Yes, you DO need a clarification of the rules: Godwin’s Law does NOT state that the person mentioning the Nazis is the loser. It just states that as any discussion thread’s length goes to infinity, the probability that someone will mention the Nazis goes to 1. Simple as that.
Correct, Flymaster. However, the Jargon Dictionary states:
This is the rule that has become most closely identified with the name “Godwin’s Law”, and it seems to be at least loosely applied around here.
…and then they accuse the liberals of being “drones.” 
Not sure if this is a Bill O’Reilly-bash or a Brutus-bash any more, but either one is fine with me. 
Hey, he stepped on the ant hill. That’s what happens.
By the way, I know this may be a fool’s errand, but I’m gonna continue to bring up that Newsweek/Florida/overvotes issue to Brutus until he admits he’s wrong, or finds the facts to prove me wrong.
C’mon, anyone else wanna help me try to crack Fort Knox? I figure if we persevere, we might be able to get him to admit to one thing, and that one crack in the armor will let aaaaallll the bullshit come flooding out.
Check the spinsanity web site - they hoist conservatives and liberals both on similar petards.
Goddamn Nazis…
Exactly the definition I was using. The merest mention of Nazis can TOTALLY hijack a thread, as was demonstrated here, and can even drive away Brutus. Sorta the same thing as Mussolini making the trains run on time–nothing is totally evil.
As a conservative who was opposed to the invasion of Iraq in the way it happened I’ve noticed the same thing myself.
I think that a lot of this comes from what I call “pop-cons.” "Po-Cons are conservatism’s equivalent of pop music.
Philster, I know that we’re not alone. Take for example this quote from the Weekly standard:
Conservatism, IMHO, has always been about sober analysis of the all facts, the nice ones and the unpleasant ones.
If your reaction to something that challenges your position is to deride the “credibility and bias” of the source before you address factuality, and you call yourself a conservative… :dubious:
If you think that liberals posess more of the unseemly attirbutes of humanity than conservatives… :dubious:
You’re most likely a pop-con
Pop-Cons
Remember, you heard it here first.
pop-con
can i get me a pop-con to buy me a pop-corn, or would that be a handout?
Do pop-cons eat popcorn while watching cop porn?
{end hijack} (hmm… speaking of cop porn… neverming…
Do pop-cons eat popcorn while watching cop porn?
{end hijack} (hmm… speaking of cop porn… nevermind…
Would Ann Coulter therefore be a Pop-Tart-Con?
Good one! But in some parts of the countries they call them soda-cons.
I blame the rise of talk radio and the Gingrich revolution. Anyone with me?
Oddly enough, David Skinner, assistant managing editor
of the Weekly Standard.
Check out **Rush Hour** the article I pulled my quote from.
Apparently, Mr. Skinner has isssssues with how Mr. Limbaugh, (presumably), et al. conduct their shows.
Geeze, about 50% of this thread reminds me of a saying my coworker picked up overseas:
“Argue with a wise man and you cannot win. Argue with a fool and you cannot stop.”
Off to bed, g’night 