McAullife: MoveOn Nazi Ads Are 'Despicable'

[RUexperienced]

So says Terry on Laura Engram radio show.

Anybody else hear this?

Has Rove/BFEE gotten to Terry McAullife?

[jpgray]

1. Not unless they've gotten to Soros as well

Everyone is denouncing those ads, not because they are wrong, but because they are WMDs in the hands of the RW spin machine. If you think the average person thinks about the early Hitler days and propaganda techniques, you are very wrong. They instead see someone comapring an "evil monster" to a US president. This ad would be a terribly potent weapon against our cause if it were endorsed by party leadership. That the ad itself is accurate is beyond questioning, that it is effective is what's in doubt. Unfortunately, it is more effective for the other side.

[YNGW]

3. Seconded

nc

[Democrats unite]

5. Third it

eom

[Woodstock]

81. There is a way of saying things

Despicable isn't the one I'd have chosen.

How about inappropriate? That says he doesn't approve, yet doesn't condemn the person who was so frustrated with Bush's dictatorlike behavior that he created this ad.

Better yet, how about not saying a damned thing? Bounce it back to moveon.org. And go back to his kissing DLC/playing nice routine that got us into this mess to start with.

Why not look beneath the surface at what Timid Terry is up to?

McAuliffe vs. Gore/Dean/Kucinich/Grassroots Democrats...

[pasadenaboy]

2. Why is he on the Laura Engraham show?

She lies lies lies lies. She is a right wing hack, not a respectible journalist.

[jobycom]

6. I second that one

Why would he be on Engraham's show, adding credibility to not just a Republican, but the dregs of the Republican neocon movement? Not to mention, according to David Brock, a bigotted homophobe.

Not like he couldn't get primetime network coverage to denounce Democrats. The networks will always give a Democrat a microphone to badmouth other Democrats.

[mouse7]

35. You're... you're... you're....

you're... DISTH-PIC-ABLE!

[brainwashed_youth]

62. but....

she's kinda pretty thougt. Better than Senor Coulter

[ComerPerro]

4. People are turned off by the comparison becuase

They don't know the history of his rise to power and how he went about installing a system of fascism and a dictatorship.

All they associate with Hitler is the holocaust.

Granted, Bush hasn't singled out a few groups of people and killed them by the millions: yet.

But he is using the same methods that Hitler used in Germany in the 1930s.

[jpgray]

8. I agree completely (nt)

[For PaisAn]

13. exactly

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

31. Disagree.

I believe that he has singled out a group of people.

70-80% of America.

[formernaderite]

33. read some real history, please

Yes Hitler was a dictator...so was Stalin,Mao, Pol Pot etc. So what you're saying is that Dubya, like Hitler....is busy overthrowing the conservatives who are already in power....in order to install his centrally controlled bureaucracy of National Socialists.
In fact, like Hitler his party's platform and stump speeches includes tirades about the evils of Capitalism and how the state will control production to benefit the people, not vice versa. The worker will further be glorified as a hero to the American people, and his legacy is in danger of being economically brutalized by the evil capitalist.
Yes, I guess you're right Bush is like Hitler.
Look, let's keep these attacks on Bush credible....Bush is a dogmatic conservative who does not reflect the will of the majority of the people residing in these United States. He is already in power, we're looking to unseat him. However, unless we come up with saner allegations, we will look like a fringe party and no one will listen.

[ComerPerro]

45. Give me a fucking break

Don't give me that shit.

So he is not using socialsim to breed fascism. So what? The same shit is happening.
Maybe you haven't noticed that Conservatives are on their way out, thanks to Bush. He is forcing all Republicans to either toe the neoCon line, or suffer the political consequences. He achieved power through the support of conservatives, but he is quickly selling them out.
Now, granted, he isn't using socialism to push his agenda. But he doesn't need to. He is using Christianity. All problems are due to the oppression of the God-fearing Christian majority, who are the victims in an all-out liberal assault on Christianity.
Did I say "Bush is Hitler"? No. Did I say everything he is doing is exactly the same, and he is giving the exact same speeches? No.

But the process is similar.

[nemo137]

46. "let's keep the attacks on buch credible"

good call! this is honestly our best chance to win in november, remind our country men exactly why he's a bad president now, instead of comparing him to someone who is, let's face it, just a bogeyman now.

[tom_paine]

71. Hitler's stump speeches condemned Capitalism? That's simply untrue

I don't believe for a second that is true.

Show me some links to a Hitler speech which villfied Capitalism and I'll believe you. Untril then I will consider that this is a fabrication.

Second, as has been said before, Bush is NOT EXACTLY Hitler, but his disdain for free elections, for legislative bodies, for compromise and conciliation, not to mention he Buseviks' use of demonization/dehumanization propaganda is quite similar.

Finally, the Police State bureaucracy and it's central apparatus, as well as the law put in place which require no judicial oversight, are also very similar to Hitler's Enabling Acts.

It sounds like somebody has been readin Fair and Balanced History.

Please provide some credible links to back up your assertions, please.

The Capitalists, as they have done for Bush, provided Hitler with immense amounts of money and other aid.

[MacCovern]

89. Hitler (quote): "we are fighting every capitalism"

You want the proof, here's one quote from Adolf Hitler:

"We are not fighting Jewish or Christian capitalism, we are fighting every capitalism: we are making the people completely free."

Quote obtained from:
http://www.cla.wayne.edu/polisci/kdk/Comparative/SOURCES/nazism.htm

Hitler also clearly condemns capitalism in Mein Kampf.

Doing an internet search of the following words will show you a lot:
CAPITALISM ADOLF HITLER.

Some basic research would have confirmed that the post stating Hitler gave speeches condemning capitalism was absolutely accurate. Capitalism and Nazism is not compatible.

[arko]

36. I think the comparison is ineffective

Because sooner or latter some one is going to point out that Nazi is short for The National Socialist Party. Above all the Nazi's were socialist, they believed the duty and purpose of the individual was to serve the State ( or what some call the greater good ). Using this tactic to attack Bush is a bad strategy and will backfire.

The correct term for what the republican party practices is Mercantilism. It is a combination of economics and politics. Where industries that do not support the party are punished by taxes and regulation, and those that do support the party are rewarded with government contracts, like going to mars, rebuilding Iraq, Airline bailouts, steel tariffs, and agricultural price supports.

It goes all the way back to Lincoln. The republican party was founded on the idea of mercantilism. His party helped to establish higher tariffs on imported manufactured goods (at the expense of the agricultural south). They then used the money to federally finance railroad construction (in the northeast and mid-west), which in turn boosted steel production (in the northeast and mid-west). It is no surprise that the steel and railroad tycoons were products of this cooperation.

Some even say Lincoln started the civil war mainly to prevent South Carolina from establishing a duty free port in Charleston which would have crushed his industrial supporters in the Northeast.

The republicans had it pretty much locked up until FDR. It looks to me like Bush is trying to reset the game board just as Lincoln did.

[formernaderite]

38. Very well put...

I'd never thought about the mercantile aspect of the republicans...but philisophically they are diametrically opposed to the idea of citizens serving the state. I'd like to think the democrats and those of us on the left understand the merits of serving
the state and community for the good of the whole.

[el_gato]

52. you must be joking

they want to make slaves of us all

the neocon fascists want everyone to be a servant of the state
please get better informed

[Malva Zebrina]

77. No, I think they want all citizens to be subjects of corporations

who will rule their lives. We do not elect these heads of corporations nor do we elect their their upper echelon of persons who make the decisions that affect out lives--and many times, they affect our lives negatively. We are tied to them==they rule and will rule until someone points out that the people of the US are shallow, without a soul, obssessed with buying trinkets, any trinkets will do, and obssessed with the notion that the things you possess define your worth and the people actually come to grips with the bread and circuses they are engaged in and do something about it. I think it corrupts the society.

It seems to be getting worse, also.

Bush is not to be compared to Lincoln, -- that is totally laughable.

Please retract that implied connection. Bush is to be compared to the lowest of all ignoramuses. He is to be likened to the Alfred E Newman, cover boy On Mad Magazine. That is exactly what he is! He is patently stupid, ill bred, crass, over his head, suffering from narcissistic phenomena and lacking in the ability to keep up with his job and lacking the basic IQ to manage this complicated country. HE has screwed up everything he touches.

[Mairead]

40. "Above all the Nazis were socialist" is possibly the biggest canard

in the past hundred years.

The Nazis called themselves the 'socialist workers party' for broadly the same reason that other totalitarian groups call themselves 'democratic' and/or 'socialist': because 'Psychopathic Kleptocrats' would be embarrassing and lack popular appeal.

Taking their self-label at face value is like believing in 1950 that you're going to get irradiated if you eat at the 'Atomic Diner', or that the Fairbanks 'Electric' banjo in 1891 had anything at all to do with electricity.

[formernaderite]

44. DAP or NSDAP still socialists...albeit whacked

Okay, before Hitler was involved they were called the German workers party...feel better?
The moniker National Socialist was in part an attack against the International Socialists(Communists). Obviously none of these adjectives are as clear or true to meaning as we'd define them. Then again, the Soviets never rose above anything than functioning as an elitist mafia against their people.
The fact is that the German workers party was a lower middle class phenomenon, which grew and later intellectually appealed to a broad range of the population. The anti-semitic anger was linked both to communists and to capitalists...both groups were villified by Hitler as organs of the jewish elite.
Hitler was very much a socialist, in terms of nationalizing industry, and centralizing the control of all aspects of the economic and social welfare programs of the state.
Yes, under Hitler the NSDAP became one of the worlds ultimate totalitarian killing tools. However, I still don't understand your issue with his socialist dogma. I think any government that rules coercively becomes psycopathic, that still doesn't diminish his socialist philosophy. We can agree on calling some of Bush's machinations psycopathic...but he still ain't Hitler.

[Mairead]

48. No, they weren't socialists!

The closest they came was to be 'state socialists', which is indistinguishable from being 'state capitalists' -- the merging of business and government. Aka fascists.

'State socialism' is not socialism.

[arko]

54. Help me out here

I'm a bit confused. I've always been told that socialism is controlled by the state. I would like to hear more about the difference between state controlled socialism and the other kind, I don't believe I've ever heard this before. But I must admit I don't really know much about socialism.

[mrdmk]

56. Try this

There are a lot of overlaps of political philosophies. Socialism is an economic philosophy that can be democratic, communistic, totalitarian, royalty or whatever. Socialism is a group of people working together for riches for all and not of the individual. People get Socialism confused because of Russia and China government purported to Socialistic under a communistic/totalitarian rule. The opposite of Socialistic is Capitalistic. The United States is a Capitalistic Nation with Socialistic Programs (i.e. Social Security, Public Schools, Public Transportations, Police, Firemen any thing which the government controls hence Public Service is a Socialistic Program). Socialistic Programs can be controlled by the people of the United States mainly through voting and calls to government officials.

[0rganism]

68. It's all about who owns the means of production

For a brief primer on the definitions of socialism and capitalism, examine the appropriate entries at http://www.marxists.org/glossary/frame.htm
I particularly recommend the entries for capital, labour, democracy, alienation, proletariat, bourgeois society, and socialism.

For more on every aspect of socialism, read on your own from http://www.marxists.org/subject/index.htm

If unelected aristocrats own the factories and the farms, employing others to work them, you are looking at some type of capitalism. If the laws of the land are determined by the public and/or elected representatives, it's probably democratic capitalism. Conversely, if a monarch, dictator or body of top-level bureaucrats rules by fiat, it's a kind of authoritarian capitalism.

If the factories and farms are owned by the nation itself, you are looking at some type of socialism. If that nation is in turn run through a representative democracy, you have democratic socialism. If, on the other hand, a dictator controls the power structure and whatever elections there are, are shams, then it's some sort of authoritarian communism.

History holds examples of all these variants, and any number of intermediates.

Fascism, in particular, is interesting here because it's often misunderstood to be related to socialism (as you opined earlier), mainly because the Nazis used the word in their party name. It isn't. What you need for a fascist state is an ultra-dominant nationalist ideology backed by corporate power. This may or may not be actively imperialist; the fallangists of Franco's Spain were a different breed than the fascists of Mussolini's Italy, in that respect. Both were entirely compatible with capitalism, and entirely opposed to socialism. The hallmark of fascism is a gradual seizure of increasing amounts of power by individuals and corporations within a nominal democracy, using heavily nationalist propaganda to attract followers.

edit: You may find the marxist.org take on fascism enlightening: http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/f/a.htm#fascism

[Blue_Chill]

72. There is no "other kind"

Socialism is a economic system where the goverment (state) contolls all means of production and distribution. That is what socialism is.

We have people on this board that think a capitalist nation with a lot of social programs and safety nets is a socialism. That's absolute nonsense of course but they would have you believe that it's "democratic socialism" or some other made up fantasy term.

[tom_paine]

76. Wrong wrong WRONG

I also noticed you conveniently failed to provide links to back up your assertions.

Without said corroboration, such words carry the same force of truth as a Bushevik blast e-mail.

Which is to say none.

It's easy to regurgitate O'Reichley's Talking Points.

It's quite another to back them up.

[MacCovern]

90. Hitler: Leader of the Greens, and anti-capitalist

Not only did Hitler hate capitalism, he was also a "Green".
Please see my earlier response regarding Hitler's quotes on capitalism -
you'll find it very enlightening.

"In the 1930s the ecologists "Green Revolution" reached full flower in Germany...In the political sphere, ecologists lobbied successfully, for antivivisection laws,..implementation of organic farming,..and the redistribution of large land holdings to the German peasants (Back-to- the-Land movement)...These laws became the policies of a political party that incorporated a major portion of the ecologists political agenda. This party also believed in the "Blood and Soil" ethic, and was known as the National Socialist Party. Its leader was Adolf Hitler."

-M.Gemmell & J.Lehr

[0rganism]

66. Wrong! The Nazis were far more "National" than they were "Socialist"

The Nazis were a POPULIST movement, to be sure. They started as a very socially-oriented group, and remained so through the time of the "brown shirts". However, under Hitler's leadership, they came to oppose socialism and its constructs.

The very first people to get the axe in Nazi Germany, during the "night of long knives", were socialists, communists, and union organizers, as well as those leading members of the Nazi party Hitler deemed less than 100% reliable. Thereafter, Hitler relied heavily on private industry (for instance, I.G. Farben) to power his war machine, which he used to further an imperialist agenda of nationalism, racism, and (as you like to call it) mercantilism. Rather than exalt the worker through redistribution of wealth, Hitler exalted the soldier through propaganda and ran his factories with slave labor.

To call what Hitler did "socialism" is to miss the point of economic socialism completely. Nazism is authoritarian, racist, and capitalist; it's only relation to Marxian socialism is as a persecutor. Socialism and slavery don't mix.

Now if you wanted to discuss the corruption of socialism by the USSR, we might review how Stalin ran a counter-revolution which effectively established him at the top of a new aristocracy, by executing the communists who had led the overthrow of the Tzar. Once again, the result is antagonistic to socialism. What authoritarian counter-revolutions like Stalin's show is how easily revolutionary socialism crumbles in the hands of power-players.

[CO Liberal]

64. Yes, He Has

Granted, Bush hasn't singled out a few groups of people and killed them by the millions: yet.

Afghans, Iraqis......

[JasonFromWaltham]

69. truly frightening

As a student of Eastern and Central European history I have to agree it is scary how much America to day feels like the fall of the Wiemar Republic. God help us all.

[MacCovern]

85. Did Hitler encourage foreign workers in Germany?

Of course not. Your point is invalid - completely invalid.

Same methods? Not by a long shot.

[TankLV]

7. Too bad they're deadly accurate - can't have that!

Truth and facts hurt when you're trying to deceive.

I think it's "funny" (in a sad way) that all the complaints are about the IDEA of the comparison - but so far, no one has been able to refute a single one of the comparisons the ads made.

Not a single one.

[jobycom]

9. Ever wonder who Hitler's opponents compared him to?

You know that whoever it was, whoever Hitler's opponents compared him to in order to make the point that he was taking Germany down a bad path, Hitler's supporters screamed "How dare you compare a German elected leader to such a MONSTER?" and Hitler's opponents backed down.

Bush lies to kill hundreds of thousands of people, in less than three years. Bush is Hitler. Shout it out. Don't be the one in ten years explaining to the next generation why YOU kept silent.

[jpgray]

11. If the comparison is a free PR arsenal to said dictator, I DON'T shout it

Maybe if I were a selfish buffoon, caring more about preening and self-affirmation among like-minded folks than forming a message that is effective, I would shout it. If the Democratic Party officially endorsed Hitler comparisons, the party and by association its candidate would become the whipping boy of the GOP for the duration of the election year. When we were eventually proven correct, it would hardly be any comfort for me.

People REFUSE this comparison utterly, they will NEVER buy into it, no matter how accurate it is. It does specific harm to both our cause and our candidates. MoveOn sees that, I can't imagine why some folks here can't.

[JI7]

19. agree

those who are not outraged and get it are already opposed to bush. but to get change we need others with us, and trying to do it by saying hitler is like bush will just turn them off.

[jobycom]

25. Whom do you agree with?

Do you agree that we shouldn't call Bush Hitler because it will turn people off, or because you don't believe he is?

I'm all for playing to the middle voters to get their support, for spinning our message in a way that will appeal to the middle, and even for moving to the middle on a few issues we won't win anyway to gain support. But denying that this beast in the White House is a bloody monster is going too far, and won't produce the results you think. We will win only be showing Bush to be bad, and by showing our candidate to be better. We won't win by defending Bush against our own party.

[jobycom]

22. People refuse the comparison because WE do

That's my whole point. If WE won't even call him what he is, who will? Bush isn't just a little bad. He's a murdering butcher who has killed hundreds of thousands of people and has not given a good reason yet for at least half of them. If we do like we did during the 2000 election, and just sort of pretend that he's not really that bad, that we really do respect him as a person and a leader, and wouldn't want to challenge his credibility or his ethics, hoping all along that by taking this least offensive route we don't turn off voters who then might decide to vote for us because we haven't offended him, then he will win again, because we haven't given people enough reason to turn against him.

I was an historian. I've read what people were saying at the time about Hitler. Including what Americans were saying. Many Americans saw what was happening. Many Germans did, too. But Hitlers supporters here and in Germany-- and it's a forgotten part of our history that one of the reasons Hitler was unopposed is because so many Americans supported him-- did what you just did. We cannot offend Hitler's supporters. We can't risk turning them off. We can't call him a monster. The good guys shut up. The bad guys kept talking. Guess who most people heard and believed?

We should make the comparison so people see it, because it's the right thing to do, and because if all of us are making the comparison, people will begin to take it seriously, and might just begin to question why we believe it. But if we keep attacking anyone who speaks badly of Bush, who calls Bush a murderer, or a Hitler, then people will assume that even most Democrats don't believe Bush is all that bad, and he will not even have to cheat to get elected next time. It's always nice when you run unopposed.

[jpgray]

37. Speaking badly of Bush and using a divisive Hitler comparison are separate

The general public will listen to one and dismiss the other. This forum *knows* that many of the Reich's propaganda techniques, its methods of misdirection, and its use of a "shadowy outsider enemy" to rob its people of liberties and a future are very similar to what Bush's administration is doing. Now, your average joe on the street does not remember Anschluss, Goebbels, the Reichstag or anything else, he remembers the Holocaust. Combine the ignorance of the factual basis for the comparison with a reflexive dismissal and anger towards comparing *any* US president to a figure generally seen as an inhuman monster, and you have a lose-lose for yourself when you consider the effectiveness of the message.

Bush is a corporatist, by definition a fascist. You know it, I know it, everyone on this board knows it. But when the average guy hears "fascist", he thinks of jackbooted guys from the thirties and forties and dead Jewish people, not corporations united with a nationalistic and militaristic authoritarian government.

There were no real major "good guy" political entities in Germany during the early thirties. There was a violent reactionary Social Democracy in Germany, and an entire population made revolutionary, financially starved and sick to death of its government. The Communists, by this time under the direction of Comintern, were bitter enemies of the Social-Democrats, and declared the Social-Democratic leadership to be fascism already. Ernst Thalmann even wrote in December 1931: 'By raising the specter of Hitler's fascism, Social Democracy is attempting to sidetrack the masses from the vigorous action against the dictatorship of finance capital.... There are some people who fail to see the Social Democratic forest for the National Socialist trees'. He confused the murderous Social-Democratic reactionary practices with fascism, and did not realize at the time that Hitler would move to crush all independent political movements in Germany once he ascended to power. Indeed he believed the Nazi success in the election of 1930 would be Hitler's "best day", and that he would have "worse days" from that time forward. Thalmann later died in Buchenwald, if I recall.

But the last word is this: the Right can frame the debate; they have a media advantage. Toss them this bone, and they will walk all over us in 2004. If you're more in love with "being right" than actually ousting Bush, that's your lookout. I prefer we use messages that are both effective and true rather than one or the other. Attacking Bush need not involve Hitler.

[Mairead]

92. Beautifully said! You've illuminated the whole point perfectly.

People listen to what is being said. If all that can be heard is fascist laudamus, then that becomes The Truth.

Christ on a bicycle -- this mechanism has been completely understood at a practical level for at least a hundred years and has been exploited by everyone from dictators to breakfast-cereal makers. What is wrong with the DUers who can't see it? Is it a case of don't-want-to?

[AndyTiedye]

23. When did we ever STOP being the whipping boy of the GOP?

> the party and by association its candidate would become the whipping
> boy of the GOP for the duration of the election year

When the other side gets to be on TV all the time
and we don't, guess what happens?

We may actually have tricked them this time though.
They've been running the Hitler ads for us,
and laughing and pointing.

But the seed has been planted,
and maybe the next time Bush* does something fascist,
more people will make the connection.

The videos have been removed from rnc.org,
I think they got nervous about how popular they were.

[formernaderite]

34. Sorry, the argument feels good but....

The problem with the argument is that it isn't even factually correct. It may be emotionally fulfilling to believe this, or I suppose almost any leader could on a very superficial level be compared to almost any other dictator. Regardless, it does make for very bad talking points.

[TankLV]

67. Again, I repeat. Name one single statement or item in the ads

that is inaccurate. Just one. Still waiting.

Trouble is, not one single thing in the ads that some persons have their nickers in a twist about can be refuted. Not one. The comparisons are horrible because they are spot-on! The fact that so many comparisons CAN and ARE being made is why there is such an uproar by the repukes and vichy democrats.

I have been asking this question for almost a couple years now, and NOT A SINGLE TIME HAS ANY SINGLE STATEMENT CONTAINED IN ANY COMPARISON BEEN PROVEN TO BE IN ERROR. Not a single one. The parallels are there, and they grow daily.

The pictures haven't been doctored.

The statements haven't been misquoted.

It's the very IDEA that such VALID comparisons can be made at all that are the concern.

Not a single other President has had this done to him, not Nixon or Reagan or even King George I. This time it seems to stick like glue and they wail and scream "I'm NOT like Hitler so stop saying that!"

They protest too much.

[Changenow]

10. Thank God that McAullife had finally taken a stand on something!

Wat a welcomed change!

Now if only he would start pounding the O'Neill facts! just a thought.

[IndianaGreen]

17. Terry wants to be the next RNC Chair

Why isn't this guy behind bars for his role in Global Crossings?

[goforit]

30. He's the lousiest DNC chairman we've ever had.

He sold the Dems down the river and celebrated with
Zell Miller to boot.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Oh...

fuck him.

I'm getting pretty damn sick and tired of everyone lying down and letting the world roll over them.

It was an ad-- one person's opinion, and not shown and not even all that nasty. The thing got more play on the news than from MoveOn, ferchrissakes.

The other side can lie, cheat, and steal with impunity, but we have to be the nice guys?

We have to put up with "liberal" and "Democrat" as insults?

We have to shut up about the miserable failure this administration is while they get to blame everything from 9/11 to the recession to a crotch itch on Clinton?

We have to stand in "protest zones" and fear arrest while that asshole gets to land on an aircraft carrier?

We have to bow and grovel and admit that the world is better off with Saddam gone rather than stand up and say it really isn't, and that they let the real criminal escape?

We can't complain that we are living in a state of perpetual "war" and can't stand in an airplane while waiting to pee, and have to be "approved" to fly in the first place?

We have to listen in silence as they bash Chelsea and we can't say a word about the drunken sluts the "Family Values President" raised?

The list goes on, and it's just sickening.

The simple truth is that the public will listen to a liar with a set of serious stones, but ignores a wimp who speaks the truth.

Mumbles the truth, and later apologizes for it.

It really, really, pisses me off.

[Woodstock]

82. Right on!

McAuliffe can kiss my ass, but he'd better watch out, because I'm a REAL democrat, and I kick.

:kick:

[ellie]

88. Thanks TB!

I couldn;t have said it better myself. We are not doing ourselves any favors by mumbling and apologizing. We need to shout the truth from the rooftops. If you get just one person thinking, and then another one, and then another one, then real change can occur. I am a serious cynic, but I still believe that if people are told the truth they will act accordingly.

[Nazgul35]

14. I've pulled my funding because of this smacked ass...

He leaves the lie of the repugs hanging in the air instead of exposing the hypocrisy of the challange....

He could easily point to numerous...and I repeat...numerous right wingnuts who have made wild claims in print against Dems, not to mention talk radio....

So here is our champion...McAuliffe, who goes on not just this show, but Blitzer's as well to apologize for something that never frigging happened!!!!

Back when the repugs got CBS to pull the Reagan miniseries, I suggested everyone contact the network and boycott, the consensus here was that it was too small potatoes.....now, CBS is considering not allowing the MoveOn ad to run during the Superbowl...

As long as we back down, even on the little stuff, we will continue to lose on the big stuff!!!! Rightwingers push back hard on the slightest of perceived threats, this sends the signal that if the "transgressors" were ever going to "step out of line," the shit storm that would be released would be overwhelming....

So yes...everyone here pat McAuliffe on the back for avoiding a needless fight...save our ammo for the big push...don't fire till you see the whites of their eyes....blah blah balh...

In the meantime, the largest independent online activist site has been severely attacked and not defended by anyone, allowed to be painted as extremists and wackos, so that any message that they put out in the future will be discounted by the general public....

Yes...well done Terry! Thank you sooo much for your help, please feel free to go on more talk shows and apologize for MoveOn!!!

[jpgray]

16. No general praise for McAuliffe from me, but he *can't* endorse this ad

It would be handing a huge victory to the GOP. That's as far as I take my comments on this thread.

[jobycom]

28. But he can at least not attack those who created it on a neocon show

We would win more votes if he did endorse it than we will win by attacking ourselves, defending Bush, and fighting from the defensive again-- as always. If McAuliffe isn't skilled enough to evade that question without attacking his own party, fire his butt and put someone there who can.

[buycitgo]

21. well, smack my ass and call me Sally!

you are correct as correct can be

take it a step farther, though

the dems MUST avoid allowing these NAZI/FASCIST/STALINIST thugs to set the terms of the debate!

the ONLY way to engage them is to employ their own tactics:

NEVER, EVER, cede any ground

ALWAYS put them on the defensive, while refusing to countenance their assertions

that's what they do

do NOT recognize any possibility of the plausibility of their stances on ANY subject

that's what they do

use denigration, dismissive laughter when addressing their points of contention (see Alex Castellanos, auteur of the "Rat" subliminal ad)

laughing off one's opponents valid point is amazingly effective

anyone else have some ideas?

[goforit]

32. Time for McAuliff to be removed!!!

I have sent money in for 2 years because of this JERK and
Move-ON can have it all instead!!!

[Cocoa]

63. MoveOn disowned the ad too

so are you going to boycott them too?

[Yupster]

65. Better to support individual candidates anyway

Find some congresscritter candidates who have a legitmate chance of winning, but lack funds. That's better than sending it to some generic party group IMO.

[Mairead]

42. "Rightwingers push back hard on the slightest of perceived threats"

Exactly!! Their resistance is ALWAYS at the 100% level. It's a standard bullying tactic ('jeez, if they're this bad now, what would they be like if we really opposed them--the lunatics might set off an atomic bomb!')

It's a way to keep us quiet and docile.

The Hitler comparison is valid and it needs to be repeated and repeated and repeated until even people who're totally out of touch with politics can quote the details by heart.

[ParanoidPat]

15. Bush* is NOT a nazi....

....so stop saying that! :evilgrin:

[Woodstock]

83. Good one!

:)

[Individualist]

18. Send him some knee pads nt

[Woodstock]

84. He's got knee pads permanently attached

Gets them replaced every week after his ineffective groveling.

[otohara]

20. Dean & Bin Laden are OK Though

asshole mediawhores

[thebigidea]

24. Silly, Terry - totalitarians are for kids! Bush is BETTER than hitler.

http://www.terminalproduct.com/betterthanhitler.rm

[buycitgo]

26. but, better than Perle?

how bout a 'Perle's before swine' ditty?

still waiting for the sphinc-eye, btw

you could use this for a template....hardly any rejiggering needed at all

[calimary]

41. Hey - cool dart board cover!

Looks like somebody already got one eye.

[jobycom]

27. Does anyone remember how the conservatives took over in the first place?

It was by calling us communists, and much worse. It was by portraying us as friends of the Viet Cong, and of the Soviet Union, so often that people began to accept it. At first they didn't, but after hearing it repeated, they began to believe it.

Unlike those charges, ours our true. Bush is Hitler. Bush is a mass murdering genocidal sociopath. If we don't say it, people will never hear it, never see it. If we do, we will be ridiculed by many, but people will start listening, if only to prove us wrong. Then we will begin to change minds. Someone give me the Ghandi quote again about how first they silence us, then they beat us, then we win.

We don't win if we don't fight.

[OneBlueSky]

29. what makes the comparison so absurd . . .

is that Bush isn't smart enough to be a Hitler . . .

[mrdmk]

57. Here, here

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[DicklessCheney]

39. The so-called "MoveOn ads" are true...

Notice how EVERYONE, even many Democrats, freaked out? These adds illustrate associations that are poisonous not only to Bush but the entire corporate/government establishment.

My guess is that our next Democratic President will not do things much differently. Dean (apparently) wants to maintain the bloated military, and Clark -- well, Clark is a General.

Brace yourself : fear is the New American Identity. Fascism is rampant. Both parties are infected with it.

The big secret is that we can end terrorism, world hunger, and establish world peace whenever we want.

Orwell was off by 20 years. 2004 is the Scared New World.

[Mairead]

51. Well said! *Very* well said!

Both parties are up to their oxters in it. We need to either take back the Democratic Party right now or abandon it as being the SlightlyLeftCaucus of the Corporate Party.

As the Labor Party organisers asked: the ruling class has two parties--shouldn't we have one too?

[w4rma]

43. He had better have explained that the ad was an ENTRY into a contest

that MoveOn is having right now. And was *never* the ad that would have been aired. It most likely wouldn't have made it to the finals even if the ad wasn't pulled from the contest.

Unfortunately, I fully expect that he didn't do his research beforehand to say all of that, and probably just apologized in a way that helped demonize MoveOn.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SoCalDem]

49. Note to Terry.... SHUT UP...SHUT UP...SHUT UP...

I wish everyone would see this for what it is.. It's false righteous indignation.. It's phony.. They are not "upset" by the damned videos.. It's just another thing to get our sao-called leaders to grovel at their feet and apologize.. It worked with BC, and they will just keep trying it..

I can't help but think that all BC needed to do was to say.. "Big deal, I'm a cheating husband.. My poor wife did not deserve this, but hey..I did it..so what?"..and then refuse to answer anymore questions..

The fact that "some" dems think that * is acting like a pre-war Hitler, does not mean that everyone does, so why should everyone within earshot be forced to apologize??

"Lots" of republicans are bigots and racists.. do we require that every republican apologize for THAT every time they are near a microphone??

Did we make Jesse Helms get down on his wrinkley old knees and apologize for insinuating that Clinton would be assassinated if he stepped foot in his state?? Did we make every republican apologize for his stupid remarks??

Enough already...

[BackDoorMan]

50. Absolutely!

[OneTwentyoNine]

73. Yep,but the sun will probably burn out...

Before most Dems get the balls to stand up for what they think. Oh sure,they'll spout it from time to time and then get all shaky knee's when called on the carpet.

TM could have easily said that he didn't agree 100% with the Hitler compare but I'M NOT GOING TO APOlOGIZE TO ANYONE and neither is the Democratic party. Gawd what pussy's we have that are supposedly OUR leaders. Get some BALLS boys or just fold the Democratic party and go FUCKING HOME!

David

[tom_paine]

74. Exactly, SoCalDem!

Once again, our craven Democratic Leadership bows and caves to another contrived Bushevik Party-Loyal Right-Wing Sub-Media ploy.

Comapring Bush to Hitler is NOT a plank of the Democratic Party, but craven apologies like MacAuliffe's make it seem so and lends credence to Bushevik lies.

And of course, I'm sure Terry wouldn;t have had the sand to bring up the FemiNazis meme or the Hitlery bit.

Of course, we didn't have a Party-Loyal Sub-media to trumpet these things and innoculate them into the mainstream press. As a result, the customary Imperial/Orwellian Double-Standard exists.

Bushevik Congressemn and Reps can say whatever they like (almost, it seems like it still get publicized when they make overtly racist comments like Trent Lott, but not even always then and not for ANYTHING ELSE).

Let Saxby Chambliss compare Max Cleland to Osama Bin Laden and what does Terry have to say?

NOTHING!

[Lars39]

53. Why is Terry decrying an attack on Bush, when Zell Miller is

still in the party endorsing Bush?

[Granite]

55. Terry and the rest of the DNC

should just remain silent on this whole ad-thing. This wasn't an ad sponsored by the DNC, so it shouldn't warrant any response from the DNC. Has the RNC denounced freeper characterizations of HRC as "Hitlery" or Limbaugh's use of the term "feminazi"? Why do we feel we must kow-tow and denounce things that have nothing to do (officially) with the Democratic Party? This was an open contest for God's-sake.

MoveOn.org has really gotten the Repubs all hot and bothered, and rather than play into their hands, the DNC should just shut the hell up and let them rant and rave and talk to themselves.

[Woodstock]

86. Definitely - moveon = grassroots dems & that scares the hell out of them

McAullife and all the DINO's can kiss my

:kick:

[Ksec]

58. can you say sell out?

[PaDUer]

61. That's right...

Boot his ass out along w/ *..They've sold OUT the people, now he thinks it's a joke..he's no better than *...If he doesn't like it, he doesn't have to watch it and he can park his lame butt HOME when the convention is taking place.

[Ksec]

59. They had no problem calling Dachle a saddam or Hillary Hitlery

I say we give them a taste of there own medicine. The reason they jumped all over the Hitler comparisons is because they know his style closely resembles Hitlers early style of governing .We need balls in this party. Not pantywaists

[mrdmk]

60. Did Gore say about the 2000 election

He was too nice about it. That he moderated his demeanor and his views and that was the reason he had lost.

[rustydog]

70. McAuliffe needs to check into the nearest hospital

and have a set of balls surgically implanted.
While he is at it, there might be a special on spinal implants.

[GreenPartyVoter]

75. DLC is despicable

EOM

[TheDalaiMama]

78. Who cares what Terry says? I liked those ads...and agree with them

Rove started the whole Hitler thing with his comparison of a nazi rally at the NYC ball game after 9-11. So he must agree too.

dalai

[TheDalaiMama]

79. Terry should use this quote when asked about the Hitler videos.

ROVE THOUGHT POST-9/11 WORLD SERIES GAME LIKE NAZI RALLY

"The president emerged wearing a New York Fire Department windbreaker. He raised his arm and gave a thumbs-up to the crowd on the third base side of the field. Probably 15,000 fans threw their arms in the air imitating the motion.

He then threw a strike from the rubber, and the stadium erupted. Watching from owner George Steinbrenner’s box, Karl Rove thought, It’s like being at a Nazi rally." (p. 277)


From Woodwards book.

[Woodstock]

80. McAuliffe has long been an ineffective flop

He doesn't represent me.

After election 2002, he should have been HISTORY.

He's probably going to drag on the "Democrats Tear Each Other Apart in the Colliseum" open season to the day of the convention, and if he does, we are doomed. I sure hope the primaries are definitive, because we can't count on McAuliffe to do squat to unite the party.

[randr]

87. He must be kissing up for a post over at the Repugs

[MacCovern]

91. Not a fan of McAuliffe's, but he was right on this one

He must have been on Engram's radio program to appeal to any
type of independent voter that was listening to assure them
that the Bush/Hitler comparison is not something the typical
Democrat believes.

Wish Dick could think of some other constructive things to do.