Monday, June 25, 2007

George Bush: Worse than Hitler

So argues a former Seinfeld writer and contributor to the Huffington Post:

You could argue that even the world's worst fascist dictators at least meant well. They honestly thought were doing good things for their countries by suppressing blacks/eliminating Jews/eradicating free enterprise/repressing individual thought/killing off rivals/invading neighbors, etc. Only the Saudi royal family is driven by the same motives as Bush, but they were already entrenched. Bush set a new precedent. He came into office with the attitude of "I'm so tired of the public good. What about my good? What about my rich friends' good?"

How can anyone not see it? It's not that their policies have been misguided or haven't played out right. They. Don't. Even. Mean. Well.

If a Democrat is elected President in 2008, don't be surprised to hear lamentations from the same Leftists about the poisonous atmosphere and the attempts on the right to demonize Democrats.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

So Hitler's still the ultimate yardstick by which to measure modernday, evil dictators by. Fine.
But when and where did Bush become worse than, say, Stalin, Mao, Castro and even Chavez? This was never mentioned by anyone anywhere. Why didn't the ever-vigilant Thinkers raise any flags sooner?
"Uhoh! Bush kicked a dog. Thats worse than anything Stalin ever did. He's bound to surpass Mao next!"