Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

by **wkelly91** » Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:59 pm

No that is not. There are others who have called him Hitler and not in jest or absurdity. By the way I think you can be absurd without being offensive.

Hitler is as inflammitory as using the N-word, I just don't think it should be used. If you wan't to call Bush unintelligent or a bafoon be my guest....but I won't agree ;-)

by **Tavish** » Sat Jun 19, 2004 7:40 pm

The thread should have been ended anyways based on Goodwin's Rule. I doubt many would have minded. ;-)

by **wkelly91** » Sat Jun 19, 2004 7:43 pm

Good one

by **Transmogrifier** » Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:58 am

wkelly91 wrote:No that is not. There are others who have called him Hitler and not in jest or absurdity. By the way I think you can be absurd without being offensive.

Hitler is as inflammitory as using the N-word, I just don't think it should be used. If you wan't to call Bush unintelligent or a bafoon be my guest....but I won't agree

Yes, Hitler is inflamatory, but so is calling liberals un-american. Both are stretches.

by **wkelly91** » Sun Jun 20, 2004 7:32 am

I agree that saying that Liberals are un-american or un-patriotic is inflammitory but still doesn't approach the Hitler reference.

It is 60 years since his death and Hitler is still reviled as one of the most evil and hated men of history!

by GW » Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:05 pm

wkelly91 wrote:It is 60 years since his death and Hitler is still reviled as one of the most evil and hated men of history!

I agree, Hitler was an evil person and deserves to be hated. Ironically, he was fully elected by a democratic system in German back then!
8-o

by **Tavish** » Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:50 pm

GW wrote:
wkelly91 wrote:It is 60 years since his death and Hitler is still reviled as one of the most evil and hated men of history!

I agree, Hitler was an evil person and deserves to be hated. Ironically, he was fully elected by a democratic system in German back then!

That is a bit of a stretch to say he was fully elected by a democratic system. The two leading political parties had been outlawed after the Reichstag fire ( the leaders of those parties were also arrested ), the Brown Shirts openly attacked those opposing Hitler, and he still only managed well below 50% of the popular vote. It was a democracy only in the vaguest sence.

by **wrveres** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 3:40 am

Tavish wrote:The thread should have been ended anyways based on Goodwin's Rule. I doubt many would have minded.

lol, good one...

so looking back at "the first party to mention Hitler" was AA right? I know it was in jest, but does that mean you all lose the discussion? ;-7

by **Tavish** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:50 am

wrveres wrote:
Tavish wrote:The thread should have been ended anyways based on Goodwin's Rule. I doubt many would have minded.

lol, good one...

so looking back at "the first party to mention Hitler" was AA right? I know it was in jest, but does that mean you all lose the discussion?

Basically yes. It's not too hard to see why it became common practice to call the debate over once someone invoked Goodwin's Law, the discussion always goes quickly from talking about issues to talking about how stupid it is to compare Hitler to something.

by **Absolutely Adequate** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:56 am

I don't know about that - I was simply using hyperbole to show why hyperbole has no place in a political discussion.

I think Goodwin's law should be extended to cover all sorts of hyperbole from "Liberals hate free speech" to "Personally they deserve what happens to them. If thats a beheading of one of there family members, so be it!"

Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

Kerry's Doom

Who is online