It's hard not to look at that as comparing me, and people like me, to Nazi's. Well I'm quiet calm to begin with. This Nazi calling has been going on for over a year, so it's not like it's any new thing. I suppose that's how you can do it and then seem surprised when someone calls you on it. You've just gotten so used to it by now.
The true danger is giving into blind political hatred with ignorance guiding people. When people do so, they are making ignorant claims comparing one person to another. It is unjust and uncalled for. To say that one political position is as bad as the person who killed 12 million people is hyperbole and doesn't solve anything.
By intimidate the Press you mean defend himself against the false stories they are reporting about him? I thought that was your best Hitler comparison. As usual those on the left are completely and willfully blind to the facts that are right under their noses. The Press will be there Frank, they aren't going anywhere. The false journalists who print and push false stories however have a lifespan of a gnat. If you report Trump took out the bust of MLK then you better have your facts straight or else you wont be allowed in the press room anymore. CNN is a disgrace for what they did. Would you object Frank, if I reported that you molested children in the 70s and got away with it? Do you object to that? Its a yes or no.
Only 36.8% of the Germans back in 1932 voted for Hitler and the the Nationalist Socialist. The other 63.2% of the Germans didn't go for Hitler's "hope and change you can believe in." Remember, in Hitler's own words he said he was a liberal <Rule 3>
Not really, Mike. I don't think for a second that MOST of the Germans who participated in getting Hitler into power were Nazis. They mostly were men/women in the street...but people being deluded into thinking the election of someone like Hitler would be a good thing. They were just fooled into thinking that the man would make Germany great again! Truthfully, I am not as surprised by people "calling me" on it...as I am by me doing it. It is not the kind of thing I do. I thought George W. Bush was a terrible choice at the time...and thought Dick Cheney was was an even worse choice. BUT...I would take either of them right now in place of Donald Trump. And back then, I NEVER suggested they were a danger to the Republic...merely that they were not a wise leader choice. Donald Trump is a danger to the Republic. I think you will see his true colors sooner than you think. Perhaps I am wrong, Mike. I hope I am. I would love to eat a murder of crows on this issue.
IF we're pretending that Trump is the reincarnation of Hitler, are we also to accept that the GOP congress are neo-nazis? The GOP holds the majority in both house, and senate, also the majotity of states governors. None of which were seated by electoral votes, as was our president. Do you suggest the majority of US registered voters are neo-nazis? and if so, exactly what can done to change that?
Thank you for your opinion, Kranes. My opinion is that the much greater danger is to ignore danger when it is staring you in the face. I'll continue on this path. You are free to ignore me...or to contest what I say.
No. I mean when he lies to vilify the press for reporting facts...which he counters with more lies. I think it is you who is ignoring facts right under your nose. I hope you are correct. But I suspect Donald Trump and his bund will do their level best to damage it. It was a Time Magazine pool reporter who did it...and he corrected himself almost immediately. Yes, I would object. Because I have never done that. But Donald Trump is objecting to news reports about crowd size...and suggesting that the media falsely reported him excoriating the Intelligence community...when in fact, those news reports are true. He is a liar...and a liar of the Joseph Goebbels type...the guy Adolf Hitler used to destroy the free press of Germany. - - - Updated - - - I'm not sure of your point.
I had the same question, but AA beat me to it. Thanks for answering the question. Frank, nobody wants to inhibit the freedom of the press. In fact, there are numerous examples of the left wanting to inhibit what can be said and what can be printed and what can be said on TV. There are also numerous examples of the press being in the tank for a political side, and when they do that, they sacrifice their credibility. Nobody is taking away their credibility or inhibiting them except themselves, Frank. What's got you worried is that Trump is blunt and plain-speaking, and he is not afraid to criticize them. Other politicians, both R and D, just sort of accept this and don't call it out. But why should we think the press cannot be criticized? Why do we criticize the police when they do wrong things? The answer is because it matters. It is important that the police do right things, not wrong things. And when we criticize the police, what do we hope to accomplish? The answer is that we hope to bring about better behavior by the police in the future. We want police to do their jobs, and we want them to do their jobs right. All we want is the same thing from the press. Any institution that cannot be criticized becomes a problem for us all. The criticism is good. It is not a sign that we are headed for a dictatorship. Nobody wants that, least of all Trump supporters. I think they are all about supporting our constitution and our rights, not taking them away.
I am not suggesting any of that. I am suggesting that I deem Donald Trump to be an existential threat to the Republic...and that a vast majority of his followers are being duped the way a vast majority of Germans in the early 1930's were duped to help Hitler get into power.
Seth...I think the press CAN be criticized...and I think the American press gets more than its fair share of criticism. But what Donald Trump is doing...and what his followers are abetting...goes way beyond that. I think we ought to keep our eyes open on the issue...so I am addressing it.
So you're not calling me a Nazi directly, merely that I support Nazism and voted a Nazi into power? Just remember, you started this entire thread a comparison to Nazism. I didn't overreact and bring it up, you did. And Bill Maher, on his show Friday, said that if he could take that million dollars he donated to Obama in 2012 to keep Mitt Romney out of the White House. and give it to Mitt Romney if he could be President now, he would. Basically, when you call every Republican a Nazi, not because they're Nazi's, but because they're Republican, it really gets hard to take the complaint seriously. But the truth is in 2012 most Democrats, Maher included, did regard Romney as a murdering Nazi. Just as they did with Bush before them. So since no one on your side has apoligized for thinking Romney, McCain, or Bush were Nazi's (Maher got the closest), I don't expect you to eat any crow on this issue 4 or 8 years from now. You'll just go on to calling the next Republican a Nazi.
OK. I voted for Trump solely to ensure a conservative appointment to the SCOTUS, and the dozens of other court vacancies Trump will appoint. I think many Trump voters did exactly as I. Trump hasn't duped me into agreement on trade, taxes, education, defense, or national security. So exactly how will Trump bring the country to ruin single handedly?
Why would most of the MSM be for or against any party? There job is to report news, sell the news for ad money so they can remain in business.
Mike...if you want to think that is what I am doing...think it. I NEVER mentioned Nazism. I mentioned the German people who allowed Hitler to rise to power...the people who were duped into thinking he was going to make Germany great again. I have not called every Republican a Nazi. Get back under control...and deal with what I have actually been saying. Sorry, Mike. I thought you were more than you are. Continue to be deluded.
Not sure he will do it single-handedly...not even sure he will do it. I hoping seriously that he will not get away with what I think he has in mind. If he does, however, I suspect he will have more than enough help...and will more than likely do it the way Hitler did it. - - - Updated - - - Okay...maybe I am wrong. You seem to mind that I am of a different opinion...and that I am acting on my concerns. My question would be: Why?
Right. The press should report news and forget blending politics with news reporting. It's fine to opine in the press, as long as it is openly identified as editorializing. But professional ethics should demand that news reporting be completely unbiased. Now we know that the MSM has not been doing that. And if they get criticized for that, I see that as a good thing. No institution, whether it be the press, the church, the military, etc, etc, etc is above criticism, and that criticism should be used by those institutions to make themselves better. We don't have to fear that we are headed towards a dictatorship just because the president happens to be blunt and plain-spoken. It's different, yes. But a sign that we're going to go all Nazi Germany? No chance. No ... chance. Not a chance in hell.
I deem the 70 democratic lawmakers who contend Trumps presidency is "illigitimate" in direct contradiction to our Republics electoral college, are the real threats ... It's beyond irresponsible, it's beyond reason, and it borders on subversion.
Which statement exactly are you referring to? Lets fact check them one by one. Please post trumps statement in quotes that you claim is a lie.
Actually by 1938 Hitler did make Germany great again while the rest of the world were still trying to recover from the Great Depression. If Hitler hadn't invaded Poland in 1939 that led to France and England to declare war on Germany, Hitler would have over shadowed FDR and would have likely been the most successful world leader during the 20th Century. But deep inside Hitler there was a totalitarian just waiting.
Clearly all sorts of people would prefer to limit freedom of the press to serve their agenda... Or when you say "no one". Are you saying "no one in the trump team wants to limit freedom of the press" Only other people want this... Yes, this is correct But is the point that since others do this it is fine for tump? Or the is the point that others do this but the trump team does not Or perhaps the point is that since others do this, the trump team has immunity from criticism on this issue? Yes, we have to keep in mind that it is virtually impossible to remove bias from reporting Yes, it is true that trump is much more direct in his criticism of the press And it is true that the press does not like it However the criticism of team trump is not just a matter of hurt feelings There are situations where people think that team trump diverges from facts... without supporting evidence. Team trump refers to this as presenting "alternative facts" But when you call something a fact... it should have some tethering to evidence Agreed, the press needs to be criticized But there is a difference between examining press shortcoming Vs, substituting one self serving agenda for another self serving agenda Yes... and imo that was the point of black lives matter Agreed. Criticism of institutions is essential Agreed Although i think, whether valid or not, the concern being expressed is a slippery sloap argument Yes, that is the attitude of trump supporters Just as was also the case with people who supported gw bush. And Nixon supporters also supported the constitution But what those two presidents actually DID was not necessarily in alignment with the ideals of their supporters I seriously doubt that people voted for hitler were consciously choosing to have an all powerful dictator, or to have world war, or to have the holocaust. And THAT is the importance of a press that criticizes our leadership
No. If you are certain, what do you hope to accomplish on a forum. Shouldn't you be out in the real world working to stop it? - - - Updated - - - What about the why part? What reason would they have to be for or against 1 party?
