Not a hair worth splitting, imo.

Anyone throwing around Hitler, Goering, Goebels, eugenics, naziism, etc. in any form in any supposedly rational political debate puts themself straight into my ignore file. Precisely which ludicrous comparison they choose is a level of detail that is irrelevant to the ludicrousness of their supposed debate rhetoric.

I have no problem observing that it comes from the right substantially more often, at louder volume, and more vehemently than from the left. But I am under no illusion that the left is squeaky clean.

That's not what I said.

"with silence"? In that case, every dem leader is guilty, as no one seemed to bother to denounce Vanity Fair's depiction of Richard Perle as Goebbels. Or their failure to say anything about the people carrying Bush-as-Hitler signage at war protests for 7 years.

You guys can split hairs down to fvcking atoms all you want; the fact of the matter is that the right wing bat**** fringe, and it's encouragers, have drug the level of political discourse in this country down to an unbelievably low level. They have no real substancive policy complaint. they just hate the man. At least those who hated Bush did so because of the things he actually did! The "Teabaggers" hate him for things he's never done and has no intention of doing. It's paranoia, pure and simple. And those in power in the Republican party egg them on with more concern with their party's success than what is actually best for America.

The lunatics are running the Republican party

Perhaps this post sums up our differences in a nutshell. Dems want proof, facts, links, whatever- they want to be informed. Repubs seem fine with just repeating things without backing them up with facts. (Death panels, WMD, Birthers, etc). It's well known around here that if you state something specific, especailly something controversial, you'd better be able to back it up. No wonder paranoia runs so rampant in the conservative arena. Did you actually read the review that link presented? What were your thoughts regarding it's content?

Whatever you say, JW. It simply isn't worth playing tit for tat with my examples of stupid dems and your examples of stupid republicans.

How did you get all the way through that with a straight face?

Obviously JW was not informed on the issue. Yet you indict me. Hmm. Wonder why. JW made a blanket statement that was false, but apparently what I wrote it far more eggregious to you. I might suspect JW is a dem, not a republican.

If I am to be criticized for not purchasing Byrd's book, scanning a page, and posting the image, rather than simply posting a link (admittedly not at first until I was chastized for that) to direct quotes from the book, then whatever.

I did not actually read the entire content of the page, no. I was criticized for posting info without a link, so I found something that directly quoted the book, yet that's not good enough either. I could have posted any number of links with the same info. You would rather quibble about the review than about what was in the book when the subject was clearly about leaders of parties either referring to or agreeing with comparison to nazis.

Actually, I was just curious as to your thoughts on the subject matter. Seems more interesting than continuing this same boring line of "Oh, yeah....well, you guys do it, too!". My bad. Wake me up when the conversation gets reasonably intelligent.

It wasn't easy. The Botox helps.