MoveOn, Hitler and Bush: Hooo, boy!

The BBQ Pit
201

I was just going to let this dangle, because at this point anyone who doesn’t identify Soros as a Democrat is too stupid to live among others and ought to be institutionalized for his own protection. But there are some unasked questions within the asked one which might bring this thread back to the OP (remember that?).

So: Is he a “spokesman” for “mainstream ‘Dems’?” Irrelevant – that wasn’t the question asked or the hijack being argued, or whatever. He is a “Dem.” There’s no question about that, and that’s what Scylla asserted. I have no horse in the race whether enough “Dems” have compared the Bush administration to Nazi Germany to support Scylla’s assertion, I simply asserted (correctly) that Soros is in fact a “Dem” by any reasonable definition of the world and that therefore referring to him as one is not, as minty said, “too stupid for words;” in fact, asserting otherwise is too stupid for words and much like calling Richard Scaife “not a Republican”. And as I said, the German guy – not so much a Democrat.

But that was all a hijack. The OP was about moveon.org. George Soros, a guy who has compared the Bush administration to the Nazis on at least two public occasions, gave $5 MM to moveon and was a keynote speaker at at least one of its events. An event at which he made the comparision right in front of their faces. I rather think that makes Soros a prime, main moveroner. So I think their protests that they are being slammed unfairly on the Nazi comparision can safely be ignored until they give the money back.

202

actually, according to the direct quote of you on this page, the question you asked was

It’s only on this page that you rephrase it into an actual polite, answerable form.

I think it’s clear both are fucking with each other, pretending otherwise is counterproductive. Your original claim was that ‘dems’ were making these allegations. Since the concept of ‘dems’ includes both 'absolutely everyone who self identifies as a democrat and the ‘officially sanctioned’ party line, it’s also clear to me that both sides in this little bizarro gig have opted to not make that distinction clear.

I would think that it’s obvious to anyone w/any amount of intelligence (and w/o an agenda to weild) that if one is making the statement ‘dems are talking in this way’, meaning that there exists somewhere, some one who self identifies as a democrat making this type of statement, that it’s most likely true. Meaningless as well, but true. Meaningless because in a large group such as ‘people who self identify as dems’ certainly there will be extreme beliefs expressed. Meaningless because it certainly doesn’t fairly represent the official “party line” or even main stream party members beliefs. Just as a reverse situation would be true w/republicans.

For example one could legitimately say that ‘republicans are talking about killing abortion providers being a moral act.’ If one examined the voting record of Paul Hill, (that’s the right name, isn’t it?) or the Olympic bombing suspect Rudolph, we wouldn’t be surprised to find that they’d voted Republican vs. Dem, right? But it’s also obvious, I would think, that they don’t reflect the main stream of Republican party members, certainly not the Official party line.

So boiled down does either side declare that the “Bush/Hitler” comparison fairly and accurately represent main stream party members thinking/ official party line ?

(IOW, I disagree w/manny in that the question ‘are there folks who self identify as dems who believe this’ is: A. obviously most likely to be true. B. Just as obviously meaningless. C. and most obviously not an interesting discussion to be had. The question that I think is more interesting is ‘is this a mainstream belief’. So far, Scylla et al seem to be hell bent on proving that there indeed are some folks who self identify as dems who believe this. **luce ** et al seem to not want to admit that there indeed is a lunatic fringe, so ignore that not as interesting side battle to focus on the bigger picture.

If luce et al admit there’s a lunatic fringe believing all sorts of stupid things, will Scylla et al admit that it is indeed a lunatic fringe and therefore essentially, ‘so what?’

203

A Democrat is not the Democrats.

204

Well, very few lunatics self-identify as such, so luce not admitting to it is unsurprising.

205

Well, thank you very much for that germane and insightful contribution, milroyj. Anything else to add?

206

I didn’t say that luce was a lunatic. Nor did I imply it. thanks anyhow, for playing.

and yes, Dio has it - ‘a’ is not the same as ‘the’, yet some folks seem to be intentionaly obscuring that fact (by omitting either ‘a’ or ‘the’). Again “a” dem saying it is meaningless, a ‘so what?’.

207

No, I said it. elucidator, et al, ARE the lunatic fringe, so why would you expect them to admit to it?

Thanks anyhow, for playing, yourself.

208

I’m sure you consider them the ‘lunatic fringe’. I’m also fairly certain that they will consider that proof their views are damn near mainstream.

209

Of course they consider their views to be mainstream, it’s part and parcel of their lunacy.

210

well, this biting repartee is too much for my little liberal senses.

211

Gosh, I didn’t realize you had any sense.

212

Don’t you have anyone else to stalk? This sort of grade school taunting is boring.

213

Milroyj, are you a Democrat plant, because you singlehandledly are their best weapon on this board. There is a case to be amde for conservative policies, but all you do is spew Limbaughesque venom, ill-defined stats, and bigotry.

You’re an embarrassment to every GOP Doper.

214

Where’s Milossarian gotten off to? He could supply some real biting repartee.

215

Limbaugh? Don’t listen to him, because, unlike many posters here, I actually work during the day. I don’t cite stats all that often, so which one do you think was ill-defined? And your accusation of bigotry offends me, do you have a cite for my alleged bigotry?

216

Yeah, it’s usually easier to ignore the facts.

217

Yeah, I knew that would be someone’s response. Anyhoo, where did I cite stats that were ill-defined?

218

In completely non-Nazi-related moveon news, I learn now that visiting their site gets you on someone’s tracking cookie such that their ads appear, at least on cnn.com. THE ADS HAVE UNSOLICITED SOUND!.

They’re really going to need the money of noted Democrat George Soros if all their small-amount contributors get fired for taking a peek at cnn while at work.

Relatedly, could someone get all these political groups on any side of any issue together and get them at least to agree spyware is bad and unsolicited sound ads are bad? I mean, that’s up there with “puppies are cute” in terms of being non-controversial. Sheesh!

219

Ah, manny. Still on the Soros-is-a-Democrat kick? Sorry, nope, I ain’t buyin’ it. Now let me explain why.

This is a matter of definition, of course. So what defines a “Democrat”? It can’t simply be–as you and the weasel are so fond of pointing out–that Soros opposes Bush and pours a noticeable percentage of his income into kicking his sorry ass back to Crawford. This is not an either-or proposition, where you either support the president or you’re a Democrat.

We must, then, look at what it is that the Democratic Party stands for [Bite your tongue, weasel boy, I’ve heard enough of your "they-don’t-stand-for-anything imbecilities], and compare it to what Soros stands for. If you actually do that instead of merely picking a handful of Democratic policies that Soros supports and concluding that he’s therefore a Democrat, you’ll find that Soros is a bizarro creature whose politics are fairly leftist, fairly libertarian, and more than a little nuts.

For instance, check out this 1997 article from the Atlantic. In it, he gives a bit of insight into his philosophy, which makes no sense whatsoever. Or wander on over to http://www.soros.org/ and see what it is he spends his money on. Is there some overlap with Democratic positions? Sure, you bet. But Soros apparently does not self-identify as a Democrat, and most of his Great Thoughts are pretty well impervious to party labels.

For those reasons, I simply cannot conclude that Soros is “a Democrat,” particularly not for purposes of the weasel’s claim about how “the Democrats” are so constantly comparing Bush to Hitler.

220

Is Richard Scaife a Republican? If you can honestly answer “no” to that question, I’ll accept (but disagree) with your viewpoint.