage was referring to a July 17 Media Matters for America item that focused on a comment he made seconds after his initial criticism of Ellison, a Muslim congressman, for his speech to an atheist organization in which he equated the Bush administration's response to the September 11 attacks to Adolf Hitler's accumulation of power following the 1933 destruction of the Reichstag. After decrying Ellison's remarks as "diminishing what was done to the people by Hitler," Savage went on to say: "Now what would a devout Muslim radical have in common with atheists? Answer: hatred of Christianity and hatred of Jews."
However, in questioning why Media Matters did not similarly criticize the ADL -- which denounced Ellison's comments as "outrageous and offensive to all Americans" -- Savage suggested that the July 17 item was in response to his criticism of Ellison for "diminishing" Hitler's atrocities. In fact, the item highlighted Savage's claim that Ellison and atheists hate Christians and Jews (thus the headline: "Savage: Rep. Ellison, atheists share 'hatred of Christianity and hatred of Jews' ").
The July 17 item did note Savage's criticism of Ellison for "diminishing what was done to the people by Hitler" and went on to point out that Savage himself often compares progressives and Democrats to Nazis. For example, he recently described the "progressive movement" as "the brown shirts of today" and called Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) a "Nazi." In fact, a May 2 ADL press release denouncing CNN host Glenn Beck's comparison of efforts to raise awareness of global warming to the Holocaust said: "It has become almost commonplace for talk-show pundits to use comparisons to the Holocaust and Nazi imagery to attack people whose views they disagree with. ... Every time a radio or television personality takes that unique event in history and twists it for their own political agenda, it cheapens the public debate and distorts and trivializes the Holocaust."
From the July 18 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Next story on michaelsavage.com: The Anti-Defamation League has slammed the first Muslim in Congress, Representative Ellison, for comparing President Bush to Adolf Hitler. And what's interesting to me -- what's interesting to me is that there's a hate website run by homosexual radicals who have nothing but praise for radical Muslims, who continue to hate me -- it's called Media Matters. They're a group of hateful, hateful, hateful people who published an article about me saying, "Savage says that Representative Ellison and atheists share 'hatred of Christianity and hatred of Jews,' " and then they try to smear me because I asked this question.
"Michael Savage responded to a recent speech given by Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minnesota, to the organization Atheists for Human Rights by saying, 'What would a devout Muslim radical have in common with atheists?' " asked Savage. "Answer: hatred of Christianity and hatred of Jews."
I then went on to say the following -- and, of course, this was the most important part -- I said, "So now Keith Ellison now calls Bush Hitler, thereby degrading what was done to the people by Hitler and diminishing what was done to the people by Hitler." I went on and said, "Of course, the all-power-to-the-people-right-on leftists in Minnesota don't even know who Keith Ellison is."
What's interesting is that the ADL agrees with me, and yet this hate group, Media Matters, the homosexual radicals, don't attack the ADL. Isn't that interesting? I don't care who they attack. We know who they are. We know who they are, and when that train goes through the tunnel, although they think the noose is about to go around my neck, when the train comes out of the tunnel, you never really know.
The point is Ellison'a original remarks illicited the same offensive reaction from Savage and the ADL. The ADL is obviously less inflammatory in their rhetoric than Savage so their remarks were to be expected, more reasoned. However, they both were offended and rightly so.
Savage uses MMFA as his favorite punching bag, and the same in reverse.
I don't think Savage is MMFA's favorite punching bag, but he is one of many.
It's sort of like asking a parent which is thier favorite child. They are equal, and special for different reasons.
That statement only works with "good" parents. Bad parents will still have their favorites. Just as bad liberal sites have their favorites. Savage is certainly this site's favorite.
Auto do you agree with:
Discussing student volunteers distributing food to the homeless in San Francisco, Savage declared that "the girls from Branson [school] can go in and maybe get raped...
or
Shock radio and TV jock Michael Savage, who since March has had a talk show called "Savage Nation" on MSNBC, regularly calls homosexuals "perverts;" women "whores;" Asians "little soy-eaters;" progressives "filthy slime;" and immigrants or people of color natives of "sacred Turd World nations."
If you don't agree with those statements then you should have no problem with MMFA pointing out Wiener's continued crazy, stupid, thoughtless remarks.
Really? DEFINITLY this sites favorite? If you use this sites search feature and you type in their respective names O'Reilly gets 793 hits, Hannity 759 hits, Limbuagh 699 hits and Matthews gets 765 hits, now the Weinerdog gets a paltry 232 hits. Then again what was I thinking you NEVER know what you are talking about and pulling totally unsupportable BS like this out of your ass is all you do.
"That statement only works with "good" parents. Bad parents will still have their favorites. Just as bad liberal sites have their favorites. Savage is certainly this site's favorite."--Autocpsychic
I was just using a generalization. I have no idea what your childhood was like. : )
Save that tactic for solon. He is the expert at attacking and cursing relatives of posters. Step back and let the expert do your work for you...like a typical liberal (someone has to do it for you).
You do KNOW you are a complete moron dont you? I mean that isnt beyond your clearly limited capacity to understand is it? YOU make nothing but BS assertions you pull out of your ass. I am a liberal and no one is doing anything for me. YOU are so stupid and so pathetic. I do love to hear you whine so piteously WWAAAHHHHH it ok when I attack other people but liberals are so mean when they call ME names WWWAAAAAHHHH a six year old girl would be embarrassed to snivel as much as you do when people treat you the way you treat us. What a whiny little sniveller you are.
You see, rick? Solon is the expert at breaking the law. I seriously doubt he has ever read the 'terms of use' of this site, because he NEVER obey's the rules. Must be an employee to be able to break the rules and not get punished.
"That statement [Parents don't have favorites]only works with "good" parents. Bad parents will still have their favorites."--Autopsychic
"I was just using a generalization. I have no idea what your childhood was like. : ) --TheRick"
"Save that tactic for solon. He is the expert at attacking and cursing relatives of posters. "--Autopsychic
I'm sorry if I touched a nerve. It was not meant to be an attack on either you or your relatives. I also didn't infer that you were talking about my parents, although, now that I think about it, I perhaps could have.
In defense, if I were to attack your relatives, I might have said; "Too bad your mama was such a bad parent'" or something of that sort. But what I said was; "I have no idea what your childhood was like." I didn't imply whether it was good or bad. In fact, there was no implication at all, I just stated a fact. Then finished with a friendly smile to let you know that I didn't wish any ill will.
"Step back and let the expert do your work for you...like a typical liberal (someone has to do it for you)"--Autopsychic
If Solon does my work for me (because I am a typical Liberal) and if you consider Solon a typical Liberal, who will do Solon's work for Solon. . . er,. . . for me?
i thinks media matters were highlighting the athiest hate jews and christians part of the speech
Ellison's comments did not compare Bush to Hitler but instead accurately reflected the historical record. Hitler used the Reichstag bombing in the same way Bush used 9-11. To ignore the rule of law, spread fear and terror, to implement rigid restrictions on civil liberties. They both used these events to justify the silencing of dissent. A fully legitimate and wholly accurate comparison. Ironically, Savage acts just like a nazi.
18 months left in his Presidency and that should be ample time to squeeze in the concentration camps...I'll keep my fingers crossed.
Go look up the definition of concentration camps. We already have them.
While you're at it, look up "rendition." Focus on the part about "3. handing over prisoners to countries where torture is allowed "
It's a common and logical mistake so often made by people who should know better. There is a clear distinction between the way Hitler rose to power and the way Hitler used his power. Those who say that his use of power to murder millions of people precludes any discussion of the way he rose to power are hiding from reality.
To say that Bush's rise to power is reminisicent of the way Hitler rose to power does not say a thing about the Holocaust' especially it does not diminish the horror of the Holocaust. It does say that both men used questionable and illegal means to gather and soldify their power and we should be very wary of what Bush is doing and what he might do regarding war and regarding scheduled elections.
Maybe you should stop trying to compare a U.S President to Hitler and Nazis and start comparing his actions to other U.S. Presidents actions during war time. Talking about repeating history, we aren't able to repeat history, like win a dang war, because of demgoguery espoused from your conspiracy theories.
"Maybe you should stop trying to compare a U.S President to Hitler and Nazis and start comparing his actions to other U.S. Presidents actions during war time."
What other president lied us into a war? If you can find that president, we'll start comparing Bush and his war to that president and his war.
I wasn't even talking about the reasons for war but just look at what other Presidents did in time of war.
What war are you referring to?
Oooooooooooh. See, here I thought it was a multitude of mistakes by an incompetent administration that kept us from winning this war, when all along it was a bunch of people badmouthing the administration.
I gotta admit, your version sounds waaaaay more plausible.
Of course you are smart enough to know that is not what I meant. However, a perfect example of this espoused demagoguery was displayed when making a comparison to Nazi concentration camps and Guantanamo Bay in the above posts. Those types of things are not only a foolish lie but destructive. I doubt Michael Moore would have been screaming across the razor wire fence of Dachau hoping to get better medical attention for Americans. Your erudition of history is lacking and you need to discontinue the attempt to put a square peg in a round hole.
I would describe what the Nazis had as death camps.
Did you look up the definition of concentration camp?
Loonz-
I don't need to look up the definition of concentration camps and I'm not going to argue semantics. Furthermore, I don't need a dictionary to tell me Guantanamo Bay is not a concentration camp. I was an Army brat and was born in Germany and subsequently lived there for 6 years. I've been to Dachau and stood in front of the furnaces where they burned the bodies. They called them concentration camps so that is what I will call them.
You also asked what war I was referring to, well you don't have to go far back. Do a search on some of the things the liberals beloved FDR did. You could go even further back to the Civil War and what Abraham Lincoln did during that war. I know I'm going to get people saying "How can you compare Bush to Lincoln or FDR!" I'm not and of course Bush comes no where near those Presidents and his name shouldn't even be mentioned amongst their graves. I merely am pointing what these men had to do when it meant either a win or loss.
So let's have some concrete examples of how FDR or Abe Lincoln or any other President did similar things to what Bush did.
Examples would need to include those otehr Presidents while they were
Illegally keeping and treating prisoners of war worse than war criminals, since war criminals in previous conflicts at least got fair and adequate defense representation.
Illegally leading the country into a war we never should have entered by distorting the evidence.
Disregarding clear advice that his course of action was likely to lead to more violence and instability in the region, rather than creating an oasis of peace in the region, and then being unwilling to acknowledge reality.
These are only a few.
Illegitimately leading the country into a war that could have been avoided by pursuing diplomacy more, after the President promised that war would be his very last option taken only after all other options were exhausting.
Failing to adequately plan for ongoing operations, and hamstringing his generals' efforts to do that.
"They called them concentration camps so that is what I will call them."
Do you know why Hitler called them concentration camps?
"Do a search on some of the things the liberals beloved FDR did."
I disagree with what FDR did. I think all Americans should be ashamed at what happened.
You could go even further back to the Civil War and what Abraham Lincoln did during that war.
What are you referring to? Habeas Corpus? Habeas Corpus can be suspended in times of insurrection. It's in the Constitution.
I know I'm going to get people saying "How can you compare Bush to Lincoln or FDR!"
Because it is an insane and inane assertion.
Sure sure...we the people who have been completely ignored as far as Iraq goes are to blame now because Bush f*cked up the war and won't end it.
I suppose you're one of those fools who thinks we would have "won" Vietnam if not for Jane Fonda.
There's nothing "evil" about you at all. You're just completely mixed up about history...that's all.
Ellison was basically saying Bush is like Hitler with his ridiculous statement, because he's an idiot. Mike , on the other hand, knows how to express himself such that everyone has something to complain about.
WAKE UP!!!! It's just a radio show.
No he wasnt he was basically saying that Bush used 9/11 in much the same way Hitler used the Riechstag fire, which is not the same thing. Anyone NOT a brainwashed idiot can see that. As for the Weinerdog besides being insane we get you Weinerdog worshippers in here all the time saying, what he REALLY MEANT WAS, which no one would have to do if he were that good at expressing himself. The Weinerdog seems like a smart man I think with adequate doses of antipsychotics he MIGHT express himself fairly well.
I think he expresses himself exactly the way he wants to.
The ADL overstepped it bounds to make claim that they speak for all Americans based on this statement in their denouncement:
...offensive to all Americans.
I find the above statement from the ADL to be offensive. I can speak and think for myself without any help from ADL.
I find Ellison's comment very appropriate.
The Anti-Defamation league is an organization devoted to trying to defame and intimidate and silence people who criticize current Israel policies whatever they may be.
The Anti-Defamation league published a book in the 1980' titled, The Real Anti-Semitism in America. The book concluded that the real anti-Semites are the people who "give war a bad name and peace to favorable a press." The logic is impeccable by their standards. The interests of Jews are the interests of Israel. The interest of Israel are the interests of powerful, militaristic Israel. Those interests are served by a powerful militaristic United States. Therefore, anyone who criticizes the militaristic posture of the United States is really anti-Semitic. That's a syllogism.
Ellison is correct. Bush has been whoring out 911 to carry on an agenda unrelated to 911. That agenda being attacking an innocent nation.
You're right, the ADL should have been a tad more specific in their offensiveness. Instead of offensive to "all Americans" - they should have said "all reasonable Americans".
Thanks for catching.
I think you meant illiterate, not reasonable. Read the comment Ellison made and the criticism from the ADL don't match. If you are truly offended by Ellison's comments please explain how they are inaccurate. It is unfortunate but true, Bush is using 9-11 for shameful purposes.
This topic was discussed ad nauseum on the previous thread, I explained myself fully - if you disagree, fine.
I was merely posting on topic here with my remarks about the ADL's reaction.
And apparently didn't comprehend that Ellison did not compare Bush to Hitler.
Please... let it go. Tommy's just gonna repeat the same crap over and over.
Right! He compared him to Mother Teresa.
Are those the only two possible choices WAIT he wasnt comparing HIM to anyone he was comparing what he DID to what someone else did. That isnt that hard a distinction to understand
When the ADL began it was a legitimate organization with legitmate concerns, but as time passed by they started getting goofy.
That would have still been an over reach since the ADL can't speak for all reasonable people. At least Ellison apologized for his remarks and that's much more than some do when they have made remarks that offends large groups of people. Right wingers like Savage who intentionally seem to be trying to offend usually say tough and then go into some kind of warped lecture about people not having the righ not to be offended. I respect Ellison for apologizing, and I wish everyone would chill on the Hitler Nazi comparisons.
On the previous thread, I commended Ellison for his apology.
Ellison's apology was like appeasing the nazis. He should have stood firm. He was correct.
The nazis grew to power gradually. It is essential to yell stop when history begins repeating itself. They'll come for you too Tommy, it's only a matter of time.
And Bush gets accused of fear mongering? Who's doing it now?
I guess it's all about perspective.
Tommy, on a previouse thread I asked you; "Don't you think that if there are legitimate alarming comparisons in our government to that of Nazi Germany's, is it not our duty to point this out?"
(You may not have seen my Q, or I may not have seen your A)
Rick
Rick,
I did not see your question. If there are legitimate, the operative word, comparisons between the two, then by all means......if and when that ever happens, let me know. IMO, it has yet to occur.
Tommy, there is disagreement on that, and not just from the left: http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
I never said there wasn't disagreement. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I'd suggest you forward this piece to the Democratic leadership who apparently isn't interested in pursuing impeachment against Bush or Cheney.
hmm. You wanted an example of a comparison. The link provides one. Further, Project for a New American Century is the blueprint.
Now you're saying it's just a matter of opinion again. I think you should be concerned that Cheney/Bush are trying to set up a police state.
Mary, I said legitimate. If you and others want to travel the fear mongering road carrying your Bush/Hitler comparisons, then by all means continue.
And I ask you again, if this was legitimate and if Bush/Cheney aren't impeached and we go the way of the Nazis, then why are his firecest political opponents not agreeing with you? Seems like a no brainer.
What's illegitimate about it Tommy? Why doesn't it meet your standards of being legitimate. Is it lacking in factual content?
These are fair questions. I'm just asking you to back up your opinions is all.
And you do know the author is the father of Reaganomics right? I mean he's a cut and dry conservative not a flaming lefty. Disagreeing is one thing, but you simply dismiss it. You didn't address one thing the guy wrote.
It took less than one week for Ellison to be forced by public pressure to retract his remarks. And then you ask why opponents of the current administration won't speak up about the alarming similarities between the current administration and other totalitarian regimes that used politics to overthrow democratic societes? I think the answer is pretty clear.
Or how about another article on this very site toady that shows the administration again publicly accusing someone of traitorous conduct for questioning them.
I don't believe that PNAC had anything to do with 9/11, but they sure did take full advantage of it to begin an aggressive campaign to serve their agenda of complete domination of American politics.
Also, I find it interesting when McCain or others say that the Al queda will follow us home if we leave Iraq, that he is immediately discounted as a fear mongering fortune teller.........yet when you can find someone who says we are headed towards a totalitarian dictatorship unless we impeach, then that person is reasoned and held up as a divine soothsayer.
Oh the inconsistency.
One point...I didn't say that BushCo will create a dictatorship; I said they are trying to.
You don't like Paul Craig Roberts as a credible source? He was the assistant treasury secretary under Ronald Reagan and a writer for the Wall Street Journal.
Ok, how about Bruce Fein, who drafted the articles of impeachment against Clinton.
According to Fein, Cheney has:- Asserted Presidential power to create military commissions, which combine the functions of judge, jury, and prosecutor in the trial of war crimes.
- Claimed authority to detain American citizens as enemy combatants indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay on the President's say-so alone.
- Initiated kidnappings, secret detentions, and torture in Eastern European prisons of suspected international terrorists.
- Championed a Presidential power to torture in contravention of federal statutes and treaties.
- Engineered the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic surveillance program targeting American citizens on American soil in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
- Orchestrated the invocation of executive privilege to conceal from Congress secret spying programs to gather foreign intelligence, and their legal justifications.
- Summoned the privilege to refuse to disclose his consulting of business executives in conjunction with his Energy Task Force.
- Retaliated against Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame, through chief of staff Scooter Libby, for questioning the administration's evidence of weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq. (Read Fein's SLATE article)
The small print says that, according to Fein, Cheney has....
One last time since you haven't answered. Why isn't Pelosi or Reid pursuing impeachment if what you fear is on the brink of occuring? They need to know!
Pelosi and Reid are basically saying that nothing else will get done if impeachment is on the table.
At first I agreed with them; now I am more on the impeachment side due to the ongoing obstruction of the bushies. They are ruthless and not following any rule of law; while the Senators and Congressmen still are.
All I would say to that is if I thought that impeachment would be too distractive, then I must not agree of it's vital importance in removing said office holders, i.e. Bush and Cheney.
Either Reid and Pelosi are derelict in their duty, or they don't share your fears.
They're derelict in their duties. Bush should have been impeached already for his crimes against the Constitution.
Why change the subject?You asked for verification of a point and it was given. At least try to to address it before changing the subject.
First Reid is a Senator, impeachment proceedings are a function of the House. Pelosi should, can't read her mind and don't care too. Whether or not she does or not is irrelevant to the facts at hand and opinions presented that they should.
That's what Tommy DOES. He feels superior to all of us, so he doesn't feel the need to explain himself to anyone.
Sounds just like our administration.
That would be great for Bush. Then he can claim that we would have won in Iraq if not for the impeachment hearings "distracting" the decider.
John McCain's statements are absurd and not based on anything but conjecture and the threat of a police state is neatly outlined in a series of executive orders and signing statements available from the White house web site.
Consistency is in the facts. They will come for you too Tommy. You can dismiss the similarities between Hitlers rise and Bush power grab relating to 2 specific events but the facts remain, only the names have changed.
Bing, With all due respect it's far left wing lunacy to say Bush is rising like Hitler. You can bat that fodder around with your fellow liberals on this board all day long if you want too. I have no interest in getting in the middle of it because it serves no purpose. Sell the fear to someone who's fearful about this, it's not me, we disagree, that's life - should it happen someday, I will then apologize for my lack of wide-eyed fear.
Or count me as some nut for refusing to entertain that notion, I could care less. If you would like to discuss current events rather than pie in the sky future conjection fantasy land theories based solely on hatred for one individual, fine - otherwise what do you want me to say - that I agree with you? Call me a Bush loving apologist, whatever - you know that is ridiculous as well. Just as 9/11 conspiracy theories, I don't deal in this one either. Sorry.
Sure Tommy...any criticism of Bush is just more irrational Bush hatred.
Man, you have to bathe in this kind of sh*t day in and day out to get as soaked as you are in it.
"You can parse Ellison's words to try and squirm his way out of what he said and what comparison he was trying to make. I don't buy it...I do not expect our elected officials to conduct their words so recklessly. If I lived in Minnesota, I would be embarassed for him."
"If you are fine with your liberal representatives comparing our president to Hitler in any way...I hardly think rhetoric from our public officials such as this is hardly useful."
"the "accepted levels of discourse" is absolutely the entire point of my argument here."
So your entire point there was that Ellison's comments were outside of the "accepted level of discourse" because he was an elected official, while everyone else was pointing out that Ellison's comments were legitimate. But now, for anyone to make the comparison it is useful...as long as it's legitimate.
Have you changed your mind? Otherwise I have to wonder why you didn't spend that thread explaining how Ellison's comments weren't legitimate, instead of pushing what you now seem to be saying is an irrelevant point about Ellison's office. Or is it that some people can point these things out, by all means, but not if they're elected officials?
Please do explain.
Your cut, copy and pasting lesson is cute but I don't understand what you're saying, besides an irrational intent to provoke an old argument.
So let me make it real simple for you. I have yet to see a legitimate case made for any legitimate comparison between Bush and Hitler, Ellison included. Is that easy enough for you? I know you don't agree with it, as you and others are bordering on hysterical to try and get me to concede some point.
Let me say it again to avoid any confusion. As of this writing, I have not seen any legitimate evidence for the Bush/Hitler comparison. Do I need to say it a third time or will you accept our disagreement?
If not, find somebody else to confirm your conspiracy theories.
If you cannot comprehend the accurate comparison between Bush's scaremongering and Hitler's scaremongering, then the problem is with your comprehension skills.
There are clear and accurate comparisons that can be made between the two men.
"If not, find somebody else to confirm your conspiracy theories."
Conspiracy theories can be true or false. I cannot figure out why Bush has put in place executives orders that essentially gives him dictatorial powers. And it's not just some on the left saying this.
No, I understand that you're saying it's not legitimate now. That's not the point. The point is that while everyone was telling you it was legitimate, you were obsessed with Ellison's office, saying that his remarks were inappropriate because of that. Now you're saying that such similarities should be pointed out, by all means. If the issue was simply that any Hitler parallels have to be justifiable (which I agree with), then that holds true for anyone, regardless of what their position is, and therefore you spent a whole thread arguing an irrelevant point.
Why? Since it doesn't matter what his position is, then why argue that his office has anything to do with it, over and over again? Why didn't you just address the repeated explanations of why Ellison's comments were legitimate, if you thought you had a genuine argument to make?
I don't think my post was that hard to understand, so maybe you can take a shot at it without whining about being held accountable for what you said a couple of days ago and making a completely bizarre and unfounded reference to conspiracy theories.
You can keep saying that another hundred times it WONT MAKE IT TRUE. Ellison did NOT compare Bush to Hitler. THAT is a LIE. Stop LYING. He compared a SPECIFIC action Bush took in regards to a SPECIFIC situation to a SPECIFIC action Hitler took in regards to a similar situation. Saying I swing a golfclub like Micheal Jordan is NOT comparing me to Micheal Jordan in any meangful way. You HAVE read many rationales why the comparison was legitimate you just dismissed them in a stubborn, I am going to be partisan and see this the way I want to regardless of truth reality or logic kind of way.
You have to remember that Tommy is very concrete in his thinking. In his mind, to compare something Bush has done to something Hitler has done is to say, "Bush is Hitler." So of course, he's able to dismiss Ellison's statement entirely without pausing to consider it. We've seen this time and again from Tommy. Draw a parallel between any two things, and he will dismiss it outright on the basis that those two things are not identical. Analogies, comparisons, historical parallels, etc. are all lost on Tommy. He will argue from a position of ignorance and you will turn blue attempting to speak logic to tommylogic.
The difference is that the Bush fear mongering leads to killing innocent people and a power grab that steers this country toward dictatorship.
The other fear is the one that leads toward stopping the killing of innocent blood in our name and bringing power back to the people.
It not a matter of perception. It's a matter of when push comes to shove we as a people should shove back hard to regain what is rightfully ours which is a nation that obeys our will not a dictator whom dismisses the will of the people.
Bush is on the wrong side of the American Revolution.
Just your urge to "shove back hard" would have been silenced by the Nazis, not to mention even your right to say it.
Therein lies just one of the glaring difference between them and us.......and any boogeyman talk of a Nazi type takeover by any poltician in this country is, yes, simple baseless fear mongering.
Tommy,
Unfortunately, there is no way to "push back hard" in this country any more. We can't protest without being put on watch lists and arrested or marginalizeds into irrelevancy by a lapdog press who makes out protesters to be wackos. To do anything more extreme puts the person in the "terrorist" group and we know what happens to "Enemy combatants" these days. The only pushback left is the howling that goes on in the blogosphere. And know this is being attacked by Bill'O and company.
Anytime anyone starts to speak out against the Bush administration in this country gets demonized and silenced and you stand by and cheerlead this behavior. By deniying that it even occurs you encourage it's continuance.
When reality stares you in the face and Bush's Nazi-like tactics are obvious to all, you say "The emporer has clothes".
Really? I see anti war protests in LA all the time, not to mention left wing radio hosts with their opinions against the war all the time. And blogs and websites railing against the war all the time. And Democratic politicians and presidential nominees vehemently speaking out against the war all the time. And major newspapers and cable hosts and guests and pundits and many more voicing their public displeasure against Bush and the war all the time.
I guess all that noise is easy to miss though.
Iowadem didn't say that people weren't allowed to protest or speak out. He simply listed some of the consequences of doing so.
You're anectodal evidence is a nonsequitur. Yet another logical fallacy that you frequently fall back on.
It's true...just today after grabbing a quick bite to eat at my favorite eatery "Moon Under Water", which has the most exquisite shrimp bisque. I dropped by my local communities weekly anti-war protester hanging in BushCheney Park on Main street. Nothing settles the stomach better than watching dissenters to "Big Brother" getting hung in the streets. Oh, and I just checked the "Anti-War Wacko List" and fortunately for me there will be many more Friday's like this one.
sorry should have been "hanged in the streets".
Tommy, the Nazis didn't come to power over night. It starts gradually. The President and his enablers have been shouting down dissent for years and the President know has the "authority" to start imprisoning us. You have some reading to do, whitehouse.gov, executive orders. Take a perusal. The military commissions act of 2006. the long standing law that the military can't fire on Americans has been changed, habeas corpus can be waved at the Presidents discretion. It doesn't matter whether or not he will or does exercise these new powers, he's not supposed to have them at all. this should alarm any American.
Pelosis cowardice does not change the facts.
Talking about a police state is just fearmongering. But when the overreaches of the administration are shown, and the potential problems explained, then Pelosi's actions supposedly prove that there are no actual overreaches or potential problems. When I explain in length why we have to be wary about executive abuses, the response is that we have to be more worried about terrorists.
Now in order to really be making these arguments in good faith, one would have to be saying that we can trust Bush with such power. Otherwise, the concerns are obviously legitimate, not fearmongering. And the point about having to worry about terrorists more indicates that even if there are some executive abuses, that's just fine as long as we're safe from attack. We can trust that anything Bush does will protect us from terrorists just the way he says it will.
But Tommy's not a Bush apologist, oh no.
You are so right on, Harlequin in the statement that the bushies are on the wrong side of the American revolution. That is the point. Another credible source on this issue is Thomas Jefferson (from the Declaration of Independence):
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world…He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. He has affected to render the Military Independent of and superior to the Civil Power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: for depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury;For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences; He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation…oops. From the Declaration of Independence:
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them...
He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance...
He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation...
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses...
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
So every situation is the same? It can't be true for one thing and not another? That's just intellectually lazy. If you think the comparison is unjustified then by all means point out why. But this attempt at drawing a double standard is weak.
Savage wants a Media Matters thread every day. There's nothing better for him than to play off of the "vermin" at Media Matters so he can go on some tirade about Brock or the far left or whatever he wants to rant about on that day. He craves the attention. It fills air time for him to comment on it and come up with some make believe societal ill.
His show is not to be taken seriously.
Godwin's Law:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
This now applies to all politcal discussions and particularly the media. Lets vow to stop all Nazi references since it makes you look like an idiot.
Um, no. When it is appropriate nazi references should be used so we don't fall into the same trap.
Oh, sure. Go on, tell me about the limits of MY free speech, Chairman Mao. And please, Mr. Stalin, could you send me the list of approved references? :-)
Not too dufficult to figure out why those most inclined to Nazi-like behavior want to outlaw comparisons to Nazis.
Reposting because I think it's important to notice who is concerned about the Bushies acting like the Nazis. Thom Hartmann interviewed this man yesterday.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
Great link Mary.
The unfortunate thing is that it - and all similar commentary on the same topic - reads like a fairy tale. It will always be viewed as hysteric conspiracy.
Let me get this straight...:
Keith Ellison compares Bush to Hitler - the ADL freaks out and demands an apology.
Meanwhile, Michael Hitler-Savage compares liberals and other leftists to Nazis and the Klan - and the ADL don't want an apology.
That's hypocrisy, in my book.
Not to be critical but Savage is the legitimate son of Hitler. And he does know an awful lot about Nazis. There,Mr. Savage, now your wish has come true...this is hate group has written something terrible about you as an individual..meanwhile, back at the Stalag, you make claims about an entire group. Now, which ever one of Mikey's minnions is reading this, tell your boss that he shouldn't pick on the whole group at Media Matters but he should specifically name individuals who are mean to him.
Signed,
A Hating, Gay Mafia type(?), radical homosexual... but I still prefer VERMINAZI.
Mike, come on,m we can't continue calling each other names..but the money is better on your end.
So, Media Matters is "hate-filled"? Where? These intemperate attacks on the relentlessly sober Media Matters would be almost amusing, if it weren't for the fact that a certain percentage of Savage's audience takes these assertions at face value.
This is off topic and I dont care right now. Where is media matters when John Kerry flat out lied on C-SPAN just recently when he denied that millions were slaughtered in vietnam after we pulled out? It is a know fact that millions were slaughtered, but kerry denied that and said "re-education camps were formed." Unbelievable. I guess it doesnt matter when leftists lie in the media.
I cant take it any more, I despise you leftist scum more than I despise radical Islam. At least radical Islamists don't hide their intentions. I'm not giving this hateful gay smear sheet anymore hit. I hope you all have a terrible life defending the criminal, and exonerating the radical muslim enemy.
You could at least provide a link before cutting and running.
Love, Worse -than- Radical -Islamist -Scum
My ultra scientific research leads me to believe john174541842 might be part of the official Savage for President team. Nearly all the posts by john174541842 are on Savage related threads.
Maybe it's Savage himself.
I think it WAS Savage, or at least one of his paid interweb experts or something; did you see the way he goes from "I respect your right to say things" suddenly to "you're scum, you're an idiot, you're a fool" et al.?
The poster John above doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm old enough to remember the events as they happened, and I've read quite a few books about the events in SE Asia after we left. Kerry's right.
It was predicted that there'd be a bloodbath in Viet Nam. There was not. About a million had to go to the re-education camps, but that's not a bloodbath. The millions were killed in another country in the region, not Viet Nam.
The poster John despises us and falsely calls John Kerry a liar when John Kerry told the truth and the poster John was the person who had the facts wrong.
It seems that the Bloodbath took place in Cambodia when Pol Pot came to power after eight years of guerrilla warfare with the Cambodian government. The Vietnam government actually overthrew Pol Pot after he attacked Vietnam. I didn't know any of this.
"I cant take it any more, I despise you leftist scum more than I despise radical Islam."--John somethingorother
Yet you somehow believe that we're the haters. If you take a psychology class, they will explain what projection is, and in a way that perhaps even you will be able to understand it.
Oh, and just one more thing John, Liberalism Always Wins. Always!
John967686766876876 showed up here pretty recently, his confidence bolstered by hundreds of hours of Rush Limbaugh, ready to kick ass & take names.
He got skunked, and hard, every time he unloaded his BS.
He didn't last very long, short trip from "let me explain things to you Libruls" to "I hate you ! I can't take it!".
pussy.
I think he is finally ripe for conversion.
Johnny, if your reading this, step this way, into the light. Seriousely, it'll only hurt for a moment. But, then you'll have a life time of cognative clarity, open mindedness, and a continual warm fuzzy feeling. Close your eyes, relax, it'll be over in just a moment. . .
Whee! Johnofthemanynumbers has left the building, cutting and running from his foolish non-arguments, hatred spilling from every orifice just like his hero, Dr. Weiner!
When have we ever hidden our intentions? I think we all wear our hearts on our sleeves in this forum ... but perhaps the ancient wisdom is true ... In the company of the deceitful, be only honest, and they will deceive themselves ... and let's face it Johnnumbersgonewild, you're only fooling yourself by turning a blind eye to your Doctor.
I cant take it any more, I despise you leftist scum more than I despise radical Islam. At least radical Islamists don't hide their intentions. I'm not giving this hateful gay smear sheet anymore hit. I hope you all have a terrible life defending the criminal, and exonerating the radical muslim enemy. John
John you are a man in need of serious help and I do mean serious. I would suggest medicine or in-house therapy.
To hate is a waste of time and energy which is why I don't hate stupid comments like yours.
Of course the congenitally ignorant like you would despise those of us that are actually capable of using our brains for something other than pushing out hair. You are incredibly stupid in fact it is absolutly NOT TRUE That millions were killed in Vietnam after we pulled out that is patent nonesense a couple of million were killed in Cambodia overall. NOT VIETNAM. YOU are apparantly a moron that has no idea what you are talking about.
Johnnymuchnumbers is living proof of what happens to those who rely on Savage, Fox "News", Limbaugh, O'Reilly and the like, for information. Really, it's kind of sad when you think about it.
Just what we need, another "expert" on the history of the War in Vietnam.
Yeah, King, like you were there! ;0)
OK, I know you were , but fortunately, there are people who weren't there who can be more objective and tell you the truth about it.
Could someone please explain what is wrong with this lunatic? He never makes any sense with his vile mumbo-jumbo. He keeps refering to Media Matters hosts as the Homosexual mafia. Is that the organization that's affiliated with Bill Orally's Lesbian gangs? Seriously there is no such thing but he insists on repeating this absurdity. How would he know if anybody at Media Matters was a homosexual? Does he have a plant over there? And so what if they were! Can't homosexuals be as responsible in journalism as straight people? Yet, Weiner-Savage slings about his homophobic remarks like poison. How is it possible that such a hateful, fear-mongering person is aloud to rant and rave on American airwaves? Someone please explain this to me. After all in Canada we don't have anything to compare this!
What does Savage care about who says what about Hitler and Jews? The man is a self-hating Jew who NEVER refers to his Jewish heritage. Shame on him!
Savage: The King Of Sewage
http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/9250/weinerkingye2.jpg
Savage = monkey
I hear this blowhard's heniated straining on the radio and I need to take a $#!+.
Note to MMFA:
On your homepage, please put the global warming smokestack photo directly adjacient to Savage's head. He's a major pollution (and global warming) source.
That your example of man-made global warming?
<>In case you didn't notice,there's a glow ball in the sky, and it warms us. It's called, Glow Ball Warming.
Carry on you Savage pussies.
<>My GOD you Weinerdog worshippers are stupid. You better start saving your money anyone as ignorant as you is eventually going to have to hire someone to remind you to breathe. MORON.
SOLON,
My hat is off for you. Only few are really meant to go against sEWage.
I've heard Savage yell:
"..commie..pinko..fascist...left-coast libral NYU graduate lawyer's guild socialists...
..etc..." but I still can't find "marmaluke" or whatever he's saying that sounds like phonetically in the dictionary, maybe he's just almost swallowed his dentures.
In return, I think that 'herniated blowhard' suffices to describe him, still finding it relevant to repeat the 'great man of history' myth by using them just the same on populations he propagandizes like those tyrant puppets once were exploited for pure publicity, strong-man charisma props. Maybe good for childrens' networks, they need another clown to laugh at. He still doens't understand the difference between agnosticism and atheism. With Savage, you're either with'us er agin'us; no fair trying to escape self contradiction or hypocrisy.
Anyone know when he flunked out of NYU, he's still carrying a grudge?
Anyone who disagrees with Savage is, in his warped and twisted mind, a homosexual Nazi radical. He doesn't even bother to choose meaningful derogatory names to call them because he knows his incredibly simple-minded listeners will drink his Kool-Aid, no matter what flavor it is. This guy is either an actor who's crafted this horrific character he plays on his show, or he's a paranoid schizophrenic. Either way, intelligent and reasonable people will not listen to him. The only people who will listen to him are people who are as mentally ill as he is. Maybe it's just all a big act, like professional wrestling, in which case it's an even sadder indictment of the state of our society.