Santorum retracted his statement:

quote:
U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said he didn't mean to compare Democrats to Adolf Hitler while defending the GOP's fight to ban judicial filibusters in Washington.

http://www.nbc6.net/news/4512783/detail.html

So what you are then saying is that comparisons to Hitler are OK if the politics behind the statement agree with your politics? If you see a connection and a similarity, it's OK then? I would suppose there are those who would suggest that Frist isn't that far off.

I'm surprised at you, MBC.

I like this gem from GOP Senator Cornyn who sounds like he's advocating violence against judges...

SENATOR JOHN CORNYN: "I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news and I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in - engage in violence." [Senate Floor, 4/4/05]

:rolleyes: Violent criminals are comitting violent crimes against judges who make decissions that affect their lives? Clearly it must be because of the judges' political views.

We can play the stupid politicians quote game all day - one of my personal favoites was when Sheila Jackson Lee asked if the Mars Observer could point the camera to the location where "the astronauts planted the American flag."

Fail to see the point when we are discussing the use of the filibuster, but that's OK.

Well, for starters, Frist's comparison makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can explain it. So far, I haven't seen anyone decipher it.

Second, I'm no fan of Senator Byrd and not enamored with anyone that chooses to use the Nazis to bolster their argument. I think it is hyperbole that is best not brought up. All I am saying is that it is not hard to see some similarities of the scenario Byrd describes and what is going on, IMO. And I also believe it is important to note that he was quoting a historian, these weren't his ideas being put forth. Regardless, at least his statement has a point to it, whether you agree with it or not. For the life of me, I have no idea what Frist's point was other than to be inflammatory.

In fairness, Sheila Jackson Lees comment, while stupid, wasn't political. So I'll go with something political and scary.

"All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the FBI, and I think we would all agree that there is a problem there." Se. Harry Reid, D NV

It is against senate rules - and maybe even illegal, but I am not sure - for anyone not on the judiciary committee to examine an FBI file of a nominee. Discussing it an FBI file is grounds for expulsion from the Senate. An FBI file contains everything ever said about you in an official capacity with no attempt at proof - it's just there.

I really want a senator free to look through the FBI files of whomever he wishes and discussing it publically.

It is a mystery, no doubt. But I have a theory.

He is comparing Hitler's arrogance to the arrogance of the democratic senators. Hitler believed the Germans were superior, that his way was the superior way, that what he thought were the superior thoughts. So any attempt to liberate France and fight back was an affront to him, as he was superior.

I think what Frist is saying is that the dems are the same way. Their way is best. How dare the republicans challange them or change the rules. The dems don't want a vote - who are the republicans to say we should have one?

That's about the best I can make of it.

You always do. That's one of the reasons I'm so fond of you and your posts. Seriously.


Santorum

All those white boy senators in suits look the same to me. :)