Did anyone see F 9-11 yet..?

[FlaSoxxJim]

why should the bush campaign stop that commercial???...all they are doing is taking clips from leading dems and moveon.org has said about the president..comparing the US to nazi germany...and then end it by saying this not the time for pessimism but for strong leadership..

 

if you take offense to that commercial then the blame lies with gore, moore ,kerry , dean , and moveon...not the republicans..

 

 

i'd play that commercial everywhere i could

Baggio, I don't take particular offense at the campaign. I find it humorous because it ain't fooling anyone.

 

But you seem to have missed a critically important distinction. The clip that appeared on MoveOn was NOT MADE BY THEM, NOT PRODUCED WITH CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and was a CONTEST ENTRY from a PRIVATE CITIZEN.

 

The Bush Internet campaign WAS PRODUCED BY THE BUSH REELECTION TEAM WITH GOP CAMPAIGN MONEY, and is NOT a mere rant from a private citizen.

 

You do see the difference, right?

 

Oh, and where the contest entry merely resided on the MoveOn site for a time, the Bush campaign ad is being actively emailed to thousands of people.

[kapkomet]

I don't know if I said this here or not, but.

 

I of course haven't seen the film, as I stated, I would like to but I am not going to spend money on it. I'll see it before the election I am sure.

 

The reason we went into Iraq is we had to get the economy going. Anytime there is a war, the government has to spend money on it, therein turning money through the economy and making it grow. War makes money. Take defense spending out of all these "GREAT ECONOMIC NUMBERS" and see what you're left with.

 

For all you "blind Bush supporters", think about that. I DO support Bush more then I do Kerry, that's obvious, but see the other side too. I could expand on the above paragraph for hours and point out a lot more things behind it, but time I do not have right now, but the thought is definitely true.

[aboz56]

I wouldn't go see this if you gave me free admission and a 100 dollars for popcorn money....

 

:fyou Michael Moore

[Confederate_48]

Im with aboz completely

[kapkomet]

Aboz, and Confed, do you listen to talk radio much?

[DBAHO]

Aboz, and Confed, do you listen to talk radio much?

Or read any of Michael Moore's books?

[1549]

Hoping to see the movie tonight. I don't agree with many of Moore's arguments, but his movies are entertaining.

 

I am hoping Moore put as much humor into this one as he did in bowling for columbine. The only part I did not like was the charlton heston scene. I was actually hoping heston would smack moore across the face.

[baggio202]

Baggio, I don't take particular offense at the campaign. I find it humorous because it ain't fooling anyone.

 

But you seem to have missed a critically important distinction.  The clip that appeared on MoveOn was NOT MADE BY THEM, NOT PRODUCED WITH CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and was a CONTEST ENTRY from a PRIVATE CITIZEN.

 

The Bush Internet campaign WAS PRODUCED BY THE BUSH REELECTION TEAM WITH GOP CAMPAIGN MONEY, and is NOT a mere rant from a private citizen.

 

You do see the difference, right?

 

Oh, and where the contest entry merely resided on the MoveOn site for a time, the Bush campaign ad is being actively emailed to thousands of people.

the fact is moveon.org ran that commercial on their website...do they not screen it first??..the ran a contest where they asked people to come up with the best anti-bush commercials..by asking for it and then running it on their website they are in fact endorsing it... now that the president is using it for his advantage you want to cry foul?????

 

if that commercial came to moveon.org and they saw it and said it wasnt within the bounds of good taste and decided not to run it and the bush campaign got a hold of it and ran it in their ads tieing it into moveon.org then there would be a problem...but once they ran that ad in their contest its fair game...

 

 

here is the disclaimer at the beginning of the commercial

 

"the following video contains remarks made by and images from ads sponsored by kerry supporters".....kerry supporters...that includes private citizens does it not???

 

"john kerry has denounced our use of these ads attacking the president...he has not denounced the support of al gore , george soros , and many others who have made speeches comparing the president to adolph hitler"

 

then it goes on to show speeches by kerry , gephardt and such while also showing the hitler ad...and everytime the hitler ad runs it says sponspred by moveon.org...

 

is this the commercial in the best taste???....probably not...but the dems have been hardball comparing bush to hitler...he's just fighting back imo...

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Moore is traditionally known for stretching a few things to fit his agenda, just like any politician/political writer/radio host these days. For conservatives, Justin Raimondo wrote a review of F 9/11 that I thought was fairly intriguing.

 

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2891

 

 

And Baggio, not all members of MoveOn.org are Kerry supporters. I'm a member of MoveOn and do not support Kerry. His policies are the exact same as Bush and the neo-conservatives (voted for NCLB, voted for PATRIOT Act, etc.)

 

There are a lot of parallels with the ideals of fascist regimes that have come into play at the end years of the Clinton administration that were only strengthened by the Bush administration. In fact, there was a study done of previous fascist governments and the key parts they all shared in common. Here is the list of 14.

 

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

 

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

 

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the peoples attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choicerelentless propaganda and disinformationwere usually effective. Often the regimes would incite spontaneous acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and terrorists. Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

 

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

 

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

 

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes excesses.

 

7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting national security, and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

 

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elites behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the godless. A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

 

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of have-not citizens.

 

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

 

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

 

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. Normal and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or traitors was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

 

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

 

14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

 

Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.

 

--

Let's face it. Bush and Kerry are both softheaded tits who are dangerously incompetent to the task of protecting America. It says something about our country when the two best people we can find to run it are an ex-alcoholic ex-coke addict billionaire & a multi-millionaire who skis at Aspen saying he knows the plight of common people. We deserve better.

[1549]

We deserve better.

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

We'll just debate this in circles so there's no point.

 

You've seen the "opinions expressed here are not necessarily the views..." disclaimer on talkshows, websites, etc. My spewing of my tofu-eating, Birkenstock-wearing, soul-damning leftist liberal ideas on this site does not constitute endorsement or agreements of these ideas by management, only that they condone free expression. There is a difference between a contest submission by an individual and an official campaign piece approved of by the campaign and its candidate.

 

If we get to the point of case-by-case debating who more closely resembles the nascent Nazi Party (years prior to 1938) in words, deeds, and ideology – the Bush II Administration with all the attendant PNACers firmly entrenched or a prospective Kerry administration or any past Democratic administration - it would be an interesting discussion. Very one-sided to be sure, but interesting.

[1549]

We'll just debate this in circles so there's no point.

 

You've seen the "opinions expressed here are not necessarily the views..." disclaimer on talkshows, websites, etc.  My spewing of my tofu-eating, Birkenstock-wearing, soul-damning leftist liberal ideas on this site does not constitute endorsement or agreements of these ideas by management, only that they condone free expression.  There is a difference between a contest submission by an individual and an official campaign piece approved of by the campaign and its candidate.

 

If we get to the point of case-by-case debating who more closely resembles the nascent Nazi Party (years prior to 1938) in words, deeds, and ideology – the Bush II Administration with all the attendant PNACers firmly entrenched or a prospective Kerry administration or any past Democratic administration - it would be an interesting discussion.  Very one-sided to be sure, but interesting.

FlaSoxx I hope you are prepared to do som reading, I think you may have opened a can of worms.

 

It would be very simple that the supporters of the Patriot Acts and other restrictive acts resemble the pre-1938 Nazi party. However, Democrats can also be compared to the Nazi party.

 

Anyone who says that the Republican party is like the nazi's should keep in mind that the Nazis were a workers party looking for more jobs and rights for the industrial worker. So if someone says the republican party is more closely related to the nazi's, I could fire back that it is the democrats who would be more likely to breed supporters for a young charismatic leader who has created a scapegoat for the struggling economy, and wants industrial labor to succeed.

 

The democrats on this board like to stereotype Republicans as wealthy tycoons, who only care about preserving their fortunes. If the stereotype is correct, then the republicans would NEVER support a party like the Nazi party...afterall, the Nazi's are the proletariat of the world, their own misfortune and poverty ended up causing millions of jews to die. The few rich German tycoons didn't put Hitler in office. So if the republican stereotype is correct, than we all better keep an eye on the proletariat of america...they may be plotting.

 

Both parties, classify, make symbolizations, and dehumanize the american people. The 8 stages of genocide the nazi's began as early as 1933:

1-Classify

2-Symbolize

3-Dehumanize

4-Organization

5-Polarization

6-Preparation

7-Extermination

8-Denial

 

FlaSoxx- When you say it is one sided, I assume you mean people would quickly point to the republicans. While both you and I know that either way the arguments would be reaching for similarities to the Nazi party, I hope my arguments were clear enough to show that you could make a fair and equal argument that both could be equally compared to the early Nazi party.

 

In the end...neither party resembles the nazis.

[1549]

Ooops, I thought of another similarity.

 

This "I believe in America" stuff Kerry keeps spewing sounds like the german nationalism rhetoric that helped get Hitler into office.

 

Again, to find similarities in this argument you really have to reach.

[FlaSoxxJim]

FlaSoxx I hope you are prepared to do som reading, I think you may have opened a can of worms.

It would be good reading to do, and truth to tell I'd be more interested in reading others people's takes on it than doing much writing or active research on the subject. Don't know if anyone will bite, but I'd go along for the ride.

 

your quick points are well taken, except that the leaders of the Nazi party in it's heyday didn't walk it like they talked it either. For being the party of the worker, they were decadant, hedonistic, lap of luxury priveleged people.

 

But again, your point is well taken. The point can be debated both ways, and for now it is a stretch to try to equate either party to the Nazis. Lead arguments for the GOP would be attack on personal liberties and suppression of free speech, Imperialistic leanings, America first without regard to consequnces, and near-official backing of a state religion.

[kapkomet]

It really scares me the way these so-called politicans, I don't care what party you're from, are taking this country. The rich get fatter, democrat or republican. I guess it really bugs me when I hear Hillary say (paraphrasing) in front of her party faithful, that they are all going to pay more in taxes so the wealth can be redistributed. Since when does our government owe that to us?

 

We are becoming a more socialized state in many respects. Nationalism runs rampant here, because by God, we're Americans, and God mandated us to be what we are today (cough, cough). I hear that a lot on right-wing talk shows and it makes me want to vomit. :puke :puke (there I feel better).

 

To take us down the path of creating a bigger government where they have more control, just scares me, and with Patriot Act, etc. that is the direction we are heading. Then, to push it on other countries, ie Iraq, shows us as rather arrogant, me thinks. That's the seeds that can be comared to empires, and they all fall down at some point.

[Steff]

Saw it tonight. Liked it a lot. Of course some of it was fan fair.. but it was informative, and entertaining.

[Cerbaho-WG]

I think you spelled Limbaugh wrong.

Absolutely f***ing demolished.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Whomever compared Hitler to Bush, and whoever believes it, scare me honestly...

 

I mean come on, Hitler was 50 times the public speaker W is

 

That really shouldn't be green, Hitler was probably one of the best public speakers in all of history. Just listening to him during a speech can send shivers down his spine. He sold his message of German nationalism and anti-Semitism extremely well, did wonders for the German economy by building up the German war machine, and...then f***ed up big time.

[kapkomet]

And some would say that Bush is taking us down the same path, without the public speaking skills, of course.

[1549]

Saw F 9-11 last night. It was very well made, I enjoyed watching. While listening to Moore's arguments, I did not lose sight of where those arguments are coming from. Moore was very effective and made bush look like the worst president we have ever had(with the exception of Buchanan)...now the question is how far did moore stretch the truth?

[cwsox]

The democrats on this board like to stereotype Republicans as wealthy tycoons, who only care about preserving their fortunes.  If the stereotype is correct, then the republicans would NEVER support a party like the Nazi party...afterall, the Nazi's are the proletariat of the world, their own misfortune and poverty ended up causing millions of jews to die. The few rich German tycoons didn't put Hitler in office.  So if the republican stereotype is correct, than we all better keep an eye on the proletariat of america...they may be plotting.

 

<clip>

 

In the end...neither party resembles the nazis.

My UM friend, I find much value in much of what you post, including politically but today I must differ on this post in great part but agree at the end.

 

I dispute your characterization of what Democrats on this board say, I have never seen a post akin to what you state nor even get a sense of that. Please beware of setting up your straw arguments:

 

let me stereoype others so that I can accuse them of stereotyping and then knock their presumed argument down.

 

I also dispute that the Nazis were the party of the working class, the proletariat as you term it. Far from it. Totally opposite. Hitler hijacked the political party and used its name and turned it into something other. The proletariat of Wiemar Germany was indeed tending towards the socialist camp. The Nazi party had nothing to do with socialism or workers, despite the hijacked name. The Nazi's base included many of Germany's wealthiest industrialists (who were as a whoie antiSemitic) as well as tapping into a deep well of wounded nationalism, retired military, and antiSemitism. The indistrialists got their inital payback with the militarization of the Rhineland, the first of many ways that Hitler paid back the wealthiest industrialists for their long standing support from the mid 1920s on.

 

Major corporations and industries fared very well under Hitler, which is why many supported him early on, and earned him admirers from the capitalist/ruling class such as Henry Ford and England's King Edward VIII (and history be praised he renounced the throne for Wallis Simpson; the man was a Nazi sympathizer and that is why Churchhill and George VI shipped Edward off to Bermuda during WW2 to get him far away from London and Europe where he had been known to pass along state secrets to the Nazis).

 

So far from being a working class or proletatriat guy, Hitler (who never labored a day in his life and knew where the money was) was always the capitalists great friend and that is from where he drew support, succor, financial backing, and legitimatization. Never from the workers.

 

Trade unionists, labor organizers, labor, working class leaders were among the first to go into Dachau from 1933 on. Hitler was a sworn enemy of the working class/labor/trade unionists - the prolartariat, who were the antepenultimate opponents of Hitler in the days before Hitler became chancellor and in the years following, the others being the Jewish community and that part of the German protestant chuch bodies who formed the Confessing Church in 1933-1934 with the Barmen Declaration (i.e. Barth, Niemoeller, Bonhoeffer, etc.)

 

As for your last statement: I have been a student of that period for almost all of my life. The issue of Holocaust is central to my doing theology. In part, my concern has been to be aware if signs of incipient Nazisism arose again. There is much I profoundly disagree with, as you know, regarding the Bush brand of Republicanism and this administration, much that deeply disturbs me as an American on constitutional and its core root meaning politcal terms. I think a diasterous course has been set by those in office now that will lead to the destruction or dimunination of this country which I love. There are some real fascist streaks in the Patriot Act (and fascism does not equal Nazis). There are facile similarties that one can suggest between some things and other things with the current adminsitration.

 

But, as you wisely say, In the end...neither party resembles the nazis.

[WSoxShuf]

I saw it last night, and found it to be wonderful.

 

It is sad how true moore is on his concept of our current state of government. Bush is a moron, and this country is basically ran by his father's old staff and friends. I hope this movie convinces the younger crowds to vote Democrat.

 

unfortunately, the Dems have a pretty boring candidate,and need an African American or Women Vice President to push them over the edge.

 

 

Our Current President's intelligence = Petrified Dinosaur Poop

[kapkomet]

There are some real fascist streaks in the Patriot Act (and fascism does not equal Nazis).  There are facile similarties that one can suggest between some things and other things with the current adminsitration.

 

But, as you wisely say, In the end...neither party resembles the nazis.

That part I agree with, but you can't pin the blame solely on this Administration. Congress voted for it as well, the blame lies with the entire government. One John Kerry voted FOR this measure.

 

That's why I have real issues with our government in general, all of them, because as Apu has stated so many times in the last couple of weeks, they are all in the pockets of the same people at the end of it all, and it's sad, because us common folks mean virtually nothing.

[CubsSuck1]

Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.

Winston Churchill, Sir (1874-1965)

[baggio202]

I saw it last night, and found it to be wonderful.

 

It is sad how true moore is on his concept of our current state of government.  Bush is a moron, and this country is basically ran by his father's old staff and friends.  I hope this movie convinces the younger crowds to vote Democrat.

 

unfortunately, the Dems have a pretty boring candidate,and need an African American or Women Vice President to push them over the edge.

 

 

Our Current President's intelligence = Petrified Dinosaur Poop

two scenarios here....will john kerry pick hillary as his VP...gaurenteeing a dem victory

 

will president bush change VP and convince powell to run..gaurenteeing a GOP victory..

 

if both scenarios happen we'd have voter turnout like you wouldnt believe