Why do liberals love to evoke the Nazi moniker in their arguments?
341227
Leading off Ronin's reasonable response (I do speak up, Ronin, whenever I see people undermining our country or demeaning the President, rather than arguing the policies.  Clinton went through it as well, though perhaps not so harshly):\nMany people only listen to what they want to hear.  This kind of isolated learning is dangerous to our country but within their rights.  It's why we prize free speech, letting us hear all sides.  However, that means that certain things get forgotten.\n\nKuwait is attacked by Iraq.\nKuwait asks for help from the U.S. which has oil interests in the region (since when should we sacrifice our own interests on the alter of "World Government"?)\nWe defend Kuwait and drive Iraq over the border.  They continue to attack.\nWe warn them to stop, several times.  They attack us at the border.\nWe drive them back while continuing to find ways to get them to stop the attack.\nIraq agrees to stop and accepts U.N. inspections for KNOWN weapons of mass destruction.  He had them, everyone saw him use them.\nU.S./Iraq have a cease-fire (not PEACE, just a cease-fire.  We are still at war for the entire duration until today).\nIraq lies to the U.N., denies them access repeatedly, misleads them, and claims he still has WMDs to his allies.  The U.N. never does find out what he did with the weapons.  To them, he claims he destroyed the WMDs.  To his allies, he says otherwise.  The world, including many top liberals, believe he has them, including Clinton while in office, and believe the threat must be dealt with.\nAfter nearly a decade of U.N. authority saying, "NOW we REALLY mean it!" to Iraq, and Iraq saying "Sure you do!", the U.S. finally acts to do what the U.N. keeps claiming it will do but never does.  We end the cease-fire.\n\nWe’ve been told we’re Nazis and Bush is Hitler because even the Nazi’s allowed the Red Cross in.\nMillions of Russian prisoners taken by the Nazis on the Eastern front might have been surprised to hear that. \n\nIts been mentioned that Hitler was elected, and had a plan (as has every elected leader of any worth), and thus Bush is like Hitler.\n\nHis stance has been compared to Hitler’s.  A stance almost all politicians take when speaking.\n\nHe’s been accused because he’s bombing brown people (do they mean that brown people commit no terrorist acts or we should bomb some more white people to even things out?)\n\nHe’s been compared to Hitler because he went to war.  Seems that Iraq attacked us first, while we were defending Kuwait.\n\nThey claim that Iraq is a scapegoat.  The same Iraq that tried to assassinate the first President Bush, gassed it’s own people, funded terrorists on national T.V. for attacking Israel with human bombs, and attacked Kuwait, an ally of the U.S.\nWe should have let them do all this?  Whose side are the complainers on?\n\nHe’s been compared to Hitler because Hitler created a pledge, and Bush loves the Pledge we have in America.\n•  Bush likes the pledge.\n•  Bush is a socialist.\n•  Therefore Bush = Hitler.\n A fairly watertight case, I'm sure we can all agree. \n\nSome say they see no difference between the invasion of Poland in 1939 and the invasion of Iraq.\n\nIt’s been pointed out that Bush was elected with a minority of votes, like Hitler (check the numbers in Florida again, folks, final count, he won).  Clinton did the same, has have many U.S. Presidents (all Hitlers?)\n\nHe has been compared to Hitler for using Fear Mongering Tactics (FMTs, as I like to call them).  He’s been totally unreasonable for believing Islamic terrorists for saying outright that they want to destroy us.  How dare he inform of us these things!  How dare he suggest that they want to destroy us just because they say that they do!\n\nBush has been compared to Hitler because he rounded up some people purely because of their ethnicity and religion (they weren’t really firing at our troops, really!) and it has been
637746
I do like them and they are used throughout the net. I especially like the Zionism=Naziism because that bares more truth than anyone wants to acknowledge.\n\n Seems to me that you are ahead of the game considering that you have observed that "NAZIISM" in fact has grown out of Zionsim which only serves the Zionist interest and creates a reason to lend sympathy for these repulsive lying people.\n\n It takes a great deal of insight and intelligence to know that Naziism is the creation of Zionist and not the German people. I bet most people don't even know that Hitlers entire army was Jewish? Thats a fact! Do a search on  "Hitlers Jewish Army" and you will find that it was the Jews alone who allegedly committed the so-called holocaust acts. Well , they fabricated most of them in order that people out of guilt would not question Zionism .\n\n  What will happen whem people realize that Naziism is of  the Zionist? Will when then have to pay reparations to the Germans for alienating them and accusing them of the holocaust myth? \n\n I have nothing but praise for the young today as most of them are beginning to understand the truth and are searching it out and revealing the myths that have been perpetrated upon America and Germany. our young are our future and I prey  you continual to thirst for the truth and reveal it to all and never back down. The truth must be know and it seems you know a little more of it than most do. Keep up the good wook...... i agree with you wholeheartedly.\n\nMatt : Yes I do ! Goto Whatreallyhappened.com and also read Titus 1;3-4 and see that God instructs us to never beleive anything that comes out of the Jews mouth, that the Jews are liars, and perverters of the word of God and will tell myths and fables. We are not to love the enemies of GOD. I hate them because they hate all mankind!\n\nMagicman: Why don't you use some of that magic to conjur up a brain. The state of Israel was created in 1948 after the Jews stole that name and applied it to their little terrorist country. The biblical saying of Those who bless Israel was spoken some 2000 years ago before the tiny state of Israel was stolen and created. The word Israel NEVER means a tiny piece of land that was stolen from its rightful people and will never mean a land at all. Israel means a people which have been dispersed from the so-called holy land never to return, and they, TRUE ISRAEL will never be back in the holy land because GOD will give them a new land and that land was America when it was first inhabited by whites.\n\n  That land was Judea before they stole the name of GODs chosen people and applied it to their stolen land so therfore it will always be Judea in accordance to scripture and will never be Isreal..... only in their dreams! Israel is a people and if you really want to bless Israel then you should start blessing the Anglo Saccsons people ,,,, Thats Saccsons from the tribe of Issac before the word was perverted by those who stole Israels heritage and changed it to SAXON so true Israle could never discover whom they are.\n\n Also Mr bible scholar, the Bible says GOD will leave the name "ISRAEL" as acurse unto those whole stole Israel's heritage and give Israel a new name. So ....according to scripture, anyone calling themselves Israel until Jesus comes back is an imposter and can never be true Israel unless they are under the new name. Do you know what that new name is? If you don't know then you are not a true Christian and you don't know Gods true word!\n\n And BTW the Holocaust is a hoax. The Holocaust is to happen to the Christians never any others. That is why it is yet to happen.
735695
Neo-Nazis are called like that because they are 'New' Nazis (Nazis were followers or members of the 'Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei' = NSDAP of Adolf Hitler). The Germans call everybody a NEO NAZI that was born after the end of World War II, or the end of the Nazi Regime 1945, following the same political views as Adolf Hitler. The ideology behind 'Nazis' is called Fascism and is not at all limited to a political direction. Fascists are 'Nationalists' caring only for citizens of their own Nationality. They oppose immigration, homosexuality, arts, women's rights and intellectual thinkers. The individual means nothing, no civil rights are granted and is to serve the will of the leaders. George Orwell's 1984 is a very good book for that matter. The worst thing under a Fascist rule are 'Concentration Camps' in which all people end up that don't follow the leaders or don't reflect their vision of how things should be.
1048786
Because if Liberals told us who they really are and what they really believe, they lose every time... ooops, I guess that's happening anyway...\n\nEven though Liberals agree with Communists and Socialists, they know that those labels don't play well with the American People.
1018614
I experience the same from the Left wing.  Cuts both ways...there are hateful people across the full spectrum and our job is to recognize it on both sides (so we don't become subject to marginalizations for showing subjectivity) and ignore them.\n\nI have received death threats from pacifists for editorials I have written about 9/11.  I have received physical threats in my classes for speaking against various topics.  The e-mail...never ending.  That is just the way some people think.  They are not smart enough to hold a debate and think that what they are doing will intimidate the other side enough to silence the other side.  The fact is this shows they do not know WHY they believe what they believe and thus are unable to intelligently defend what they believe.
1134771
Because they are afraid... they know that they have two years to try to convince America that being conservative is wrong, and are afraid its not going to happen... because most people know the truth.\n\nThe truth is of course that what Answerman said is wrong, either through ignorance or he wants to change the facts.  He linked conservatives with NAZI Germany.  Heads up kids, Hitler was a socialist... that's right, a liberal.  It the the liberal, democratic president FDR who had dealings with NAZI Germany.\n\nThe term Neo-Con is in flux, it doesn't have much of a meaning yet.  It is used interchangeable to describe the far right and the right leaning moderates.  If you want to frustrate a liberal when they use it ask what it means.  They get that deer in the headlights look every time.\n\nNote to BrianW_28:  I must have been typing when your answer popped up, I didn't see it.  Congratulations on being one of the few libs around here who can not only spell but use coherent sentences AND string them together to convey coherent thoughts.
742023
the roots of the nazi party would be a reason. I've never heard of this though.
1136208
Have fun with your bashing,  this seems to be all liberals have.  You're a great example
676604
Because in a fascist leaning society, the "official mouthpieces" need to be mimicked, no need to research anything or think for yourself...you have a "decider" at the helm of your personal life now :)
815102
Because they are the reincarnations of the nazi party. Thats why they blew it.
556152
Most liberals I've ever met are diehard free-speech advocates. If you're talking about the "political correctness" movement, it's dying the death it deserves, and it was only embraced by a minority of people, anyway. Most liberals will definitely go to bat for freedom of speech, and not just for causes they believe in. When somebody has to step in and defend the rights of groups like the KKK to speak, it's often a group perceived as "liberal", such as the ACLU.
813095
It is amusing to see liberals pretending to be shocked by buggery
774883
I am happy to disabuse here.\n\nLiberalism does not denote support for any type of hatred. In fact, by definition, liberalism represents open-mindedness, erudition and individualism. None of this is at all related to "hatred".\n\nRemember that the terms "liberal" and "liberalism" are often thrown around as generalized political pejoratives, especially by people who themselves hold relatively closed-minded attitudes. Anyone can throw a word around pretending what it means, but the dictionaries are the final arbiters of semantic verismilitude. \n\nAre you a friend to the English language? Can you trust a dictionary? I am totally unafraid of dictionaries. Are you?\n\n\nLiberals do not like government intursion in personal freedom (into personal health and family, etc.), and also tend relatively to disdain militarism and violence and preparations for violence (which is not really all that "hateful", is it?).\n\n\nGood luck.
821277
Liberals-----Brains??   now there is an oxymoron
496056
I think the reason is that liberals believe that man is capable of being perfect without anybody's help. They think that all it takes is education. This is the reason behind much of their supposedly self-righteous anger at anybody who seems to diagree with them:\n\n"I've just explained my position to this person, and he disagrees! Since I can't possibly be mistaken, he might simply be too stupid to understand. I'll be patient and give him a second chance."\n\n(After explaining a second time,)\n\n"I've just explained my position to this person who was pretending to be honestly curious and he STILL disagrees! Since I can't possibly be mistaken, and he doesn't seem to stupid to understanmd, he must be DELIBERATELY pretending to be dumb in order to waste my time! That makes him a CAD as well as a HERETIC! What's more, he knows EXACTLY how much what he says and does irritates me, AND HE'S DOING IT ON PURPOSE!"\n\nThe above assumptions cover most if not quite all of the liberal position. People are not born liberal. What kind of person does it require to take an innocent child and turn them into a liberal...? I will tell you what kind of person you need. It takes a villain.\n\nYou correctly point out that liberals are dissatisfied with Christ, this is because they largely do not have a personal sense of sin. They see no need or a Savior, they do not recognize the moral response of guilt (" 'laws' are for the governed, not for the governor") and they have lost all sense of shame.\n\nLiberals appear to recognize guilt only as a means of manipulating people; they will not admit to a real sense of moral guilt because that would be to recognize a standard be behavior above themselves. They respond to attempts to put them on the same footing with the rest of the world as attempts to shame them, and their pride will not allow them to admit that they might be mistaken. So they castigate those who would criticise them, at the same time hurling terrible and vicious attacks against their opponents, in an attempt to shame their opponents. \n\nBecause they do not realize that there must be a basis to moral accusations, their attacks are largely built on emotional appeal, and are factually invalid.\n\nThis unyeilding effort to block all sense of personal responsiblity has its parallel in an individual psychological response, called malignant narcissism.\n\nMalignant narcissism was first described by a psychologist and author Dr. M. Scott Peck in his books The Road Less Traveled, and others. He describes the resistance of some hideously selfish people to recognize their own selfishness. This was his attempt to describe the moral condition traditionally called 'evil', in psychological terms. When faced with the 'good', evil must destroy it or be forced to face its own selfishness.\n\nIn American liberalism to day, I believe that we see malignant narcissism raised to the institutional level.\n\nThe group behavior of people may be either better or worse than their individual behavior. Among Christians we recognize that we ought to continue to assemble together on a regular basis becuse we will stimulate each other to love and good works more than if we do not meet regularly.\n\nAnd, we have (unfortunately almost daily in the news) seen reports of troublemakers who, egged on by their peers, commit even more heinous acts of violence and selfishness than they would have stooped to without such provocation. What makes organized crime and gang activity so bad and so dangerous to the community is the fact that it is organized. Organization is a 'good', which was made and intended to serve other goods. It is terrible that it has been coopted and enslaved to serve evil.\n\nSo it is with liberalism in America today. (By the way, I  hope nobody has misunderstood-- this is political liberalism I am talking about. Liberal Christians are a different matter, in terms
1023624
people belive that an arguement that is written well with a rich vocabulary and allegories  must also be as perfect in its logical process , which is not the case .\nrhetoric has been used forever to impose ideology on others.\n\nthe answer:  keeping it simple.
952395
Liberals do not like the "under God" line in it.  After all.... they think they are gods and do not want to be reminded that here is one and they are not him.  Then, they might have to humle themselves before Him.\n\nSue