Tophat665

CJ,
That's a little over the top. I see what you might be getting at though. Another stolen election by the Bush Bund would have a certain resemblance in method to the early rise of the Nazi party in Germany. However, let us give the current occupant of the whitehouse some things: a ideologically identical media arm (in Faux News, Rush, NY Post, and the Freep), and the endorsement of some terrorist groups (Operation Rescue, al-Qaeda) does not give Son of Bush either the reality or even the intention of an SA, even if sometime the shirts do look a little brownish, that's just seeing the world through crap colored glasses.

George W. Bush is not Adolph Hitler. Incompetent does equal Evil. Mentally Challenged is not Psychotic. Bloody Minded does not have to equal bloody handed, and there is not even the hint of a shade of a whiff of an inkling of genocide here.

Also, while there are certain similarities, there are every bit as many differences: The US does not have a national inferiority or persecution complex as Germany had after being defeated in WWI. We haven't lost a major war ever, and, unless there's a successful Indian uprising or Mexican invasion, we will never have land that we have colonized taken from us. We have living space to spare. You can carry the price of all your groceries in cash in your wallet - it doesn't take a wheelbarrow (though that could change if Bush is re-elected. Flip side of that is, if he screws it up royally, his party gets voted out of office and we see a new New Deal.) as it did in interwar Germany. We have a 200 year old tradition of mildy corrupt but stunningly well constructed democracy, not an infant democracy with a constitution that virtually doomed it to an early end.

GW may - is say <i>may</i> - be a racist. It would be hard to prove, but I suppose it is possible. What he is not is a white supremacist. Republicans, with the possible exception of Tom Delay, are not the KKK, and that's (other than neo-nazis) the closest thing we have to Nazis in this country.

Finally, all Nazis are fascists, but most fascists are not Nazis. Mussolini said that fascism ought to be called corporatism, since it implied a very close union of business and government. GW may be verging on that, but that's no argument for Naziism, though it is the single best argument to challenge every last return in his favor that came from a Deibold machine this fall.

Username, I think shallowminded is a bit harsh. Hasty, maybe, or even lazy, but not necessarily shallow. I've done it before myself, but, as I hope i have demonstrated, I really mean there are some points of similarity but none of identity, and that there are also differences.

Kind of like calling the NEA a terrorist group. I see where he was coming from (hyperbole and frustration), and there are points of similarity, but none of identity.

2 year old wants juice. Gotta git. Interesting thread.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.