[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"You got it Andy. Tomorrow, I will read more about Joseph Stalin. I will read where intimidation of opposing viewpoints were nonexistent during his reign and I will apologize profusely for my ignorance if this is indeed the truth."
Of course Stalin intimidated people. But "stalinist" doesn't mean intimidation. It means murder, deliberate creation of famine, and banishment to Siberia. He was one of the great villains of history. When Felix throws around Stalinist in regard to a letter written to the chairman of Clear Channel--or when lefties throw around "Nazi"in reference to President Bush--it confuses, rather than clarifies, discussion.
[/ QUOTE ]
I realize your point. But, I don't agree that the language, in this instance. confuses or creates a problem. Was he being dramatic to push a point?? Probably so.
The idiocy of our Senators should be the prevalent theme here.
[/ QUOTE ]
Recap:
Horrible analogy derails thread.
Your take:
I've repeatedly defended the horrible analogy because I think the thread shouldn't focus on the analogy, however overly dramatic.
Edit to add: It was ***YOU*** who posted replies like: 'Answer me this question, is this a stalinist tactic?' (Not: 'Answer me this question, are the Senators out of line?') But now you say you've always wanted the thread to be over this question and focus on the senator's actions without focusing on the labels. Nice try. Good game. You lose again.