Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
There are comparisons to be drawn between many poltical leaders throughout history (try King David and Clinton for a fun ride). Just because one poltical leader is infamlus doesn't mean the comparison is or isn't apt. Listen to or read an argument for it's merrits and weight those merrits. If you deem it incorrect, then wite or say your peace. It helps no one if you simply shoot down the arguer instead of his or her argument. With all due respect, you didn't address what I was trying to say. You attacked me for my subject.
|
Just to clear up a misconception that a few seem to have:
I will reasonably listen to any argument...to a point. Examples of this are arguments for man-boy love (NAMBLA), denial of the Holocaust and teaching Intelligent Design in school.
As to this discussion, an
irrational comparison of Bush to Hitler falls into that category.
Now there certainly are things they have in common, but I find that those things will be the same sorts of things that Hitler would have in common with 99% of other national leaders.
But I find the differences to be so overwhelming that I can only conclude that the comparision is being done either a) irrationally or b) for effect and frankly, I find both to be boring.
To reiterate, if you want to discuss Bush's policies that's fine, but I think there are more apropo comparisons than Nazi Germany.