Clinton Allies Suppress the Vote in Nevada

[one...two...tree 2,762]

or maybe it's these chickens coming home to roost........

Seriously, I'm no fan of Hillary, but placing the hammer and sickle next to her name or face would be as offensive as placing the swastika next to Bush's. I'm not personally offended by it, but it is no better than the Hitler/Bush comparisons. I'm just saying this because if you're okay with doing so, then all protests and outrage over Nazi Bush posters and such have just been nullified.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

or maybe it's these chickens coming home to roost........

Seriously, I'm no fan of Hillary, but placing the hammer and sickle next to her name or face would be as offensive as placing the swastika next to Bush's. I'm not personally offended by it, but it is no better than the Hitler/Bush comparisons. I'm just saying this because if you're okay with doing so, then all protests and outrage over Nazi Bush posters and such have just been nullified.

i didn't make the picture

but your outrage has been duly noted

eta: you might wish to read karl marx to understand the significance of the hammer and sickle........

Edited January 16, 2008 by charlesandnessa

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And besides, Hillary did say "We're gonna take things away from you on behalf of the common good"... so the communist designation isn't inaccurate. AFAIK Bush has never advocated gassing the Jews.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

And besides, Hillary did say "We're gonna take things away from you on behalf of the common good"... so the communist designation isn't inaccurate. AFAIK Bush has never advocated gassing the Jews.

How many Jews were killed by Stalin? Think about it.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

And besides, Hillary did say "We're gonna take things away from you on behalf of the common good"... so the communist designation isn't inaccurate. AFAIK Bush has never advocated gassing the Jews.

How many Jews were killed by Stalin? Think about it.

the hammer and sickle is synonymous with stalin?

stalin killed lots of people, not just jews. he was an equal opportunity mass murderer.

how that reading of the communist manifesto going? come across that similar phrase yet?

eta: this is, btw, about the 4th time i've posted that particular pic in vj. why is this just now becoming an issue?

Edited January 16, 2008 by charlesandnessa

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And besides, Hillary did say "We're gonna take things away from you on behalf of the common good"... so the communist designation isn't inaccurate. AFAIK Bush has never advocated gassing the Jews.

I dunno - if you take it out of context Bush's "you're either with us or against us" thing takes on an ugly color.

Seriously - I don't think a hardcore communist would rake in too many campaign contributions, since the communist position is completely opposed to the interests of major political contributors.

I couldn't find the whole speech Hillary made - but this adds a bit of context to it. Hardly has the same general meaning that has been applied to the statement subsequently.

Addressing a Democratic fund-raiser yesterday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told wealthy supporters the government will need to take money away from them for the "common good."

Clinton headlined an appearance with other women Democratic senators in San Francisco, where donors gave as much as $10,000 to California Sen. Barbara Boxer's campaign.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=39205

Edited January 16, 2008 by Number 6

[one...two...tree 2,762]

And besides, Hillary did say "We're gonna take things away from you on behalf of the common good"... so the communist designation isn't inaccurate. AFAIK Bush has never advocated gassing the Jews.

How many Jews were killed by Stalin? Think about it.

the hammer and sickle is synonymous with stalin?

stalin killed lots of people, not just jews. he was an equal opportunity mass murderer.

how that reading of the communist manifesto going? come across that similar phrase yet?

eta: this is, btw, about the 4th time i've posted that particular pic in vj. why is this just now becoming an issue?

So associating Hillary with Communist Russia isn't as bad as comparing Bush to Nazi Germany because Bush never gassed Jews? Interesting.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Hitler gassed Jews so such reference is deplorable. Stalin killed millions of Jews himself, but making a reference between Hillary and Communist Russia is not bad. Hmmmm....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hitler gassed Jews so such reference is deplorable. Stalin killed millions of Jews himself, but making a reference between Hillary and Communist Russia is not bad. Hmmmm....

Wow you can get that Bush thing on a T-Shirt?

One thing I never understood is why its acceptable to wear a T-shirt with a hammer and sickle on the front, but if you do the same with a Swastika you'll be lucky if people only spit in your face.

Probably because the Nazi Holocaust was the focus of huge media interest, while Stalin's atrocities which took place during the war and in subsequent years were essentially done on the quiet behind the iron curtain. Pictures showing piles of starved corpses are easier to identify with and be shocked by than statistics on declassified documents and in history books - relating to comparable or worse atrocities.

Edited January 16, 2008 by Number 6

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Hitler gassed Jews so such reference is deplorable. Stalin killed millions of Jews himself, but making a reference between Hillary and Communist Russia is not bad. Hmmmm....

Wow you can get that Bush thing on a T-Shirt?

One thing I never understood is why its acceptable to wear a T-shirt with a hammer and sickle on the front, but if you do the same with a Swastika you'll be lucky if people only spit in your face.

Probably because the Nazi Holocaust was the focus of huge media interest, while Stalin's atrocities which took place during the war and in subsequent years were essentially done on the quiet behind the iron curtain. Pictures showing piles of starved corpses are easier to identify with and be shocked by than statistics on declassified documents and in history books - relating to comparable or worse atrocities.

Also, perhaps because Communist Russia survived WWII and has several reference points...which is worth pointing out. Because someone can make legitimate comparisons to Bush and the Nazi's without implying that he would go as far as gassing Jews.

I just think it's farcical to one-hand, condemn some historical references while making an excuse to use others.

Edited January 16, 2008 by Mister Fancypants

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hitler gassed Jews so such reference is deplorable. Stalin killed millions of Jews himself, but making a reference between Hillary and Communist Russia is not bad. Hmmmm....

Wow you can get that Bush thing on a T-Shirt?

One thing I never understood is why its acceptable to wear a T-shirt with a hammer and sickle on the front, but if you do the same with a Swastika you'll be lucky if people only spit in your face.

Probably because the Nazi Holocaust was the focus of huge media interest, while Stalin's atrocities which took place during the war and in subsequent years were essentially done on the quiet behind the iron curtain. Pictures showing piles of starved corpses are easier to identify with and be shocked by than statistics on declassified documents and in history books - relating to comparable or worse atrocities.

Also, perhaps because Communist Russia survived WWII and has several reference points...which is worth pointing out. Because someone can make legitimate comparisons to Bush and the Nazi's without implying that he would go as far as gassing Jews.

I just think it's farcical to one-hand, condemn some historical references while making an excuse to use others.

Both the Nazi/Communist labels are so overused as to become meaningless - or at least entirely divorced from their original meanings. The realm of cartoon bad guys...

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Hitler gassed Jews so such reference is deplorable. Stalin killed millions of Jews himself, but making a reference between Hillary and Communist Russia is not bad. Hmmmm....

how quaint. happy now?

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

You don't even have to get all the way to communism to get the oppression. You only need to go down the road to communism's little brother socialism to destroy freedom. Because government must force people to do things that they would not normally do to enforce socialism.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You don't even have to get all the way to communism to get the oppression. You only need to go down the road to communism's little brother socialism to destroy freedom. Because government must force people to do things that they would not normally do to enforce socialism.

I think there has to be at least some middle way between "oppression" and neglect. There are few clearly defined, outright positions these days - there's a little socialism, a little privatisation and free market capitalism. The balance fluctuates back and forth on certain issues, but overall little changes. Isn't that what people are supposedly hoping for from this election - a move away from the status quo?

So far there's a lot of rhetoric - whether any of the candidates can deliver on that is the real question. Unfortunately, people have more experience with, and little reason to have faith in politicians than to expect them to actually follow through on their promises..

Edited January 16, 2008 by Number 6

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

You don't even have to get all the way to communism to get the oppression. You only need to go down the road to communism's little brother socialism to destroy freedom. Because government must force people to do things that they would not normally do to enforce socialism.

I think there has to be at least some middle way between "oppression" and neglect. There are few clearly defined, outright positions these days - there's a little socialism, a little privatisation and free market capitalism. The balance fluctuates back and forth on certain issues, but little seems to change. Isn't that what people are supposedly hoping for from this election?

I don't hope for the change that is being talked about lately. This country thrives when the government stays out of the way. That is how we have become the most prosperous nation this world has ever known in a mere 200 years. A blink in the eye of some countries. The constitution limits the power of the federal government to the things enumerated in the constitution. It's not the power, but the limit of the power that creates our success. The change that is being proposed oversteps the constitution and threatens our future.