http://youtube.com/watch?v=pU6dNSsWWkQ
2007-10-22 02:34:00 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Last September, German Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin pointed out that George Bush is using Iraq to distract the American public from his failed domestic policies. She capped her statement by reminding her audience: "That's a popular method. Even Hitler did that." What was lost in the reactions to Ms. Daeubler-Gmelin's comments was that she wasn't comparing Bush to the Hitler of the late 1930s and early 1940s; but to the Hitler of the late 1920s and early 1930s.
Most Americans have forgotten that Hitler came to power legally. He and the Nazi Party were elected democratically in a time of great national turmoil and crisis. They themselves had done much to cause the turmoil, of course, but that's what makes the Bush comparison so compelling.
2007-10-22 02:58:04 · update #1
Similar to the Bush administration, the Nazis were funded and ultimately ushered into power by wealthy industrialists looking for government favors in the form of tax breaks, big subsidies, and laws to weaken the rights of workers. When the Reichstag (Germany's Parliament building) was set ablaze in 1933 (probably by Nazis), the Nazis framed their political rivals for it. In the general panic that followed, the German Parliament was purged of all left-wing representatives who might be soft on communists and foreigners, and the few who remained then VOTED to grant Chancellor Hitler dictatorial powers. A long, hideous nightmare had begun. http://www.1933key.com/news/patriot_act_vs_enabling_act.php
2007-10-22 02:58:52 · update #2
The answer is simple. It is often said in debating circles that the one who mentions HItler first loses. I think you lose.
2007-10-29 15:10:54 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chilling comparison but hyperbole. The Patriot act is not the same as the Nazi Enabling Act. But yes, the very same words were used in the wake of 9/11 to justify the Patriot Act, the invasion of Afghanistan (necessary) and the invasion of Iraq (not necessary)
2007-10-22 09:42:36 · answer #2 · answered by jehen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It can't drop below 10 to 15%, because that's the approximate percentage of mentally ill Americans.
2007-10-22 09:38:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Says and does are two different things. He would have to walk the walk as well as talk the talk to get people to increase their approval of him. That is not likely to happen.
2007-10-22 09:57:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would he lie to get approval ratings. I think you are confusing presidents.
2007-10-22 09:39:37 · answer #5 · answered by time_wounds_all_heelz 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, cons won't stand for it.
2007-10-22 09:36:21 · answer #6 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋