Bush Compared to Hitler; Teacher Suspended
 

A High School teacher was suspended today for comparing George Bush to Hitler.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1364883.shtml

I tend to agree with this viewpoint because I listened to the tape:

http://www.850koa.com/cc-common/podc...ews_worthy.xml

And found it to be a one-sided rant.

But this teacher isn't alone in his accusations. Just a few years ago, Republican Politicians and Pundits would frequently compare Bill Clinton to Hitler.

One example (many more available):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...8416-2000Jun27

I guess my question is: Does making these comparisons trivialize what Hitler did?

What do you think?

Well, I dunno... I mean, if things like this happen in high school, these kids may be shocked when they go to college and professors make much worse accusations about many more people and are left to preach that way. If school was only about 100% fact, people would be stupid leaving school, and it would certainly be far too boring. So he made a connection. I think it's just fine. By high school, kids should have the ability to take things with a grain of salt and/or research the issue more if they are inclined to do so. *shrug*

That's sort of the whole point of Godwin's Law, isn't it?

Of course it trivializes what Hitler did. People are way too quick with the comparison.

Yes.

I heard the audio too, and as soon as I heard the teacher compare Bush to Hitler, I said, "Godwined!" That teacher and I probably share a similar voting record, but I cringe to think that people would ever connect me ideologically with this bozo.

Idiots who compare any politician to Hitler hurt their cause and demonize others in a fashion that can cause harm.

This teacher's rant was especially stupid. It could fit in well with statements like: "Then they made a small, economical car that regular folks could purchase, JUST LIKE HITLER!" "Then they held a parade, JUST LIKE HITLER!" "Then they got all raucous in a bar, JUST LIKE HITLER!" "Then they worked to improve rail service, JUST LIKE HITLER!"

So, Hyundai, Macy's, Norm and Cliff, and the Virginia Railway Express are all JUST LIKE HITLER!

ditto .

I don't think it trivializes Hitler's actions. They were heinous enough that you could call people Hitler, but if you really know what Hitler did instead of actually viewing the person as a new-age Hitler you would instead think the person making the accusation is a crackpot. Of course you can't discount some Hitler comparisons based on Godwin's law, such as the Khmer Rouge. In that case it serves as a comparison which helps people understand what happened there; a kind of ethical and moral benchmark to which you can look ta something and understand it in other contexts. Most Americans who come from Europe understand the atrocities of the Holocaust, but hearing about what happens in Asia with millions massacred, by linking it to something that has been studied you have a worthwhile comparison.

But then again, in a way it trivializes the comparison as the Right comparing Saddam Hussein to Hitler based on the gassing of the Kurds, and the Left comparing Bush to Hitler based on his rhetoric, it does make the meaning of Hitler trivialized. But in my opinion it only does that to the using of Hitler as a means to compare something that's actually comparable.

I personally believe the comparison of Hitler to any American president regardless of how much I dislike them is blatantly false. Be it Bush or Clinton.

And finally, the teacher definitely deserves a strict sentence for how he acted. I read the transcript yesterday and I know as a high schooler you should be able to know the truth from fiction, but having a teacher you disagree with politically can severely polarise the learning experience which is highly unfair to those in the classroom who disagree with the teacher. Plus, a teacher loses credibility to the students based on that. Last year I had a teacher who was very strongly anti-Bush, and I myself am a Republican so I found his Michael Moore-esque style of commentary very frustrating. If you're in a public school you should have the right reserved to not have wannabe political pundits mouthing off about these things.

Lets hear the recordings....

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...GeoTeacher.mp3

Mind you this guy is a GEOGRAPHY teacher....

Asshat.

Well, I am as disgusted by Bush as the next guy, but Hitler comparisons are just flat out idiotic.

Like remember that time when Bush mercilessly exterminated six million ethnic minorities? No? Me neither. Case closed.

No...I don't think that it trivializes what Hitler did.

What it does do, however, is trivialize the one making the comparison. That is to say, it is at that point that I usually roll my eyes, stop listening, and start thinking about what Mrs. O'Rights may be fixing for dinner.

Excellent points, all, Poppinjay.

The dissimilarities don't end there.

In 1933 when Hitler was elected into power the economy was very bad for Germany. There was 23% unemployment. By 1935 -there was 3% unemployment.

When Bush was selected into power the economy was very good for America. There was 3.9% unemployment. Under Bush's careful guidence unemployment reached 6.2%.

Hitler borrowed millions to build Bridges, Railways, and the Autobahn.
After the federal government failed to step in -American railways, airports and airlines went bankrupt.

Hitler started with nothing and worked his way into power.
Bush started with everything and let his families wealth and influence get him into power.

You see, there are very few similarities between Bush and Hilter.

I went to Mount Anthony Union High School in Bennington, VT. The community is pretty liberal, so it makes sense that the teachers are too. There are a few that very openly voice their opinions. One teacher just made national news a few months ago, Bret Chenkin ( You can find articles and commentaries at
Newsbusters.org , TheConservativeVoice.com , and WashingtonPost.com .) I had friends that were at both ends of the political spectrum. The ones that agreed with him loved him, and the ones that disagreed with his views hated him. I consider myself liberal, but not by much, I have views from both sides. I enjoyed his commentary because it really did spark debate among the class, especially when there were students with strong opposing opinions. I personally enjoyed it and it helped me see different views on politics then my own. I think if the parents are that bothered by it, they can send their kids to a public school where you can have all the teachers teach the same way, following the private school's practice.

I had a history teacher I was 180 degrees away from on the political spectrum.

He was also one of the best teachers I had. He didn't even flintch when I rated Nixon as a president above Truman as I was able to back up my argument (though now that I'm not 17 I'd have changed that).

The problem isn't that this guy is a liberal, the problem is that he is a barking moonbat liberal, no more suited to teach than a Fred Phelps.

Good comparison. It's not about what you believe; it's whether you're a whacko or not.

There was a high school teacher in San Jose a year or two back -- he _was_ a history teacher -- who kept bringing up religion in class. Not religion as in "religious beliefs played a role in..." but as in "What a good idea to accept Jesus into your life..." Repeatedly. When he wouldn't stop, the administration canned him; there was a lot of furor over his right to free speech (can you say "Fox News?") until the students started quoting what he was telling them to the MSM. Apparently, he was something of a head case as well.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...r/2d387669.gif

I like it when he talks about "blind, naive faith."

As if he doesn't exhibit any.

Transcriibed by moi:

I encourage you all to listen to what the teacher said. I think it's all valid.. you may or may not based on your political feelings, but based on his treatment of the student's questions and his qualifying remarks.. "I'm not saying they're exactly the same, they're obviously NOT, okay.." I found his argument to be sound and rational. He drew ONE comparison between us and Hitler and it brought all of this to a standstill?

Isn't that funny! Something about the headline rang my "taken out of context" bell.

Saying "Bush IS Hitler" is obvious trolling. Saying "Bush's speech had some eerie similarities to things Hitler might have said", while qualifying your statements and citing evidence from speeches, is another matter entirely.

Is it Godwin's Law?

Personally my issue with the teacher wouldnt be political bias, it would be the fact he is, if reflected accurately in this case, a moron.

To compare Bush and Hitler would be one thing, but to imply that Bush is like Hitler strikes me as rather ridiculous and a pretty poor standard of teaching. I'd be the last person to support Bush, but to say he has commited crimes with are substantively similar to Hitler is very clearly false and offensive. My complaint would be that a person capable of making such a statement would seem to be unfit to provide a suitable standard of education. It of course show's a lack of understand of who Hitler was, and of what was done.

If you are comparing Bush to Hilter, and in this case, specifically to Hitler in his rise to power, rather than what came later, it is a valid comparison.

What the teacher was trying to point out, and rightly so, is how Hitler manipulated the public to his way of thinking. Bush, in his speeches touches on many of the same themes (fear of the other, nationalism, etc.).

One need only remember what Goering said at the Nuremberg trials:

It is quite easy to see the parallels between the speeches made by Hitler and those made Bush (or other leaders for that matter).

Strange how Hitler gets all the credit for what the bastards standing next to him did. Hitler didn't kill six million people, the Nazi government killed six million people. Hitler was the public face that inspired fanatic loyalty, brought a country on the brink of another recession into an economic powerhouse and conquered much of Europe. The Nazi government and military was the body that decided how and when to implement the final solution.

Reading the transcript above, the argument this teacher made is about as valid as it gets. Godwin's Law is an irrational response to anything - the fact that it's internet tradition alone notwithstanding, the longer a discussion is the higher the chance of anything imaginable is used to compare.

This is TOTALLY a threadjack, but.. That's the first time I've ever heard anyone suggest that Adolf Hilter himself wasn't personally the architect of the holocaust. Is it true? I mean, his name is on Mein Kampf...

(To unthreadjack the threadjack) Even if it's untrue, it illustrates one point: the leader is the one accountable. Even if it was Hitler's henchmen who did the deed, Hitler is the one ultimately held responsible in the eyes of history. That's a lesson that today's CYA-happy administration would do well to learn.

While the comparison of Hitler's rise to power and Bush's speeches may be accurate, but by backing the comparison, you tend to lose credibility. To me it's the equivalent of comparing Pope John Paul II to Osama Bin Laden. They're both religious leaders, thus it's a comparison is technically true, but you're making the comparison of a peacefulish religious leader to a leader who supports killing thousands of innocent men, women, and children. You're using a poor comparison to imply something that's not necessarily true. Such as Bush is a mass murderer, etc. or Pope John Paul is a terrorist. You can compare small things, but you make a very poor argument by making inflammatory comparisons without an overall strong basis in fact.

Well, I dont want to threadjack either - but if you are reckoning, I would not think the number of deaths Usama Bin Laden is responsible for would equate very easily to the number of dead in the Third World, as a direct and causal effect of the Catholic doctrine on the use of contraception.

As I said, certainly Bush and Hitler can be compared, insofar both are leaders who have declared war on and invaded other nation states. It is true of most political leaders that they use the fear of external danger to try and hold power - this is hardly unique of Bush or Hitler. This is why it seems foolish to me to say that Hitler is "LIKE" Bush. The things that make them similar (that they were both leaders who started wars, that they both had pet dogs) are not significant to the things that are different.

I guess if you really study the differences -you can understand better -why Hitler was able to succeed in rallying his nation to war -while Bush's popularity is hitting an alltime low.

I think Bush is has been using a lot of the tactics of someone like Hitler BUT, the USA in this day and age is a very different place from Wiemar Germany.

Not only are people much more media savvy they are much more versed in democracy... I think the teacher made a very facile comparison when it comes down to it.

I don't think it was a suspension offence. His principal should have taken him to task about balance in his lectures but that's about it (unless he'd been warned before).


By the way, terms like "moonbat Liberal" do nothing to forward an arguement. All they do is drag the overall level of discussion down. We can do better.

My grandfather actually lived through WWII as a young man; he was imprisoned by the Nazis in a work camp in Germany where he welded locomotives for the war.

Yet even he, who had been directly affected by Hitler's regime, compared Bush's actions to some of those Hitler took--especially the PATRIOT Act. He was deeply concerned about the path the United States was taking when George W. Bush came to power. Yet I think as time went on he came to realize the United States was not as weak as Weimar Germany.

A free press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly can make all the difference.

I don't think it trivializes what Hitler did. I don't think anything could though.

As for the teacher--I think he must have been on his second warning if he did get suspended. Given the fact that most school districts have the unions breathing down their necks, most do not suspend lightly.

I mentioned the Bush=Hitler debate to one friend's father, who was a POW at Moosburg, and to several WWII survivors. They're getting harder to find.

They think it's nuts. They voted for Bush, and they favor the Patriot Act, which you may have noticed was approved 89-10.

He was the cause of the persecution of Jews, yes. He was only successful in doing so by playing on anti-semetic feelings that were rife in Germany at the time. He was also crazy and considered them the cause of WW2, hence his justification to ask for the Final Solution of the Jewish Question.

It's impossible to say who came up with the idea of extermination over relocation or another means - there's nothing to suggest that Hitler originally wanted them all dead, just not in Germany. Naturally, being a dictator, he green-lighted the eventual plan, but it was Himmler that oversaw the concentration camps and genuinly took delight in it whereas Hitler was never known to have ever visited one. It's not a common view, but a conclusion I came to myself after 2-odd years studying WW2.

Just to let you know...


Colorado schools are still 48th in funding for public schools. This should explain ahy we have so many problems with horrible teachers and kids killing each other.

Marv, I think you are missing the point made by the teacher, me, snowy's grandfather, and others... The point that we are not saying Bush=Hitler. We are saying that some of the PR tactics and some of the arguments Bush uses are reminescent of the tactics used by Hitler in the 30s on his rise to power.

A good teacher can introduce politcal debate into his class by asking carefully worded questions. When a teacher is TELLING his class shit like this, thats crossing the line. In fact, if anyone were to preach this to me, Id tell em to go fuck off and find someone who gives a shit.

That may be true, but there are many other people Bush could be compared to, but by choosing Hitler it contains a deeper comparison than "They just talk the same." It's hard to easily write off Bush≈Hitler as just a slight comparison. While you can say

it doesn't come off as Bush is like Hitler, but implies Bush is a fascist Nazi.

Care to walk me through how you come to that conclusion?

While you may wish to make that connection, the doing is all yours. I am examing the use of propaganda and rhetoric in wiemar germany as used by Hitler compared to the language Bush has been using. It has nothing to do with nazism specifically and perhaps more than most would comfortably admit with facism in general.

As pointed out elsewhere, the biggest difference is that the US today is nothing like Wiemar Germany. Otherwise Bush used a lot of the same US vs. Them, We are the Greatest, etc. rhetoric that convinced their nations to march to war.

You are right, other examples could have been used. His lesson was sloppy and lazy (IMO) but hardly worthy of suspension. Reprimand would be more appropriate.

More of this story has come out. The kid who taped his teacher did not take the tape to the principal or any school authority… no, he took it (with the guidance of his parents) to a local conservative talk radio station where they put him on the air and played only the Hitler comment.

It turns out that after giving that statement, he asked the kids to challenge it.

This was really a case of “out of context”. While I think he would have been better off to compare Bush’s rhetoric to fascist rhetoric than Hitler, I think he’s been railroaded by a school that was blindsided and could do little else since this all came out through this talk station.

For the record, the kid never complained to anybody about his teacher, and no students had complained about this teacher. Now they’re screwing with his career because some petulant brat wanted to be a mini-Rush Limbaugh.

The school board needs to have some balls and stand up to bullshit like this. Scapegoating a teacher is not the way to go. Reprimand if neccessary but hanging him out to dry is poor management.

It's worrying that a teacher has been forced to stop educating his class (costing the school money in the process) because people are so frightened that their children are so prone to brainwashing that listening to alternative viewpoints is somehow considered dangerous. Only in America. Land of the free (to say what you like as long as it's deemed 'patriotic' by the authorities) home of the brave (enough to risk ruining your career by speaking your mind in a calm and rational manner).

Makes you proud doesn't it?

Nezmot... that's a bit extreme I think.

The US is not unique in it's ability to prove that the "mob" can still rule.

Charlatan, perhaps it is extreme - I take back the 'Only in America' part because you're right - mob rule happens all over the world - and it's ugly as sin wherever it occurs.

Stuff like this really gets me upset.

I heard about this a few days ago, and someone (Mike Trivisonno) on the radio was blasting the teacher for just being a Geography teacher. Ahem..... last I checked part of geopgraphy was studying countries social, political, economical and philosophical beliefs, NOT just point out countries on a map.

He is also heard flipping down the maps (I assume) so he could POINT OUT COUNTRIES HE NAMED...... hmmmmm using free speech to point to countries interesting way to get kids to know where Guatemela is, or Isreal and Syria, and so on.

BUT the article states very plainly, he is not just a Geography teacher but a Social studies/Am. Hist teacher: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1364883.shtml


THANK YOU FOR THE TRANSCRIPT.

Now then, I have 2 problems with this.

1) Why and how was this teacher's lecture taped?

Well according to the article it was because the student never heard an opposing side. Meaning, I suppose, this teacher made statements derogatory towards Bush before. So the kid taped his teacher's rant.

Now that could be innocent by the kid, go to class the teacher is talking about America and Bush and starts his rant and .....

However, it could have very easily benn a setup by the kid. Do we hear on the tape what was said before? If perhaps this student may have egged the teacher on with a baited question? It would be easy to sit there and say, "Hey teach, I was on the net last night and saw a comparison between Bush and Hitler, do you think there is any?" So we cannot rule the qualifiers (what was said before) out.

2) Why was this teacher suspended?

Well according to the school, it was not what was said but the fact he didn't give the other side, a favorable Bush comment. Which the tape clearly show was not the case.

Well, the problem exists is that we are basing everything on a kid's tape. A kid that as shown above could easily have baited the teacher. The kid could have edited the tape (paused at places he wanted... and he did), to get only what he wanted.

So to say that this tape is the only evidence is very suspect. Actually, sounds like a very interesting lecture..... (EXCEPT alcohol is the number 1 killing drug in America not tobacco/nicotine. So, as a smoker I must argue that I dislike his condemnation of tobacco...... ) He makes some very valid points, that should be addressed.

I guess my view is do we sit here and want teachers to just teach or do we sit here and want kids to think for themselves and work to inspire the kids to think? I personally as a parent would have praised this teacher because he got my kid interested in a subject and got my kid thinking.

When you do hear the kid talk (I assume it is him as his voice is louder) the teacher acknowledges the kid's views and debates, egged on by the kid.

Hmmmmmmm a teacher again proving that he is getting response from students and getting them to THINK and QUESTION.

Sorry, but I find this teacher to be damned good. I would venture to say his students walk out of his class having learned more than they knew before it, AND are probably more apt to think about differing views and debate better.

QUOTE FROM THE TEACHER: "...IN NO WAY AM I TELLING YOU, YOU HAVE TO FIGURE THIS OUT YOURSELF...... IT ALL REVOLVES AROUND PEOPLE'S PERSPECTIVES."

"I AM NOT IN ANY WAY IMPLYING YOU NEED TO AGREE WITH ME, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I AM TAKING A POSITION. BUT WHAT I AM TRYING TO DO IS TO GET YOU TO THINK ABOUT THESE ISSUES MORE IN DEPTH...... I AM GLAD YOU ASKED ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY GOOD LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS AND HOPEFULLY IT WILL GET OTHERS TO THINK ABOUT TAKING A POSITION."

Hmmmmmm making students think...... we should put him in front of a firing squad for that.

He talks about how Clinton bombed the Sudan.

I think he makes some very, very good arguments.

I think in a few places you can hear the pause in mid sentence and the tape start up again.

I think this teacher is doing the job he is paid to do extremely well and we need more teachers like him.

I think that because of his views (some legitimate, some out there, some I would be very interested in seeing how he came up with) the Right looks to fry the man.

Look how many just on this board IGNORED everything else (including the quotes from the teacher I supplied), evene this thread.... all people on the Right heard was a comparison to Hitler and how he shows that other countries have the right to attack the USA for what we do, if they were to use the same logic we used to attack Iraq, or Cuba or.......

I feel sorry because this teacher did a damned good job, educating opening minds to THINK, and is being punished for doing so.

I just think if he had taken a pro-Bush stance and the kid taped it and complained that he didn't have the "other side" the Right would find no fault in this at all.

Overall, an extremely interesting lecture by an extremely damned good teacher. :thumbsup:

So, according to the teacher (whose interview I just saw on the Today show), he teaches a World Geography course, and was doing a basic overview of some new geography terms when students started asking him about the State of the Union address, which had taken place the previous night. He basically just went along with the questions the students asked--which, according to Matt Lauer, who has heard the whole tape--make it sound like the teacher was being baited.

Notably, he also gave a HUGE disclaimer AFTER the Hitler statement that the Today Show played.

All in all, I think the circumstances of this--the student not reporting it to the principal but taking it to talk radio (and evidently they shopped it around to a number of stations before finding one that would play it), the disclaimer the teacher gave, the line of questioning the students posed--make it one shady suspension. The school board needs to seriously take a look at all of the evidence and realize that this guy is doing what teacher SHOULD do--cause students to think critically. As the teacher said on the Today Show, he encourages his students to think for themselves, and he hopes that that is one thing they can all take away from this.

Thing is....one is somewhat hard pressed to make a social studies presentation that actually places bush in a "Good" light....I am not trying to be political here...there are few examples to use that would show the opposite side of this lecture.

Do you remember how everyone was up in arms about the 'pussification' (shudder - what a <i>horrible</i> phrase) of the country? Well here it is in action again. Now teachers across the country will have to think twice before they open their mouths in case some spotty teenager is recording them and is going to release their lessons on the national media. Where is the moral uproar? Where is the anti-PC brigade now? Not only are people no longer to talk about race, gender or disability - now they're not allowed to discuss politics either (even from within the context of a geography class!). Where exactly will this end? What exactly will we be able to talk about in the future? Which topics of conversation will be consigned to hushed and embarrassed exchanges between consenting adults?

It's completely disgusting.

The people responsible should be ashamed of themselves. I am ashamed of them.

I am still very outraged by his obvious hatred for tobacco and feel he must be on Anheiser Busch's payroll to not name alcohol as the #1 killing drug in America.

He should have all teaching credentials ripped from him, and forced to live under the bridge drinking day old coffee. Then maybe he can see the error in his ways.

listening to it now... I'm not liking his tone of voice... it could be very intimidating to a student... he sounds angry, cynical, and jaded, and I wouldn't like to be taught by a teacher like that. He presents it as though he knows all the answers, and it does sound very one-sided...

He is way too passionate to present a sound, reasoned argument... passion better suits a politician than a teacher, and his lecture sounds more like a speech than a lecture...

Listening to the part about Israel now... not impressed with the way he's handling this... he's allowing himself to be put on the defensive, he's overstating his points, he's relying too much on speculation. The part about 9/11, he's allowing himself to sound like an apologist when he's probably not. He's jumping all over the map, from topic to topic, and never ties it back together that he's trying to make a point about how peace cannot come from war, and it's really no wonder that he was misunderstood.

Now that he's talking about globalization, he's calmed down, which really changes his ability to teach rather than preach... end of tape... too bad...

That said, I agree with the teacher quite often. The way the student handled it (including altering the tape?), the way the school board handled it, were all wildly inappropriate. There were a ton of mistakes made by everybody. If I were the principle, I would've sat down with the teacher, this recording, and tried to teach the teacher, not punish... this event had the promise of a grand learning experience for everybody involved, and it was squandered on politics.

That's one point, and I have to admit that there are mitigating circumstances, e.g. what you said above, his asking for responses, etc.

However, I get the impression that this kind of stuff had gone on before, and it motivated the kid to bring a tape recorder. That would also explain what someone else said about their impression that the teacher was "baited" into the discussion.

Also, it strikes me as quite unfair for the teacher to have researched the topic thoroughly, and then ask a teenager, with no preparation, to respond.

Lastly, I don't know why, because there isn't a physical resemblance, but DAMN that teacher reminded me of Howard Dean. Can't say why.

I find this statement to be quite premature. History is likely to consider the Iraq war more favorably than Korea, or Vietnam. Should democracy sprout in the Middle East, or terrorism be greatly curtailed, Bush will be considered a genius, no matter how painful that thought is to some.

Additionally, I am hard pressed to identify a single beneficial or effective accomplishment of Bill Clinton in regard to fighting terrorism.

I'm sure that some of the French thought it was a bad idea to help with the American Revolution, but I'm thankful they weren't in charge.

To throw a bone; You'd be hard pressed to find Clinton using terrorism as an excuse to invade a country. Any guy who can get away with asking the definition of 'is' is fine in my book ;)

If this teacher was talking to world leaders, or conducting funded research, or doing anything of a greater impact than telling a bunch of kids who are old enough to form their own opinions his own, then perhaps the issue of political/idealogical imbalance would arise. His suspension was a knee-jerk reaction and nothing else.

The statement cannot be premature Marv, as it is intended to address current events, by using current events. If we were talking about a " Future History" lecture, perhaps your opinion on Bush would be accurate, but we wont know for a couple decades. As for Mr. Cinton, I would agree with you, however he has nothing to do with this discussion, and falling back on the "Bush isn't all that bad....Just look at Clinton" position, is a very tired and played out strategy, though the French Connection is a new one to me.

Segmentation Fault.

Throw up Pointer Segment:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/

That would be funny if it wasn't so true. Partisan politics. Let's face it. Fighting terrorism wouldn't be Bush's future claim of glory, as Marv suggests, if not for the devastation of September 11, 2001.

He would have just found some other way to invade Iraq.

Perhaps if I post this, I can simply link to it the next time a Bush-basher says, “I don’t care if Clinton committed murder while in office.” I’m not interested in going back to find that post, but it did appear on TFP. I will, however, give an analogy of why I think what you call a "tired and played out strategy" is relevant.

Let’s say one of your kids has his or her heart set on a bicycle. You, being short on funds at the moment, say there’s no money for one. Your kid starts a neighborhood leaf-raking service, works his butt off, and over six or eight months, earns enough for this fancy bike. You take him to the bike store, where he proudly plops down his money and rides the bike home. A real Kodak moment.


However, the dirt-bag father who lives on the next block has a kid or two who take after their old man. A couple of days later, your kid has gone somewhere, and since he didn’t know to buy a lock for the bike, dirt-bag’s kid heists it. No one sees him do it, and no one has seen your kid in possession of his new bike.


A month or two later, dirt-bag’s kid is observed riding the bike. You verify that, and call the father. He calls you unpleasant names, like “liar.” Says the whole neighborhood is participating in a “conspiracy to get him.” So you call the cops, but your kid didn’t know to save the receipt, and you can’t prove anything. You and your kid are out of luck.


Fast forward a year or so, and dirt-bag kid leaves the bike lying around. Your kid sees it, and takes his property back. However, once your kid is seen riding it, you get a call from dirt-bag father, calling your kid a thief, and threatening to call the cops. There are now plenty of neighbors who have seen dirt-bag kid riding the bike, and you still don’t have any proof that the bike originally belonged to yours. Dirt-bag father, who managed to ignore crime in the past, is now a champion of justice, as far as your kid’s “crime” is concerned.

So how forgiving will you now choose to be in regard to the original theft, and how forgiving of the current "theft?" Me too.

I’m really not interested in all of the "reasons" that will soon be posted in regard to how this “isn’t comparable” to Clinton and Bush. The crimes/lies committed by Clinton affected (and continue to affect) me, my friends, and my family. I’m NOT talking about Monica, either. I choose not to give Clinton a free pass for the crime while I’m still doing the time.

Yes, at some point, it’s useless to hang on to past injustices (like slavery, since no one living today was a slave when it was legal in the US, or Mexicans claiming they still own Texas and California), but some issues (Nazi war criminals, DNA evidence from 30-year old trials) are still being decided that are quite a bit older than Clinton’s misdeeds. Child molestation now seems to have an indefinite period in which charges can be filed.

Summation: If a dishonest politician affects my life, I am not willing to accept an arbitrary “statute of limitations” defense from someone who’s only a champion of justice in regard to Bush. Nor will I be anxious to clean up a situation the other party was only too happy to tolerate when it worked to their advantage.

Don’t like my analogy? Let’s condense your philosophy, then. If Bush okays drilling in the ANWR, outlaws abortion, and privatizes Social Security, by your reasoning, he gets a clean slate in January of 2009. “It’s time to move on,” as some here would say.

Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...0chewbacca.jpg

I was thinking the same thing astrocloud, I just didn't know there was a term for it!
unfortunately, to my time and sanity's sake, I actually read the whole friggin post...

I also suspect the only time anyone ever said they didn't care if Clinton murdered someone while in office was in a post like this...that is, attributed to some "liberal's" viewpoint in some bizarre caricature.

Maybe some of us should try to see how it works the other way: I remember someone saying that they didn't care if Bush killed Iraqi citizens, it's a good thing that saddam is out of power. I don't feel like looking up the post...in a year from now I can "remember" this post as someone posting what I just wrote; win-win baby.

My head A-splode.

Hitler was a brilliant strategist, an excellent orator, and a driven man. It should be EASY to draw similarities between him and many different leaders or movers in this world. He studied speach and filmed himself to learn to be a better motivational speaker. He had a father who pushed him to excell in military school (if I remember right - it's been years since I read Mine Kampf (sp?) ).

Hitler managed to accomplish what he did because he knew how to move the public in his direction. Any leader needs to do that or they are not a leader. The problem is the insane direction in which the German public was lead.

I guess the question that this teacher did not address - What would have happened had the people who followed Hitler NOT followed him?? and What would happen if we did not follow the direction that our government is taking??

I do believe that the teacher needs to stick with his subject matter. A classroom is not intended to be each teacher's soapbox. If it was then we'd have teachers talking about their own religion and we don't do we??

Disagreeing with a teacher politically should not be a problem. I differed with a teacher in government class in highschool. The teacher gave me full credit for all my work so long as I was able to support my position.

According to a piece in 'This Week' that I read 'Recording teachers is a new trend in schools in the US: one right-wing group recently offered pupils $100 for tapes illustrating left-wing bias among teachers.'

Reading the transcript that Jinnkai posted I think that a lot of people have been a little quick to condemn this guy. He never said that Bush is like Hitler. All he said was that some of the things that Bush said sound like things that Hitler said. He even goes on to say 'I'm not saying Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously they're, not,'

Although I would say that offering kids rewards for taping teachers does seem to have certain fascist implications. Assuming that it's true of course, which given that they didn't name the group may not be the case.

Yes, it's incredibly far-fetched that someone might see a dirt-bag's kid with a stolen bike. I'm glad the three of you weren't around scratching your heads when I recovered my son's stolen skateboard.

But thanks for the link. Now I have an appropriate and convenient response for Host's posts.

Did you actually see president Clinton steal your son's bike?

Wow....guess you managed to sum up my stance on politics by viewing a single line of a single paragraph. Or....maybe you extrapolated what you wanted from my statement. My point was simple, and only my own opinion, as I tend to make clear in all posts I place on these boards. Still, I will attempt to clarify further my intended position.
While I understand, and agree that Mr Clinton had much to be desired as the president of this country, I prefer to focus on something a bit more tangible....you know....the guy running this country right now. I did quite understand your analogy, though I found it somewhat lacking in the context of this discussion. Lets try this one on for size:

Same kid steals my kids bike. Months later my kid steals it back, A year later Bad kids dad tries to take the bike away from my kid, and I am having a beer on the porch as he does so. Do I decide to talk to the Kid that stole the bike over a year ago.....or do I beat the shit out of his Dad?

Hitler was also methed up most of the time. If we're going to compare the two men on one front, can we look at this one too? :rolleyes:

But no. The rant this man gives is out of line. I would not have a problem with teachers talking about their own religion in the classroom, but this man doesn't seem the type (at least in this verbal spew) to academically discuss things; he seems to like to yell them, push them, force them.

By the way, a lot of the heads of the tobacco companies like to make their home in Lexington, Kentucky and the surrounding area. Sure, Durham is still involved in the process... but that was a job they were much more renowned for around the middle of the last century. So while he condemns the use of force in other countries based on outright false or extremely questionable reasoning, he asks if other countries should not bomb us... based on outright false or extremely questionable reasoning. Way to go.