Bush Compares Dems to Hitler

Bizarre and frightening. At georgewbush.com, a new Republican campaign ad features faces and speeches of various Democrats, intercut with a snippet of Adolf Hitler spieling at a rally. I guess this is what Bush meant by “changing the tone in Washington.”

Is this an effective ad? Does anybody even understand what point they’re trying to make here? That both Democrats and Hitler have spoken excitedly at rallies? I’m speechless. Sign the petition at democrats.org to demand bushco to talk about issues.

Music: Liz Phair :: Only Son

10 Replies to “Bush Compares Dems to Hitler”

  1. Pingback: Ludovic's weblog
  2. huh. i’m totally … flabbergasted. i hope bush’s ad people keepp up this brilliant work. not only will it be entertaining (n the same way Jackass – the movie was entertaining), it’ll alienate absolutely EVERYONE. including his present supporters.

  3. The Bush campaign is using snippets from the controversial Hitler MoveOn ads. Those were two of the ads that were submitted when MoveOn held a contest to solicit commericials for an ad campaign (http://www.bushin30seconds.org/). They were briefly on the MoveOn site and then pulled down and removed from the contest when MoveOn caught flak (http://www.szed.com/szdaily/20040108/ca718805.htm). They are not MoveOn ads, and they are certainly not Kerry or Dem party ads. But that is the association that the Bush campaign is trying make. A sort of “”See how low they’ll stoop” insinuation. A little more here: http://fury.com/article/2032.php

  4. It’s is an astonishing new low in the campaign wars that Bush’s people would put up such a lie: the lie that MoveOn.org endorsed that submission with Hitler in it. It is quite clear that for them the ends justify the means.

  5. Not to mention the fact that the way the Bush ad is presented says nothing about MoveOn, the nature of the contest, etc. To the casual observer viewing this ad, who knows nothing of the back-story, all they see is some Democrats and then Hitler and then more Democrats. So if the point they’re trying to make is that the Dems are stooping to these lows, then that point is going to be not only wrong, but completely lost on the majority of viewers.

  6. Wow. A bunch of bigots with aluminum foil hats sharing black helicopter theories and patting themselves on the back for being such “good” democraps, accusing the President of having something to do with an ad that was created by some people who support him and whom he probably doesn’t even know them.

    Question: Did at any time you hear George Bush’s voice say “I’m George Bush, and I approve of this message”?

  7. gumby: Which bigots are you referring to? Names please. Which conspiracy theories are you referring to? Specifics please.

    Are you suggesting that Bush doesn’t approve his own campaign ads? That may be true. If it is, is it relevant? It’s still his name on them, and they’re still his ads, promoting him.

    Most importantly, are you saying that the ad is acceptable in your view? In what sense is the ad not dishonest, not manipulative, not a new low for Republican campaign advertising?

  8. I’m more disturbed by the fact that nobody on the left objected to the Bush=Hitler theme in the first place. MoveOn only removed them as a result of well deserved flak (thanks Michael Bazeley for the link).

    No way am I a Bush supporter but, all the outrage expressed here leads me to think that you consider the equation to be a vaild one. If Bush does= Hitler then who or what else do we compare Hitler to?

    If we call any Tom, Dick or Harry a Nazi how do we then describe the real Nazis?

    Words and images are powerful, don’t abuse them, and don’t cry “wolf!” too often, remember how that story ends.

  9. At georgewbush.com, a new Republican campaign ad features faces and speeches of various Democrats, intercut with a snippet of Adolf Hitler spieling at a rally. I guess this is what Bush meant by “changing the tone in Washington.”

    I see it as Potkettleblack Disease.

    http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/010904A.shtml

    Sign the petition at democrats.org to demand bushco to talk about issues.

    Now OTOH, the Kerry head of the BushKerry creature does talk about issues; it’s getting him to pick one side of them and stick to it that’s the trick.

    gumby wrote: A bunch of bigots with aluminum foil hats sharing black helicopter theories and patting themselves on the back for being such “good” democraps,

    But don’t you know that it’s us eeeeeevil VRWC members who wear the tinfoil hats and share the black helicopter theories? ;-)

  10. Obviously the Bush people have no idea what they’re talking about. They’re confused. We’re communists and THEY’RE fascists. Throwing Hitler around is our job, they on the other hand should feel free to use Stalin.

    Probably of more substance than my comment above, if you’re interested in checking into campaign ads and speeches this season (and their validity) two organizations are good bets:

    1. Fact Check (from the University of Penn.)

    2. Campaign Desk (from the Columbia Journalism Review)

    The Christian Science Monitor has a good background story on both organizations:

    Both of the sites being reviewed this week are new and specifically dedicated to truth in politics. (And Diogenes thought he had it rough.) The first operates under the name, FactCheck.org, and tops its home page with the mission statement of “Holding Politicians Accountable,” and the Daniel Moynihan quote, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.”

    From those three bits of introductory information, we can already build a pretty clear picture of what the site is all about, but just to fill in the details, FactCheck (online since December) monitors the accuracy of political speeches, ads, interviews and any other method that one candidate, party, or special interest group might use in promoting a specific view – and then posts, shall we say, “clarifications,” online.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.