Time Mag POTY 1938-Hitler 2004-Bush

Micah

Member
http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/2004/story.html
Bush - 2004
http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/archive/photohistory/hitler.html
Hitler - 1938
http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/archive/photohistory/stalin.html
Stalin - 1939 & 1942

Not for nothing though - there have been some great people named POTY, but - it's a mixed bag for sure. In the case of world leaders however - well, you can check out the ratio for yourself.

http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/archive/stories/
Check out the whole list there.

It's a dubious honor.
 
You are not seriously comparing Bush to Stalin or Hitler?
 
holy s***. You guys have been brainwashed. Do you have any idea the atrocities that were committed by Hitler and Stalin? I have been to Dachau (one of the largest concentration camps in Germany) and seen the recorded truth. Show me where Bush has done anything remotely similar.

Do you see Americans in ovens or gas chambers because they have the wrong ideals?

Do you see Americans murdered because the have different politics than the "mother country"?

Wow. Anyone who believes they are alike is either brainwashed or insanely ignorant. If you have any knowledge of history, this is idiotic.

Both Stalin and Hitler were proved by their actions to be insane. Willing to do anything to accomplish their goals, even subduing their own people. Show me the similarities.
 
History is written by the winners.

Yes, I realize that Bush is not at the same level (or anywhere near) Stalin or Hitler. However, he's a headstrong tyrant - with a low IQ, and because he leaned left - he's the "fortunate son".

"it ain't me, it ain't me - I ain't no fortunate son"
 
From m-w.com (merriam-webster)
Main Entry: tyrant
Pronunciation: <tt>'tI-r&nt</tt>
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tirant, from Old French tyran, tyrant, from Latin tyrannus, from Greek tyrannos
1 a : an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution b : a usurper of sovereignty
2 a : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally b : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power

Explain how Bush is a tyrant.
 
I think the argument for Bush being a tyrant is a stretch, but he is on the fascist end of the spectrum which does scare me. I try to find the middleground on everything and I enjoy listening to opinions from right to left. Glyph's opinions here deserve a high level of respect. I know him personally and he is an honest, intelligent, and every policy of the Bush Admin effects him in some ways more than the rest of us. I'm posting this just to get some feedback on it. Some of this doesn't really mesh with where America is, but it seems that most of this is pretty dead on. I'm also trying not to single out Bush individually in current politics as he is really only part of a much larger movement.

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]fascism (n)[/font]
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

2. An extreme form of nationalism that played on fears of communism and rejected individual freedom, liberal individualism, democracy, and limitations on the state.
[/font]​
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3. political philosophy or movement that places the nation or the race above the individual and that stands for highly centralized government led by a dictator; belief in militarism, racism, and nationalism; opposition to democracy and human rights.
[/font]​



[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

6. Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes the media are directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media are indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in wartime, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
[/font]
 
ill throw this one out there too since when it was the big headline in the news i was pretty aggrivated by it but there was no ongoing political thread at the time so i didnt bother starting one.

How about all this crap in the Ukraine? It hurts my head just to think about it.

First of all the big picture that the chaos and virtual collapse of the country all started because they held elections which were very close, and which the incumbent appears to have won amidst widespread suspicion of voter fraud.

First I couldnt believe how similar that sounded to what had just happened in the US. and I was trying to get my head around what the significance was of the acceptance of the results in the US and the way the people in the ukraine basically revolted and said wtfbbq. Did it mean that they appreciated democracy more than americans do, perhaps because they all know very well what it is like to be without it? Or did it mean that america did the right thing by shushing all the corruption nonsense so that the country could churn on without grinding to a halt when it was divided over an issue and unable to determine who the next president would be?

Then as president bush and/or his administration started voicing their opinions in the international forum regarding the debocle in the ukraine and i slammed my head repeatedly into my desk as i wondered how they could think that they were in any position to give advice on a situation they have no handle on in their own country.

discuss amongst yourselves...
 
Bush is a dildo. I hate him and I pray daily for his removal from power and/or life. Maybe if God answers my prayers he'll choose to answer this one.
 
Super Matty P said:
Bush is a dildo. I hate him and I pray daily for his removal from power and/or life. Maybe if God answers my prayers he'll choose to answer this one.
Yeah, only a true Christian would wish and pray for someone's death...
(shrug)
 
Last edited:
slug420 said:
ill throw this one out there too since when it was the big headline in the news i was pretty aggrivated by it but there was no ongoing political thread at the time so i didnt bother starting one.


How about all this crap in the Ukraine? It hurts my head just to think about it.

First of all the big picture that the chaos and virtual collapse of the country all started because they held elections which were very close, and which the incumbent appears to have won amidst widespread suspicion of voter fraud.

First I couldnt believe how similar that sounded to what had just happened in the US. and I was trying to get my head around what the significance was of the acceptance of the results in the US and the way the people in the ukraine basically revolted and said wtfbbq. Did it mean that they appreciated democracy more than americans do, perhaps because they all know very well what it is like to be without it? Or did it mean that america did the right thing by shushing all the corruption nonsense so that the country could churn on without grinding to a halt when it was divided over an issue and unable to determine who the next president would be?

Then as president bush and/or his administration started voicing their opinions in the international forum regarding the debocle in the ukraine and i slammed my head repeatedly into my desk as i wondered how they could think that they were in any position to give advice on a situation they have no handle on in their own country.

discuss amongst yourselves...
This very thought hit me like a ton of bricks, especially since I was born in Ukraine (Kiev to be exact, where the protests were held). Therefore I will be there on January 20th to make my voice heard. I've never protested anything in my life, but this is absolutely something I have to do. http://www.turnyourbackonbush.org
 
GI- said:
The quote had nothing to do with you... Get a clue.
You're a f$^&ing moron GI-, For example, SuperMatty's statement had nothing to do with you either. Yet still you find it necessary to butt-in with a stupid comment like "Yeah, only a true Christian would wish and pray for someone's death" which is just totally stupid and obviously untrue.

Why is it whenever anyone freely expresses their dislike for Bush you try to offer up a flip side, take it out of context and start an argument?

To me, you sound like a stupid opinionated egotist.
 
He took my comment the right way. He was right. It's not "christianly" of me to say I want Bush dead. The funny thing is though that if I said I wanted Osama Bin Laden dead it would be "patriotic".

Thanks Speed for taking up for me but he's half right.
 
SpeedMcheen said:
You're a f$^&ing moron GI-, For example, SuperMatty's statement had nothing to do with you either. Yet still you find it necessary to butt-in with a stupid comment like "Yeah, only a true Christian would wish and pray for someone's death" which is just totally stupid and obviously untrue.

Why is it whenever anyone freely expresses their dislike for Bush you try to offer up a flip side, take it out of context and start an argument?

To me, you sound like a stupid opinionated egotist.
OMG, I said nothing about my presidential views asshole. Read Matty's statement and then my quote and counterpoint and I called him out on being a Christian and wishing for someone's death. How can you defend that?
 
Super Matty P said:
He took my comment the right way. He was right. It's not "christianly" of me to say I want Bush dead. The funny thing is though that if I said I wanted Osama Bin Laden dead it would be "patriotic".

Thanks Speed for taking up for me but he's half right.
Thank you Matty for at least seeing what I was trying to say. I think that someone who is a Christian shouldn't wish death upon anyone (I thought that was the point of forgiveness). That was the only point of my quote and retort of your statement.

Don't turn this around on me, I spouted no political opinions/views on this topic!
 
BTW - I don't think it is "patriotic" to wish Osama Bin Laden dead, but it would be "patriotic" to say you wish he were captured and brought to justice.
 
Back