This isnt going to sit well with GoreWarRight, he sidles right up to the line with his stock insult of "brownshirt". You can tell he is just dying to scream something far more provocative. Poor thing.

Unless, of course, you are comparing Pelosi and democrats to Nazi appeasers. Then it is OK - right Mark?

Mark,
I think that's a great rule. My father, father-in-law and six uncles fought the Nazis in WWII. Are you also going to extend this rule to those people that call fellow Americans Terrorists or Commies.

A fair enough point, but what is right for one is also right for another. Let's have no writers on this blog drawing parallels or half-accusations about OTHER people being nazis or neo-nazis or as bad as Hitler or his cronies!

Let's see THAT rigidly enforced too!

And just for the record, I don't consider Bush a Nazi anymore than I consider Pelosi a Terrorist sympathizer.

Does this mean keefer can no longer call Hillary "Hitlery?" Oh well, I'm sure he'll come up with a creative replacement.

Gar Wood

Thank you, Mark, for making this new rule.

There is a HUGE difference between calling somone a Nazi (or brownshirt) when there is absolutely no comparison to calling someone a terrorist appeaser when their actions and statements appear that they are just that. Sorry, but I'm just telling it like it is.

I agree with this rule. As well as Kim's pointing out that a terrorist appeaser is not nearly as touchy as comparing people to Hitler, or his henchmen. And believe me, my family was in contact with distant relatives in Germany after the war until the Soviets cut them off.

Kimberly,

Indeed....

And, lefties, I didn't say you couldn't call any particular public figure any insult you prefer: you just can't call the writers or commenters on this blog such.

kimberly4bush,
Yet from my viewpoint calling a good American a nazi or calling one a terrorist appeaser is the same. Either we live in a country where people are allowed to disagree or we don't.

Casper,

To call me a Nazi you would have to show how I held to Nazi views...but someone who goes to Syria and puts on a head dress for fear of offending Moslem sensibilities...well, that is appeasment, if you ask me.

Mark:

Appeasment even in this sense?

Question... re: Pelosi going to Syria....

Nixon went to enemy China at the height of the Cold War

Reagan engaged the USSR diplomatically as well during the Cold War

Etc etc....

Why-- other than partisan attack on Pelosi-- is this any different?

(PS- Please stop with the head scarf crap, Mark. Both Condi and Laura Bush, among other world leaders, have worn the scarf as a sign of respect. This is just more hypocrisy.)

Casper,
Appeasement lead to WWII - and Hitler's ability to kill so many. Chamberlain will forever be known for his appeasement of Nazi Germany.

Pelosi is willing to appease Syria and the Islamists by doing something she would never do anywhere else. This is so obvious that even the late night commics are going after her.

Adam,

*Appeasment even in this sense?*

Ouch...hey, you're not supposed to bring up the double standard.

Junior is not on vacation. He's working.

Nancy is subverting the WH wishes, but hey, (shhhhh-finger over lips) don't look at the republican contingent that is doing the same thing (with the WH blessing I might add).

You just can't make this stuff up. This is better then reading the onion.

Question... re: Nixon, Reagan and Pelosi....

Which of the above-named people doesnt hold the title of President of the United States?

When you can adequately answer that question, then you will know how this is different.

Adam - did you notice the job titles of Nixon and Reagan? Slightly higher than Ms Pelosi, as in they were "President"!!!! Try thinking that one thru, if you can.

*Sighs*

This new rule is fine and dandy. Personally I think the second you compair anyone to Hitler or the Nazi's you lose your argument. Period.

Shhhhhh, the republicans were sent as representatives of the administration, its why they had official clearance from the old man.

Pelosi went on her own, inserting herself into the diplomatic fray as an alternative to the POTUS.

I do believe I laugh harder at liberal postings than I did while watching Al Gore's comedy film, though I must admit you all deserve an Oscar for 'Best Vapid Lines in a Blog Posting'.

All this political chat back and forth and each side claiming to represent the American voters... But what's really important to the average American..

Let's look and see
Most Emailed News
Coyote visits Chicago sandwich shop
Eggs will raise your cholesterol, and other myths
2 bald eagles hatch on Catalina Island
Intern admits thefts from U.S. archives
'Christmas Story' director dies in crash
Falling woman saved by pile of...
Vet claims docs removed wrong testicle

Most Viewed News
"Hoax" revives famed 1970s literary lie on film
Feds pay for Mich. barn in Hoffa search
Bush bypasses Senate to name ambassador
Greek archaeologists unearth rich tomb
Journalist or Activist?
British navy crew leaves Iran for London
Review: Apple appalls where Xbox excels

So on behalf of the over 50% of Americans who choose not to vote... I guess we now know what the major issues of the day are

Shhhhhh, the republicans were sent as representatives of the administration, its why they had official clearance from the old man.

Also, they were probably sent along to keep an eye on SanFranNan, to verify or refute any spin she puts on this visit. I'm sure she's gonna come back and report that Assad is ready for peace, but President Bush won't talk to him. Something like that.

Does this mean keefer can no longer call Hillary "Hitlery?" Oh well, I'm sure he'll come up with a creative replacement.

Gar Weed, all you had to do was ask me to stop calling her that. Henceforth, she will be known as the beyotch in pants...

I think that the rule is a good one but it has to be applied to everyone and not just to those you agree with. On the note about Chamberlains appeasment what did you expect European economies and man power had been decimated in some areas. The public had barely recovered from the horrors of WW1, he was doing what he thought was best for Britain. Anyway America cannot cast the first stone at Chamberlain - when did they enter the war and for what reason????

This isnt going to sit well with GoreWarRight, he sidles right up to the line with his stock insult of "brownshirt".

this is what you deleted my topic for in another thread mark.

i think it's disgusting to call someone a nazi, and i was calling gonewarright out on it.

"Shhhhhh, the republicans were sent as representatives of the administration, its why they had official clearance from the old man."

Do you have proof that Bush sent the republicans Syria? That's not what I've read. If he did send them dosn't that violate his own policy?

Queenie Pelosi had made comments that signaled a change in direction, which she does not have the ability to do. She stated that her visit to Syria was to work toward peace.

The Republicans were not doing anything to undermine the foreign policy. Queenie is.

Calling someone a terrorist sympatizer or a commie is entirely different from calling them a Nazi. When you have a party that is continually being paraphrased by terrorists and terrorist organizations, don't you think that gives justification to making a link between that party and the thought processes and desires of the terrorists? If not, then that is truly frightening. Liberals are leaning more and more toward socialism, which is how the USSR really was, they were called communists. That is the link there.

The public had barely recovered from the horrors of WW1, he was doing what he thought was best for Britain. Anyway America cannot cast the first stone at Chamberlain - when did they enter the war and for what reason????

Posted by: weefee at April 5, 2007 06:09 AM

Some Americans, weefee, believe they defeated the enemy single handed. Forget the true history, they are just not interested and probably haven't a clue to what really happened.

To them the U.S. military ruled supreme; that's all they need to know.

Mark,

I'm sorry. It won't happen again.

Mike

Ol' Goat,
Show me a link were Pelosi endorsed any terrorist organization.
By your logic, since Al-Qaeda is against gay marrage and abortion they should be linked to the republican party.

Actually I find it kind of sad that you feel it necessary to justify calling fellow Americans names.

"Unless, of course, you are comparing Pelosi and democrats to Nazi appeasers. Then it is OK - right Mark?"

--My good friends, for the first time in our history, a United States House Speaker has returned from Syria bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.--

The Right has already won the Pelosei game since it is a non-story and we're all falling for it. The hypocrisy of critisizing Pelosi for her trip when three Republicans visited the day before, and Specter a few months back, is transparent to anyone unclouded by dogma and hate. So they move on to the headscarf. Is that the issue? Adam and Jeremy Wilcox showed pretty definitively that it isn't. The real issue is that Nancy Pelosi, the most powerful woman in the history of the United States, scares the hell out of conservatives, so they call her crazy or try to slander her so people won't listen. Powerful women scare conservatives, everyone knows that. Margaret Thatcher wouldn't have had a chance here. She'd end up full of buckshot in a field somehwere, just like they'd like to do to Hillary and any other woman who raises her head and speaks her own mind.

"The real issue is that Nancy Pelosi, the most powerful woman in the history of the United States, scares the hell out of conservatives, so they call her crazy or try to slander her so people won't listen."

No, we've been honest in our assessment of the Commie for some time now. This is merely a contination. Where've you been?

"Powerful women scare conservatives, everyone knows that. Margaret Thatcher wouldn't have had a chance here."

Only by the Left. Maggie Thatcher was AWESOME - a great woman, just like Condy.

"She'd end up full of buckshot in a field somehwere, just like they'd like to do to Hillary and any other woman who raises her head and speaks her own mind."

Hillary changes her stance (and her accent by the way) depending on her audience. REAL women, wouldn't do that.

OK, now that we've learned that Pelosi was indeed visiting a mosque (not readily apparent from the pic) when she wore that scarf, it's time for a "we were wrong about that" moment.

Conversely, since we've also learned that about 500 chemical WMD been found in Iraq, can some of the "Bush lied about WMD" crowd also admit being wrong? (I refer not to commenters here, but to the political class, such as John "we were misled" Kerry.)

Powerful women scare conservatives, everyone knows that.

Yeno, you left out one word. Powerful LIBERAL women scare us conservatives. On the other hand, liberals claim to respect strong women, but their definition of "strong woman" seems to exclude Margaret Thatcher, Dr. Condi Rice, Dr. Laura Schlessinger (PhD + black belt), Elizabeth Dole, Phyllis Schlafly, Michelle Malkin, etc.

If anyone wishes to accuse me of fearing Nancy and Hillary, I most assuredly plead guilty.

I appreciate Bigfoot's measured response. It should be a lesson to all of us not to resort to hysteria, name-calling, and unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks. I admire Margaret Thatcher -- strong leader at the right time. And Elizabeth Dole and even Condi -- I think she's intelligent and likeable, but she's pursuing a failing policy. Gamblers will tell you, good money shouldn't follow bad money.

Pelosi is not doing this trip on behalf on Bush, nor were the three Republican congressmen visiting the day before. But all are there in the interest of peace. This is not appeasement. Syria is not Nazi Germany. We cannot go to war with Syria and Iran on top of our commitment in Iraq. How can we ask that of our army? Wars cost lives and money. Are we willing to spend them? And I don't mean putting another on the national credit card, and on the backs of our Reservists and National Guardsmen. Let's be realistic.

We can talk tough and let them know force is not out of the question. I don't see how Pelosi's trip subverts any of this. The legislative branch has been emasculated too long. It is now assuming the responsibility for its share of governance that it surrendered in Bush's first time. (Hillary was most craven of them all in that era, and continues to be.) Foreign policy is the province of the White House, yes. But members of Congress on a mission of peace do not inhibit our ability to wage war. (Voting to cut funding, or threatening to do so during the surge is another matter.) So why not let our elected representatives travel in the hopes of solving difference through diplomacy? we will hold them accountable for what they say. We should support efforts for peace. Despite what some say, war is not always the answer. We cannot wage war on the entire Middle East. Let's remember TR and his big stick. You don't get anywhere by refusing to engage in dialogue.

"This new rule is fine and dandy. Personally I think the second you compair anyone to Hitler or the Nazi's you lose your argument. Period."

Gozer

It's called Godwin's Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_rule

Mark -

"...but someone who goes to Syria and puts on a head dress for fear of offending Moslem sensibilities...well, that is appeasment, if you ask me."

Mark, Mark, Mark. Listen, I recently visited the Great Synagogue on a trip to Budapest. It was a beautiful and moving experience. Before entering, I was required to wear a yarmulke - which I dutifully put on eventhough I am not Jewish. So does that somehow mean that I am a wild "Zionist sympathizer" or a "Jewish appeaser"? No, it simply means I have no problem showing respect. Apparently, respect is a concept totally foreign to you.

For whatever it's worth, none of my relatives were Jewish nor fought the Nazis in WWII. My Grandfather DID train pilots in the U.S. for reconnaisance in WWII and my Uncle was a sailor in the Pacific during WWII. My other Grandfather didn't serve due to medical reasons but was involved a lot with raising money for war bonds and he owned a grocery store/dry goods store back then which promoted war bond drives and helped out a lot of people with rationing.

Anyway, I support the rule by our hosts.

Can we use the term "fascists"?

I recently visited the Great Synagogue on a trip to Budapest. It was a beautiful and moving experience. Before entering, I was required to wear a yarmulke - which I dutifully put on eventhough I am not Jewish. So does that somehow mean that I am a wild "Zionist sympathizer" or a "Jewish appeaser"? No, it simply means I have no problem showing respect.

Posted by: Aarontime at April 5, 2007 12:48 PM

I agree, Aarontime. Why do some feel so threatened in their own beliefs that they cannot show a modem of consideration for those who hold different views? While visiting Buddhist temples in Thailand, I witnessed the disrespect some individuals can, in ignorance or contempt, show others. While it is considered a sign of respect to remove your shoes before you enter a temple and to avoid pointing your feet toward the person in front of you, time after time, this simple act was totally ignored. Again, on a trip to the Vatican in Rome, we encountered people who, without a clue, were trying to enter with inappropriate dress. When they were turned away at the door, they cursed the attendants. Unbelievable.

Anyone who thinks the Pelosi is the most powerful woman in the history of the United States..has a real problem!!!!

Bigfoot,

Pelosi also paraded around Damascus in that horrid hijab.

Syrian Reformists: The Damage from Pelosi's Visit Will Be Felt for Years Lgf, "A statement from the Reform Party of Syria about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s disgraceful visit to the Baathist regime, and what it means to women struggling for rights in the Islamic world: 'Has Pelosi Gone Bonkers?'"

Reform Party of Syria: As a Muslim, I fully understand respect of our religion by visiting US officials and I applaud that respect. Had Speaker Pelosi worn the Hijab inside a Mosque, this would have indicated respect but for Pelosi to wear it on the streets of Damascus all the while she is sitting with the self-imposed Baschar al-Assad who has come to symbolize oppression and one of the reasons why women are forced to wear the Hijab as they turn to religion to express their freedom is a statement of submittal not only to oppression but also to lack of women’s rights in the Middle East. Pelosi just reversed the work of the Syrian civil society and those who aspire for women’s freedom in the Muslim countries many years back with her visual statement. Her lack of experience of the Middle East is showing.

Assad could not have been happier because Syrian women, seeing a US official confirming what their husbands, the Imams in the Mosques tell them, and the society at large imposes on them through peer pressure will see in her wearing a Hijab as a confirmation of the societal pressures they are constantly under. No one will ever know how many women took the Hijab on after seeing Pelosi wearing it. The damage Speaker Pelosi is causing with her visit to Syria will be felt for many years to come.

It seems this new rule would be about the bare minimum required to be considered a moderately respectable human being (says the grandson of the guy who lost his family to the Nazis). So, can we compare critics to Stalin? Limbaugh and Cheney did, and I haven't heard any complaints,