Two thoughts colliding - Liberals are Terrorists and Don't Change Horses

[zbdent]

Okay, since Hannity, along with others, tries to paint anybody left of Rush as being worse than the terrorists (ergo linking any non-RW thought to Osama), that should allow us to make certain comparisons without being accused of inflammatory stretching.

We are inundated with the concept - "Well, we are at war. We cannot switch horses in the middle of the stream, it will be a sign of weakness."

My point - when someone confronts us with the "no switching horses" idea of the election, can't we just smugly turn back to them and say "Yeah, well the people of Germany probably thought that they shouldn't switch leaders in the middle of a war either."

Face it folks, it's like the early 30s. Hitler did not start his reign of Nazism with September 1 1939.

[bobbieinok]

1. 9-1 1939 Hitler invaded Poland

end of Jan 1933 - Hitler named chancellor

Richstag Fire

bookburnings

Night of the Long Knives - 1934

Kristallnacht 11-9-38

[zbdent]

5. Exactly

I remember Rush Limbaugh, mere weeks after W was inaugurated, saying something to the effect of:

"The liberals would have had you believe that we would have concentration camps, shred the constitution, ruined the environment, and " yadda yadda yadda.

Well, we have Gitmo, a putsch for a constitutional amendment, etc.

The real push will come if Bush is re-elected. Guess they'll try to revoke that amendment which the Repubs pushed through so that the US could never have another four-termer like FDR.

[tjwash]

2. Who cares what Hannity thinks.

His listeners would vote for B* if he wrapped a baby in a flag and set it on fire on faux news. What we need to do is strongly and personally confront our non voting, moderate, independent and republican-lite families and friends, with the steady repetitive beat that a win for Bush in November will help them further entrench their Right-wing control of all branches of government. Screw the rush/hannity crowd, it's THESE people we have to reach.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Brotherjohn]

3. My reply: We shouldn't be in the stream in the first place.

Does that mean we blindly go forward because this horse will not take us anywhere else? Or if another horse arrives to take us on a better course, we should not hop in its saddle? What if there's a raging forest fire on the other side?

Basic reply: "We shouldn't be in the stream in the first place."
Deeper reply: "I would hope you're not suggesting we run the world by catch-phrases."

[Brotherjohn]

7. Not only should we not be in this stream... we're in the wrong country!

[sadiesworld]

4. It's a raging river and the current nag can't make it to shore.

[Adams Wulff]

6. We're in mid-air over the Grand Canyon...

...and the nag is dropping like a rock.
I'm more than willing to hitch a ride on a passing eagle.

[DinahMoeHum]

8. "switching horses in midstream" my ass. It's more like. . .

"changing dicks in the middle of a screw"


Reminds me of an old graffitti I saw on the subway in 1972, regarding Dick Nixon. Very ironic.

"You wouldn't change dicks in the middle of a screw - vote for Nixon in '72"


:evilfrown:

[amber dog democrat]

9. In the Navy

I remember wearing helmet liner that had the following graffiti: Withdrawl is something Nixon's parents should have done 58 years ago.

Yes I remember the Nixon '72 poem... used to quote it myself.

[amber dog democrat]

10. They're at war, I'm not.

I refuse to suscribe to to this insanity. This war is not legitimate and the sooner it unravels, we declare victory and end it, the better. May the rightwing war criminals who foisted this on to the world be damned for it. All the same, yes it could happen here. I don't know if it has YET.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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