Hitler dismantled all civil rights in Germany during the 30's. Would todays conservatives have been as tickled pink then as they are now under Bush's aupices?
2006-11-02 12:01:44 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well, remember what Hitler was really doing.
He wasn't taking away people's civil rights. He was protecting them from the scary terrorists who blew up the Reitstag. (Which, of course, was the Nazis themselves).
But let's never forget the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin -
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
You conservative lapdogs want to take on Franklin?
2006-11-02 12:08:52 · answer #1 · answered by wineboy 5 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Actually Hitler's first step was a national gun registry to make Germans safer. Then he enacted strict gun control laws and confiscated weapons the registry made it quite easy. All along the German people really believed this was to make them safer from crime. So in acuallity if there would have been more conservatives Hitler may not have been able to so easily sieze power. Also Hitler was the leader of the National Socialist Workers Party. "Socialist" in other words liberal. He is often referred to as a facist or right wing but other than nationalism he had much more in common with the left. He was very popular among the workers and the poor he very much gained and kept control by pushing a socialist agenda.
2006-11-02 12:33:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
nicely, i imagine your remark is about as stupid because it receives. You cleary were eating a lot democratic kool aide tht you ahve lost any experience of actuality. first of all its the dems who're racists, they have a vested interest in protecting minoriites down so one can ACT like the are the savior party. i ask your self why considering that 3 trillion dollrs were spent on the "warfare on poverty" we even sitll have negative human beings. . Adn sure, many republicnas are adverse to unlawful immigration in case you remember it takes position to be the regulation. yet as an Obma supporter we've considering that stumbled on the guidelines don not recommend a lot to him. And in case you communicate over with the Oxford dictionary "marraige" is between a male and a lady who've th eABILITY tro procreate. playstation less than the Reagan administration minorieis fared more effective perfect income sensible and productiveness sensible thenunder any previous democratic administration. PF "any u . s . a . that can't u . s . a . its borders, is doomed t fail" Franklin Roosevelt
2016-12-05 11:46:33 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never understood you people. Are you really that ignorant or are you just drunk. Do you honestly believe that the Rep are like that and if so you need some help or at least a good education. You make a great point why education in this country sucks. You should pick up a history book and take a look at what our fathers set out for this country. Our governments number one job is to protect its citizens, nothing more. Bush is doing that and you people act like he is way out of whack. Do you honestly believe sitting back in fantasy land that everything will just get better on its own. If I remember right we just let Germany take over countries and didn't get involved and look at what happened by not getting involved. I bet if we would have got involved a lot early, we would have saved a lot of lives.
2006-11-02 12:13:25 · answer #4 · answered by ffsotus 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I won't compare Bush to Hitler, I don't like the man, but I think that is a bit extreme. But there is a correlation. I find Republicans blindly follow Bush the same way Germans blindly followed Hitler. That is disturbing to me. Let me reiterate I am not calling Repubs Nazis or Bush Hitler, but I do see a blind loyalty that is comparative.
2006-11-02 12:08:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Hey, that's the wrong example. When Hitler was around you either cheered or were shot. This was the way he ran his government (if you can call it that). He striped all rights away from his people and put millions to death. You can't compare him to bush.
2006-11-02 12:22:19 · answer #6 · answered by Saint 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
They may not have cheered but they would have rolled-over and voted for any "reforms" that Hitler had in mind. I mean what's Congress supposed to do if not vote for anything the president wants - right?
2006-11-02 15:50:17 · answer #7 · answered by Cowboy 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hitler created a new Germany from the ashes of WW1...national socialist had some great ideas that worked,Hitler is the reason for the evil in the Nazi party,they were racist though ,but so are us Americans too,you know not what you compare sir,,,hail bush and the republican party....
2006-11-02 12:11:10 · answer #8 · answered by CIVILIAN 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Some would approve, others would cower, others would object. The ocnservatives of Germany, who despised Hitler's tactics, ended up allying themselves with him, inthe hope that they would have things their way. It was a pact with the devil, and when you mak a pact with the devil, you become the devil.
2006-11-02 12:09:14 · answer #9 · answered by Mr Ed 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
They seem to be falling all overthem selves in support of the MCA. I guess Republicans hate us for our freedoms as well as thier own. Kinda reminds me of when the Roman Emperor Tiberius was told by the Senate they would automatically approve anything he wanted them to do ... and he replied " how eager you are to become slaves " . Once upon a time we used to have habeas corpus.
2006-11-02 12:07:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋