It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Democrats and Republicans, War over use of Hitler Images

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Yesterday Democrats and Republicans went to war over a new Bush reelection campaign ad that uses images of Adolph Hitler in bashing Democratic nominee John Kerry. while on the other side Democrats have repeatedly used Hitler imagery in criticism of Bush or so the Bush camp claims. The new video in debate here was sent out via E-mail to some 6 million Bush Cheney supporters....
 





Full Article: MSNBC.com/Newsweek

The Web video, e-mailed to 6 million Bush supporters Thursday evening, splices together clips of Al Gore, Howard Dean, Rep. Dick Gephardt, film director Michael Moore and Kerry. On two occasions in the 87-second-long "Webmercial," Hitler is shown, speaking loudly in German. The fuhrer footage is overlaid with the words "sponsored by MoveOn.org" while the ad's opening screen says "The Faces of John Kerry's Democratic Party."

MoveOn.org, a left-wing political fundraising group, immediately objected. "We never sponsored those [Hitler] ads, we didn't condone them," says Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn PAC. He says the Hitler clips originally appeared on the group's Web site in January as part of the "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest as part of two of the 1,100 entries the organization received After learning that the offensive Hitler spots were on the site-and facing criticism for them-MoveOn.org removed the entries. The Hitler submissions were up for 10 days.

The Bush camp argues the Hitler ads are fair game. After all, says Bush-Cheney '04 spokesman Scott Stanzel, the video did first appear on the MoveOn site. "It's indicative of the type of vitriol that we have seen from John Kerry and his surrogates," he says. Stanzel says Democratics have repeatedly used Hitler imagery in criticism of Bush.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The full Article page has the video.

So this is how the game is going to be played here?

While these two camps use images of Adolph Hitler in a nasty form of political mud slinging I have to wonder, Who really loses here.
I say we the American people who may have to make the ultimate choice between these to sides in this story. We lose and if they continue this Hitler campaign it would seem that either way Hitler wins!

Are the independents running any Hitler ads this year?




posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Well, of course, the whole darned issue is of hyperbole and vacuous rhetoric that completely abstains from speaking at the issues....and that's the main point that should be aggravating as all get out. Both of these people need to STFU about each other and tell us what they plan to do for the next 4 years...but that's not going to happen.

With that major point aside, if there is any one in history who deserves to be exploited...it's Hitler.



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:48 AM
link   
It is easy to understand why liberals are using images of Hitler,
the image of an arrogant leader serves as a whipping post to election.

On the conservative side, although on the surface merely a reaction,
it certainly appears that the Bush campaign is imploding,
his Hitler video revealing a subconscious schism in the Republican ranks.

From a psychological perspective, Psychohistory: Bush Ad

...Watching the ad, though, it's quite bizarre -- it a compilation of
angry Democrats, including Micheal Moore, Al Gore, and Kerry, with a
few clips from some moveon.org ads that use Hitler imagery.

The intent of the ad is to portray Democrats as angry "pessimists";
however, the ad comes off as a tirade to get rid of Bush -- only the
last 5 seconds or so has any connection with the Bush campaign.

Watching it, I thought I was watching something generated by the
Democrats.

Is the Bush campaign itself starting to promote the idea of regicide?


(The underlying discussion of regicide regards this event as a form of national sacrifice,
King George being the sacrificial offering.)



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:55 AM
link   
I have found that without Hitler as my moral guidepost, I can not fully make informed decisions. Is such and such better than, about the same or worse than Hitler? It's the most important issue to me.

I also stand in abject disgust with some modernists efforts to replace Hitler with Saddam as the moral guidepost for deciding the important things...like acceptable torture practices.

I think using Saddam simply "lowers the bar", as it were. He's good mind you, but he's no Hitler. In this age of enlightened debate, we must always ask ourselves What would Hitler do? to ensure we don't cross that line ever again.




posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:57 AM
link   
RANT

I'm placing an order for a WWHD bracelet as we speak. Shall I put you in for one??? And if so, do you want the default "black" - or the Juden yellow?



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I better take one of each Valhall.
I'm pretty sure one of my hands is out to trip me up and do some evil Hitler stuff. Better safe than sorry.



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Before some one comes along who can't read sarcasm. Let me state that not only am I (and RANT) being facetious, I'm being downright ate up with disgusted sarcasm.

That neither Kerry nor Bush - along with their minions of campaign people - do not understand that envoking the name or image of Hitler is inappropriate, and does nothing but minimize a horrific period in humankind's history, shows that both these parties have just lost their ever loving minds and morality.

This is disgusting disgusting disgusting....and makes joking about a WWHD bracelet look like kid's play - that should drive home a point shouldn't it?

[edit on 6-26-2004 by Valhall]



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:05 AM
link   
that ad is spooky. it looks like one of those fake ads from 'robocop' or something. it looks like its target audience would be people who already hate michael moore, al gore, and kerry, which is weird because isn't the point of an ad to reach new people and change people's opinions? maybe the purpose of it is simply to reinforce the hard-core element of republican voters, which would appear to be a very cynical tactic (ie, 'we won't try to explain our differences and political platforms, we'll just rally our supporters into a frenzy.)

-koji K.

ps- im sure the democrats have done stuff like this as well, before anyone accuses me of *gasp!* taking sides.



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:12 AM
link   
I think the difference is that the Republicans actively used the Hitler ads. The ad on Moveon.org was an entry to a contest, and was never used or endorsed by anyone.



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Morality and Propriety ride only as excess baggage on the campaign trail.

[edit on 2004-7-2 by Teknik]



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Teknik

Morality and Propriety ride only as excess baggage on the campaign trail.


You can frame mine only if I can frame yours...



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
RANT

I'm placing an order for a WWHD bracelet as we speak. Shall I put you in for one??? And if so, do you want the default "black" - or the Juden yellow?



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Oh my gawd! You're disgusting!






posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 03:47 PM
link   
And it is only June


Maybe as we get closer to election time they will be using images of Barney or Homer Simpson to bash each other?

Maybe this is the way they will fight for the white house.. Perhaps this is a sign that no side left or right really knows where to stand on any real issues.

But at least they are keeping it entertaining.

Gazz



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Teknik
It is easy to understand why liberals are using images of Hitler,
the image of an arrogant leader serves as a whipping post to election.

On the conservative side, although on the surface merely a reaction,
it certainly appears that the Bush campaign is imploding,
his Hitler video revealing a subconscious schism in the Republican ranks.

From a psychological perspective, Psychohistory: Bush Ad

(The underlying discussion of regicide regards this event as a form of national sacrifice,King George being the sacrificial offering.)


Oh my gosh Teknik, I see the regicide!

I risked the net herpes surely being distributed by a site like georgewbush.com and went to see what the ad was like. Front a center a big picture of Kerry. I clicked it to play and instead of loading a video, I got some spiralling hypno graphics timed to the audio.

30 full seconds of reasons NOT to vote GWB, intermixed with a cheering audience. Of course, the video (had it played) would have eventually cut to some pro GWB text and his picture, but I'm not getting that. More psycho swirly graphics.


It kind of leaves you stunned. Damn good anti-GWB ad.


I realize someone might say "buy a newer laptop you dolt" so that the video will load...but it works fine everywhere else. What a gaff.

But as to regicide, that would imply Bush himself is throwing the campaign. I'd look more to Dick "FU" Cheney or possibly RNC loyalist Carl Rove.



posted on Jun, 26 2004 @ 08:39 PM
link   
It is kind of funny that George W. Bush is using ads comparing democrats with Hitler when his Grandfather Prescott Bush and his Great Grandfather George Herbert Walker were both financers of Hitler and his socialist party through corporations here in the U.S.



posted on Jun, 27 2004 @ 12:14 AM
link   
What I can't understand is why no Holocaust remembrance group like the Simon Wiesenthal Center has condemned these ads. The Wiesenthal Center is constantly condemning acts of hate and violence against any minority group so it's surprising to me that they haven't condemned the use of Hitler.



posted on Jun, 27 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Both of these parties have become a disgrace to the nation. Forget parties. Just vote for me :-)



posted on Jun, 27 2004 @ 05:13 AM
link   
Revisited (thanks, Valhall):

Originally posted by Valhall
That neither Kerry nor Bush - along with their minions of campaign people - do not understand that envoking the name or image of Hitler is inappropriate...

Inappropriate for more than just one reason,
they are such vain attempts to acquire stature by association with
one of the most influential leaders in modern history.


Adolf Hitler,
aside from becoming history's poster child for government Evil,
transcended mere politics:

Adolf Hitler was not born into wealth and
all the perks that 'daddy and his friends can arrange'.

Adolf Hitler studied rigorously and independently,
rather than coasting through subsidized ivy-league thought factories.

Adolf Hitler was a world leader,
creating from almost nothing a political movement that altered history,
as opposed to being fabricated into existence
by covens of spin doctors and closet-meetings of political hacks.

Adolf Hitler sought to improve Germany rather than merely govern -
the fanatical pursuit of his noble intent created the horrors we remember Hitler for.

...X...

[edit on 2004-6-27 by Teknik]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join