PDA

View Full Version : Rep. Tom Cole (OK), you are an idiot.


brianjedi
03-04-2004, 04:26 PM
Congressman Tom Cole of Oklahoma made some remarks that make me question how he ever got elected. He said that "If George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins the election," and that voting against Bush is equivalent to supporting Hitler in WWII.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040304/dcth046_1.html

Listen, fucknut. Electing John Kerry does not mean that terrorists will have free reign over the country. It means that the American public has had enough of the lying, the rampant unemployment and the discriminatory remarks and wants to replace the leader. And indirectly comparing Kerry to Hitler was a really classy move. Maybe later you can compare Bush to Gandhi or something.

Spavined Gelding
03-04-2004, 04:55 PM
It is just the beginning. This election is just going to be awful. The President may try to maintain a posture of dignity and propriety and keep the whole thing in the Rose Garden, but his surrogates, the windbag TV and radio commentators, the balderdash pundits, the sycophant Congressmen and the corporate cronies will be out in force with their knives drawn. This is going to be war to the knife and the knife to the hilt. And rightly so since this is a fight for the soul of this nation.

Remember, every bullet shot at a Union soldier boy was fired by a Democrat.

elucidator
03-04-2004, 05:07 PM
Just the sort of lying crap you'd expect from a Yankee!

Chance the Gardener
03-04-2004, 05:23 PM
The hell of it is that Cole, as Bush’s surrogate, is resorting to a fascist tactic: skirt debate and difference of opinion by linking their man to righteousness and patriotism, and damning dissenting views out of hand. This is the kind of tactic I would expect of Hitler. The idea that questioning your leader is tantamount to following fascists is absurd and destructive.

If Bush himself tolerates this kind of rhetoric, then he’s complicit. Plain and simple. Not that Bush would earn my vote by turning on people who say things like Cole is saying, but by not policing such behavior, the Republican Party earns my disgust and contempt. Fascist tactics have no place in American democracy. Cole needs to apologize, and Bush needs to rebuke him. And, if he’s interested in changing the tone in Washington, he will. So it goes without saying that he won’t.

Cole is scum.

Spavined Gelding
03-04-2004, 05:57 PM
Second response and we are into the Adolf comparisons. A new record?

The last thing that Democrats and other reasonable and patriotic folks who think the future of the Republic requires the removal of the present unholy alliance of the Blue Noses, the reactionaries and the Robber Barons should be doing is surrendering to the impulse for name calling. Rational and straight forward plain talk about the need for the invasion of Iraq, the failure to prepare for the disorder that followed, the unthinking allegiance to free trade and cheap overseas labor, the dissipation of a budget surplus for the short term benefit of the uber rich, the failure to protect the environment, the sale of the country’s future to the highest bidder, the restriction of traditional personal liberty, reproductive rights, the subordination of science and medicine to politics and the tactic of scare politics is what we have to talk about long, loud and incessantly.

Hitler talk, while cheap and easy, is not going to get anything done but offend people who expect more of the election than waiving the bloody shirt and a grand war whoop for the starry flag and the great bird of liberty. Let the President and his lick spittles enunciate the defamatory connections and tilt at straw men. Against all expectations the American electorate can tell honest political argument from hysterical hyperbole. Give them a choice. Let people like the redneck Congressman pursue the low road. Reply to it, condemn it as the appeal to irrationality it is, but don’t start it.

Bricker
03-04-2004, 06:37 PM
Absolutely despicable. I'm not so sure Senator Kerry is the right man for the job, but so far as I can see, his loyalty, patriotism and integrity are unquestionable. This sort of rhetorical device has no place in intellectually honest discourse.

And shile we're on the subject -- brianjedi, what was your response to the moveon.org ads about President Bush?

- Rick

brianjedi
03-04-2004, 06:42 PM
And shile we're on the subject -- brianjedi, what was your response to the moveon.org ads about President Bush?



The one with the kids working is not too bad. Several of the others are just too over the top, and I think they're going to turn some people off with them if they push too hard. I admire their efforts to get some discussion going, but I'm afraid that they may be too strong ideologically.

Jackmannii
03-04-2004, 06:46 PM
Anyone have a link to a story on Cole's remarks, other than a press release from the office of the Democratic Whip? Not that I doubt the gist of the story, but it would be interesting to see an account from a non-partisan source.

The over-the-top hyperbolic crap has been bad enough on the SDMB in recent months; it's depressing to think of what it will be like as election fever takes hold.

PhiloVance
03-04-2004, 06:55 PM
the rampant unemployment

Whaaaaa?

Cite please. ;)

brianjedi
03-04-2004, 07:41 PM
Here's (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/03/04/politics1748EST0756.DTL) another link; that press release was the only written link I could find (CNN had this on Inside Politics earlier.)

World Eater
03-04-2004, 07:47 PM
<shaking head>

My mantra throughout this ordeal will be.....

worst.election.ever!

Jackmannii
03-04-2004, 08:22 PM
So the "paraphrasing" of Cole's remarks was just a bit inaccurate.

"What do you think Hitler would have thought if Roosevelt would've lost the election in 1944? He would have thought American resolve was" (weakening), Cole said, according to a spokeswoman.

After local news reports paraphrased Cole as claiming a vote against Bush is a vote for Hitler, some Democrats demanded he apologize.


Still moronic, just not as outrageously moronic.



There'll be worse to come.

Bricker
03-04-2004, 09:33 PM
The one with the kids working is not too bad. Several of the others are just too over the top, and I think they're going to turn some people off with them if they push too hard. I admire their efforts to get some discussion going, but I'm afraid that they may be too strong ideologically.

Huh.

Well, that's a lukewarm condemnation at best -- certainly a far cry from "Listen, fucknut..." in your OP.

Why in the world would you provide such a tepid response to ads that compare Bush to Hitler, and yet get so upset over a comment that compares Kerry to Hitler?

Spavined Gelding
03-04-2004, 09:58 PM
.

Why in the world would you provide such a tepid response to ads that compare Bush to Hitler, and yet get so upset over a comment that compares Kerry to Hitler?

You will pardon me, Bricker, but what ad compares President Bush to Hitler? For that matter who, except the Oklahoma Congressman and then in only a tenuous manner, compares Senator Kerry to Hitler. Who am I supposed to be work up at, and why?

The stupidity, the irrationality, the partisan hyperbole is the contention that if President Bush is not re-elected (my God prevent) Osama will have won.

Nametag
03-04-2004, 10:02 PM
Huh.

Well, that's a lukewarm condemnation at best -- certainly a far cry from "Listen, fucknut..." in your OP.

Why in the world would you provide such a tepid response to ads that compare Bush to Hitler, and yet get so upset over a comment that compares Kerry to Hitler?
Maybe because NOT A SINGLE MOVEON.ORG AD COMPARED BUSH TO HITLER???

Dammit Bricker, you know better. There were ads submitted to a moveon.org contest that featured that argument, but they were never aired, and never used, and they were removed from web access as soon as they were discovered. :smack: (and no, I ain't smackin' MY forehead there)

Reeder
03-04-2004, 10:13 PM
I'm not surprised. The RNC can throw these guys out left and right to say everything outrageous to pander to the right wing idealogues. That way Bush can seem to be above the fray. You might get an "Oh..we don't really feel that way" sometimes but the speaker will not be chastised.

brianjedi
03-04-2004, 10:16 PM
Ah, now this makes sense. I was not aware of any sort of MoveOn ad that made such a comparison. And it appears that was because there was no such ad.

And if such an ad did exist, I would respond in the same manner, Bricker. Comparisons to Hitler accomplish nothing.

But, just for future reference, let's get our facts straight before we take people to task on things that didn't happen, k?

elucidator
03-04-2004, 10:21 PM
Now just a second! There plenty of evidence of Hitler-comparing-associated-programs!

Manduck
03-04-2004, 10:29 PM
So the "paraphrasing" of Cole's remarks was just a bit inaccurate.

"What do you think Hitler would have thought if Roosevelt would've lost the election in 1944? He would have thought American resolve was" (weakening), Cole said, according to a spokeswoman.

I still wonder what Cole's point was. If Roosevelt had lost in 44 I doubt the course of the war would be much different, if at all. If Kerry wins in 04, that won't put Bin Laden in the clear either.

Spavined Gelding
03-04-2004, 10:45 PM
I still wonder what Cole's point was. If Roosevelt had lost in 44 I doubt the course of the war would be much different, if at all. If Kerry wins in 04, that won't put Bin Laden in the clear either.

Why of course it would have made a difference. We all know that Dewey (Dewey?) Would have called the GIs back across the Rhine, cut off aid to the Russians, refused to give the Brits gasoline and started negotiating for a separate peace with Adolf. This is the problem with hyperbole, it cuts off the blood supply to the brain.

Kimstu
03-05-2004, 12:16 AM
[Cole] said that "If George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins the election"

This reflects what I think is a very common misconception: that bin Laden (and Islamist extremist terrorists in general) is somehow personally opposed to Bush's presidency. Nonsense. Bush's administration is in many ways the best thing that ever happened to the al-Qaeda cause (e.g., his ill-judged "crusade" remark after 9/11, his invasion of Iraq, his closeness to some openly anti-Muslim Christian conservatives, etc.).

Anything that gets ordinary, non-fanatical Muslims outraged and fearful about the US is exactly what Islamist terrorists want, for the sake of furthering their goal of an all-out Islam-against-the-West battle. The last thing bin Laden and his ilk want to see in the Oval Office is a sensible, knowledgeable internationalist whom moderate Muslims feel they can trust, who wouldn't be stoking Muslim sympathy for Islamist anti-West terrorism.

Of course, Bush is an "opponent" of bin Laden in the sense that the US government is pushing hard to capture him, but any Democratic administration would do the same.

mhendo
03-05-2004, 08:25 AM
Huh.

Well, that's a lukewarm condemnation at best -- certainly a far cry from "Listen, fucknut..." in your OP.

Why in the world would you provide such a tepid response to ads that compare Bush to Hitler, and yet get so upset over a comment that compares Kerry to Hitler?
Jeez, i thought you were a little more honest than that.

The ad that won the MoveOn competition was the one showing children working in factories and making the point that the next generation will have to pay for the current Administration's tax cuts and other economic boondoggles. This was the one, the only, ad that MoveOn attempted to have placed on television, only to be rejected by CBS.

There were two (count 'em: 2) ads comparing Hitler to Bush among the hundreds of entries in the MoveOn competition. Neither of those ads even made the list of 15 overall finalists, or of the other twelve finalists in specific categories.

Furthermore, MoveOn pulled those two ads from their website in short order, and released a statement (http://moveonvoterfund.org/smear/release.html) that said, in part:None of these was our ad, nor did their appearance constitute endorsement or sponsorship by MoveOn.org Voter Fund. They will not appear on TV. We do not support the sentiment expressed in the two Hitler submissions. They were voted down by our members and the public, who reviewed the ads and submitted nearly 3 million critiques in the process of choosing the 15 finalist entries.

We agree that the two ads in question were in poor taste and deeply regret that they slipped through our screening process. In the future, if we publish or broadcast raw material, we will create a more effective filtering system.On the whole, i thought the MoveOn people could have handled the brouhaha a but better. They should have just left those two submissions up on the website and let the membership vote them down (which is what happened anyway). But to compare MoveOn's actions with the statements described in the OP seems rather disingenuous.

Even if you think MoveOn was stupid or irresponsible or overly partisan when it allowed those two submissions to appear on its website, the simple fact of MoveOn's apology and rapid removal of the ads puts them far above the actions of Tom Cole. If Cole ever apologizes for his ridiculous statements, then he might have some claim to be compared with MoveOn, but probably not even then.

It's also a little disingenuous to call the submissions that compared Bush and Hitler "the moveon.org ads about President Bush" and "ads that compare Bush to Hitler," as if MoveOn had actualy endorsed those two submissions and placed them on television. Those "ads":

- were submissions to a contest

- were never even in the final group from which the single winning ad was selected

- were specifically repudiated, apologized for, and removed by MoveOn

- never appeared on TV or in any other medium except the internet

I thought those two submissions sucked, and that their juxtapositions of Bush and Hitler were silly. But it's over the top to call them "the moveon.org ads." There was one official moveon.org ad, and that was the children-in-factories ad, which, in my opinion, is no more negative in its style than most political ads nowdays.

Bricker
03-05-2004, 08:49 AM
My bad. I did not realize that moveon.org had pulled the Hitler ads from its website. I believed, when I posted the above, that they had continued to host the ads, implicitly endorsing them.

Certainly no outrage needs to be vented on an organization that responsibly removed the ads as moveon.org did. So I was quite wrong in what I posted above.

Sorry - I should have been paying more attention to the rest of the story!

- Rick

mhendo
03-05-2004, 09:03 AM
My bad. I did not realize that moveon.org had pulled the Hitler ads from its website. I believed, when I posted the above, that they had continued to host the ads, implicitly endorsing them.

Certainly no outrage needs to be vented on an organization that responsibly removed the ads as moveon.org did. So I was quite wrong in what I posted above.

Sorry - I should have been paying more attention to the rest of the story!

- RickNo big deal.

And i shouldn't have been so quick to impugn your honesty. When determining whether someone is being dishonest or might simply have overlooked something, i think the assumption should rest with the latter until proven otherwise.

elucidator
03-05-2004, 09:03 AM
That was a graceful and sincere acknowledgement of error. But this is the Pit. So knock it off!

Zebra
03-05-2004, 10:16 AM
So the "paraphrasing" of Cole's remarks was just a bit inaccurate.

"What do you think Hitler would have thought if Roosevelt would've lost the election in 1944? He would have thought American resolve was" (weakening), Cole said, according to a spokeswoman.






Shouldn't we have then re-elected President Carter? Didn't that show the Iranian fundies that our resolve was weakening?


Support the president, (when he is my guy but fuck him in the ass if he is your guy)

Spavined Gelding
03-05-2004, 01:10 PM
This thread has the potential to turn into a long running series on dishonest campaign tactics—God knows there will be enough to do that.

So, this morning I pick up the newspaper and in due course come to the comic page where I find the always amusing Mallard Filmore strip. A strip about Senator Kerry porking an intern with this language (paraphrase)—there have been allegations that Senator Kerry had an affair with an intern, but his liberal supporters say that they will vote for him even if it isn’t true.

What the Hell is that? It is hard to count the misrepresentations. It implies that the Senator did indeed have an illicit sexual relationship with an intern. It implies that there is no evidence that it didn’t happen. It implies that “liberals,” who ever they are, think it is just a dandy idea for public officials to screw around with young volunteers. It’s not even funny. It’s a dishonest cheap shot. It is even unworthy of Paul Harvey.

Now I am starting to get oblique comments about Mrs. Kerry’s “unconventional life.” We all know what that means. Brace for the President’s deniable supporters to start taking pot shots at Mrs. Kerry as a reflection on her husband. I could tell you some things about Mrs. Eisenhower that would shock you.

Let me assure all that if the Democrats and their supporters and running dogs take up this sort of back alley stuff while the candidate appears in soft focus with puppy dogs and motivational music I’ll be screaming about that too.

brianjedi
03-05-2004, 03:46 PM
You mean someone reads Mallard Fillmore? Huh. Learn something new every day.

samclem
03-05-2004, 04:15 PM
The basic concept of "a vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism" was driven home to me last night and today.

I have a local station to which I listen that is all-talk radio, with all local hosts. No sydicated stuff. The night host last night is a rather right-winged looney. He can be conservative and liberal, but is just usually weird. He was the first I heard use the phrase about terrorism that I voiced above.

Today, a strange but middle of the road host voiced the exact phrase to a caller--"a vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism."

That scares me.

Hopefully most of the faithful listeners who hear this are a minority and already were voting for Bush.

And, I'd be just as upset if I heard the liberal talk guy in the afternoon say something about Bush that was equally as moronic. But, just like most liberals(except the extreme branch), it would never occur to him to use such comparisons. Just as it would never occur to most moderate, thinking 'Pubbies to make such a stupid comment.

Mtgman
03-05-2004, 04:22 PM
Now I am starting to get oblique comments about Mrs. Kerry’s “unconventional life.” We all know what that means. Brace for the President’s deniable supporters to start taking pot shots at Mrs. Kerry as a reflection on her husband.Mrs. Kerry is fluent in French.


Now stop that. You know damn well I mean the language. Don't make me come up there!Enjoy,
Steven

elucidator
03-05-2004, 04:34 PM
Good enough, as far as that goes, Sam. But the real issue is whether or not they will tolerate such statements. Surely, somebody at the Republican meeting Mr. Cole spoke before was sane and moderate enough to know better.

For all the caterwauling and bewailing we have heard from the Bushiviks (music to my ears, truth be known..) the fact is the charges they are characterizing as "hateful" are based on facts. Mr. Cole's repulsive rhetoric is not.

It is not our speech that damns us, but our silences.

Jackmannii
03-05-2004, 07:11 PM
And i shouldn't have been so quick to impugn your honesty. When determining whether someone is being dishonest or might simply have overlooked something, i think the assumption should rest with the latter until proven otherwise.Well and truly spoken, grasshopper. :)

Spavined Gelding
03-05-2004, 10:17 PM
Mtgman, the President on the other hand is inarticulate in two languages.

capacitor
03-05-2004, 10:21 PM
Well, if this Cole says so, then I am happy to vote for 'terrorists'.

Chance the Gardener
03-06-2004, 11:55 AM
I can't imagine a Kerry win being that good for bin Laden. I think bin Laden and his ilk would be much happier with a candidate who favored integrating religious institutions with our federal ones, who was more sympathetic to a religious view of the world and foreign policy, and whose constituency opposed gay rights. Someone who is willing to stir up hornets' nests in the Islamic world would also sit rather well with bin Laden, who seems to like the idea of holy war.

No, a Kerry victory would be a loss for bin Laden and all that he stands for. Luckily for Mr. Kerry, bin Laden can't vote.

brianjedi
03-06-2004, 01:55 PM
Not to mention, Chance, that Afghanistan doesn't even have that many electoral votes. No one's picking it as a "battleground state," although several have called it a "battleground."

Now, to take a detour back to the OP, why haven't we heard ANYTHING about this since it happened?

county
03-06-2004, 02:10 PM
"If George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins the election,"

That's ridiculous. Hell, bin Laden got less votes in the primary than Al Sharpton.

Although, I think bin Laden is someone that even Bush could and should beat.

DoctorJ
03-06-2004, 11:53 PM
If Bush were a man of any integrity whatsoever, he would immediately condemn this sort of "vote for Kerry and bin Laden wins" bullshit rhetoric and work through the Republican party to put a stop to it (and not in a wink-nudge way that allows it to go on while he maintains denyability, either).

Of course, I would be less surprised if he stripped naked and did a pole dance live on Fox News.

The Long Road
03-07-2004, 02:12 AM
I hope the Super Storm (http://www.outdoorshub.com/The_Coming_Global_Superstorm_0671041916.html) gets here soon and ends all of this. People will be blaiming each each other's political party as they freeze to death but at least it will end eventually.

ivylass
03-07-2004, 09:29 AM
Doesn't anyone find it disturbing that Kim Jong Il seems to be endorsing (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/world/story/0,4386,238539,00.html) Kerry?

Here too? (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040305/ts_nm/korea_north_kerry_dc_1)

elucidator
03-07-2004, 10:24 AM
...Of course, I would be less surprised if he stripped naked and did a pole dance live on Fox News.

As a public service, I include some tips for removing mental imagery which, like the above, threaten mental health.

1. Mix a paste of any common household cleanser (Comet, etc.) and ordinary lighter fluid.

2. Insert any standard hand-held drill (1/4") into either nasal passage, and drill an opening just deep enough to allow access to the frontal lobes.

3. Using a ordinary toothbrush (soft), apply the paste to the frontal lobes in a gentle scrubbing fashion, until such time as the words "George Bush" do not bring the aforementioned ghastly image to mind.

4. As a precaution, write down such vital information as your name, SS#, bank account number, and PIN, and forward same to any widely beloved SDMB member whose character and integrity are impeccable.

Spavined Gelding
03-07-2004, 02:10 PM
Doesn't anyone find it disturbing that Kim Jong Il seems to be endorsing (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/world/story/0,4386,238539,00.html) Kerry?

Here too? (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040305/ts_nm/korea_north_kerry_dc_1)

And how does this differ significantly from the Congressman's comment? By God, if Osama and Kim want him, all red blooded Americans better vote for GW Bush!

Weirddave
03-07-2004, 07:32 PM
So the "paraphrasing" of Cole's remarks was just a bit inaccurate.

"What do you think Hitler would have thought if Roosevelt would've lost the election in 1944? He would have thought American resolve was" (weakening), Cole said, according to a spokeswoman.



Dealing solely with the quote above, as I am unaware of any further statements made by Mr. Cole which may be far more explicit: What's the big deal? Since Hitler reportedly greeted the news of Roosevelt's death on April 12 with "This is the turning point we've been waiting for"(blissfully delusional to the end), saying that he (Hitler) would have taken a Roosevelt loss as a weakening of American resolve is prolly fairly accurate. Of course it would have meant no such thing, but I bet that's how he would have taken it.

kaylasdad99
03-08-2004, 02:07 AM
And how does this differ significantly from the Congressman's comment? By God, if Osama and Kim want him, all red blooded Americans better vote for GW Bush!Oh, twaddle.

And horseshit. "Enemy of my enemy, you are my friend" is one of the more simplistic political mottoes going. Simplistic propositions invariably merit suspicious scrutiny.