i dont know but u r hot
2006-07-14 04:05:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by *brunettes~r~better* ;) 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
These days, when you're fighting a war, you've got to make sure you do everything from the high ground. Dot your i's, cross your t's and make sure that everything is legal and above board. Bush's problem is that he thinks he can fight the war in any way that's most effective, and he's crossed the line on several occasions.
Bush did deny rights to prisoners of war at Guantanamo Bay. They've been locked up for four years without any charges being pressed or being able to talk to a lawyer. Those men could be guilty, but they should still be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. They have been denied their prompt trial by jury. That's very un-American. You wouldn't want that to happen to you, it shouldn't happen to them either.
There's also the whole start of the war in Iraq. There are plenty of reasons to have gone to kick out Saddam, but WMDs isn't one of them.
Then there's the widespread domestic spying. He's recording phone calls and looking to see what we've checked out from the local library. Do I have a secret service agent looking over my file with a highlighter to see if I've ever read a book about Islam? Is someone listening to what I say when I call my mom? Am I gonna get in trouble for posting this answer?
Imprisoning people illegally, spying on your own populace and starting a war for the wrong reasons are Hitler-ish, in nature if not degree. And even in the case of Hitler, he didn't just go straight to the Holocaust. He worked his way up to it a little bit at a time until suddenly everyone was committing atrocities and no one knew how they got there.
That's why it's such a huge deal that the Congress is finally setting guidelines for domestic spying and the Supreme Court ruled that the Guantanamo Bay prisoners do have protection under the Geneva Convention. Bush went too far, but the system is slowly righting itself through checks and balances.
I will say there is one difference. Hitler was out to conquer the world. Bush at least THINKS he's doing the right thing, even though I disagree with a lot of what he's done. Another difference is that unlike Nazi Germany, we still have a democracy which will eventually correct itself. It's taken 4 years, but we're seeing some progress.
2006-07-14 11:22:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by foofoo19472 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
grant it he is not Hitler, but he is a liar, a deceiver, and he is maniacally turning this country into a dictator ship. which are all things Hitler did, Hitler was voted in to office but soon lied his way in to war (like bush), and soon became dictator of Germany. Like I said, bush is not Hitler, maybe the anti-Christ, but not Hitler. but he is on a slippery slope, at the very least he will be remembered as the worst president ever.
2006-07-14 11:12:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by chris1979pt 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a specious argument created by leftists. Since Hitler is their ultimate bad guy, they want to link Bush, who is nominally inept at worst and average at best, to him in the minds of the people. Unfortunately, because of the end of absolute truths (also thanks to leftists), anything you don't like can be equated with your ultimate bogey-man. That's why Ward Churchill can call stock brokers in the WTC "Eichmanns" and get away with it. These epithets are used to hound everyone from smokers to people who don't use bicycle helmets simply because someone finds their actions disagreeable. No one seems to be immune. In grad school, I complained about "parking Nazis" in the college town where I lived.
Hitler and Nazis are in a class by themselves and painting minor annoyances or political enemies as these psychopaths only serves to diminish the memory of how evil they were rather than elevate that person/group to their level of evil.
2006-07-14 11:12:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Crusader1189 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because they don't care what the truth is. They are so arrogant, they just know they are right about things, so why would they need to ivestigate on their own. They just simply know they are right, so when they lose elections, it must be becuause we are dumb or the others stole the election, therefore, they just start labelling them. It is ridiculous really, and to think that the people who are trying to dumb down America with an educational system subsidized by the Federal Government (Dems or Libs) are voted for by the ones they are dumbing down.
2006-07-14 11:11:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by bowhunk7627 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
When one gets to name calling or making ludicrous comparisons like this, it means only one thing: they do not know enough about the issue to carry on a rational discourse about it and can no longer defend their opinions, but refuse to admit they are wrong.
In the mid 90's my ex-mother in law would last about 3 minutes before she was calling Newt Gingrich a communist, to which I usually replied "Right, thats why he ran off to Prague and Moscow during Vietnam........no, my mistake, that would be YOUR guy; Pres Clinton and her husband Bill!!"
Usually ended the debate right there (no wonder i'm divorced, lol)
Bottom line? Because they can't back their opinions up with actual facts.
2006-07-14 11:13:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Yote' 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush is in no way like Hitler because Bush did not make millions of people dye because of their religious beliefs and characteristics! He did not put people in gas chambers and leave them to die! He is in NO WAY like hitler. It's disgusting that you can compare anyone to Hitler. Well there is one person, the DEVIL
2006-07-20 22:06:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Taylurr Babee. 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Just like the tactic of "Race Baiting", calling someone a racist because you have no good argument against their position and want to bring it down to a purely emotional level, Nazi calling has become an often resorted to tactic of the frustrated Leftist Communist of our country, typically the Coastal Elitist who look down on everyone that doesn't share their views.
2006-07-14 11:07:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by DJ 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
bush is worse than Hitler.... Hitler has his own reason for killing the Jews. but bush... no reason for defending what the Israel had done . plus his stupid lie for attacking Iraq.. he's just useless leader... what good had he done? nothing.
2006-07-14 11:07:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well hate blinds them from all reason and they are creepy little weirdos. But to make a slight correction Hitler didn't kill six million Jews, he killed six million people including Gypsies, mentally disabled etc...
2006-07-14 11:06:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by wild_orchid_1988 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is no need for a detailed answer. It is simple, they are uneducated and simply dumb. They have never opened a text book and read one thing by a conspiracy theorist and think it has to be true.
2006-07-14 11:05:50
·
answer #11
·
answered by takeashot30 4
·
0⤊
0⤋