I don't think it is kudos. However, just don't ever mention Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot in any sentence that isn't about universal condemnation.

This guy seriously lacks tact.

yeah, video title is just a tad misleading.

We really should be using nuclear. Someone smarter than I on the subject should comment, but I believe those breeder style reactors did reprocess the fuel and on top of it, were impossible to meltdown.

the problem is:

1. We're too scared to even touch nuclear. It's become taboo. and the NIMBY mentality has set in.
2. Crazy insanely expensive.

I'd say the only hypocrisy here is why is it ok to go after nuclear, but mention solar and suddenly the republicans start crying socialism. Or is it just that republicans are so desperate to pin anything on Obama that they don't give a crap if they're hypocrites. You heard Romney folks, we should be looking into everything.

redacted

the easiest and most technologically feasible way to more energy for everyone is to have less people.

the condom!: the energy technology of the future!

reductio ad hitlerum.

Oh no no, no liberal bias here. Not at all.

Firstly he isn't giving any credit to Hitler. He may have been able to phrase it better though. eg "the Germans back in WW2 etc". Secondly, even if he had been giving any kudos to Hitler what does it fucking matter if the context is sound. Hitler was great at speeches. Doesn't mean I subscribe to the contents of those speeches.

There is plenty of REAL things to disagree with Romney on. We don't need to invent absurd ones that detract from the actual issues.

In other news - "Is Obama a muslim?"

That wasn't kudos.

Does not the application of Godwin's Law now automatically re-elect Obama?

You must stand on the shoulders of other men to progress technology and science. It does not matter whether those men were good or evil if their ideas accomplish your means.

This is like the argument, "Well the Nazis did X, therefore X is bad."

Whoever posted this, and whoever agrees with the sentiment, you're just wrong. There's a lot about Romney to be concerned with. If he actually won, America would be in a world of hurt, but don't cloud the issue with crap like this. Hate Romney for who he is, what he believes and the things he does. Don't simply invoke the name Hitler make some vague accusations and hope it'll stick. That's what the other side does.

Think about it, do you really want to sound like Rush Limbaugh?

Of course it matters. The Nazi's did all sorts of horrible experiments on people. Now, do we respect the victims of these experiments by using that data, or do we honour them by refusing to acknowledge any possible scientific legitimacy that their experience/death may have? Furthermore, if we do use the data are we not condoning what was done to them? Do we risk future despots doing the same by claiming "necessary evils" in the name of progress?

Are you happy to become a means to an end for the sake of science and progress? >> ^Gutspiller:

You must stand on the shoulders of other men to progress technology and science. It does not matter whether those men were good or evil if their ideas accomplish your means.

You are right. The issue here is tact. Does this guy have enough political savy, forethought and intelligence to be the leader and spokesman for what is still the only real super-power left in the world?

Look at how he described the Israel/Palestine conflict. What hope could anyone have for an impartial resolution with him leading the discussion? Look at what a stupid film can do to stability in the Middle East. Imagine having Magic-Pants here at the helm talking about Islam and Muhammad. >> ^Drachen_Jager:

This is like the argument, "Well the Nazis did X, therefore X is bad."
Whoever posted this, and whoever agrees with the sentiment, you're just wrong. There's a lot about Romney to be concerned with.

>> ^Jinx:Firstly he isn't giving any credit to Hitler.


Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what he did do. It's not like he was saying he liked Hitler or something, but the one sentence that referenced Hitler gave him credit for liquifying coal.

Not sure why anyone cares, though. He mentioned a positive thing Hitler might have been involved in, and it stands to reason that there must have been a few positives to the guy. But when you bring him up, you're going to catch some shit (I guess) if you don't end up condemning him.

And now, in order to avoid hand-launched vegetables, I conclude with...

That Hitler, what a horrible guy!

Romney = Obama - Tact²

Hitler had a hand in Volkswagen. I used to own a Volkswagen. Ergo I'm a Nazi. Simply math people!

Wow, this is even more docile than I though, I came to be disgusted and left thinking it was a reasonable sentence

>> ^PostalBlowfish:

>> ^Jinx:Firstly he isn't giving any credit to Hitler.

Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what he did do. It's not like he was saying he liked Hitler or something, but the one sentence that referenced Hitler gave him credit for liquifying coal.
Not sure why anyone cares, though. He mentioned a positive thing Hitler might have been involved in, and it stands to reason that there must have been a few positives to the guy. But when you bring him up, you're going to catch some shit (I guess) if you don't end up condemning him.
And now, in order to avoid hand-launched vegetables, I conclude with...
That Hitler, what a horrible guy!

Ok, you even mention Hitler and you immediately have to finish your sentence with some bullshit disclaimer. I mean, the article in the OP contradicts its title by the second paragraph by way of explaining that Mitt wasn't actually supporting Hitlers politics with this statement but then close by saying he should be more tactful? Tactful for who? For the morons who'd take something so far out of context that a offhand comment about Hitler's energy policy suddenly becomes a call for the massacre of Jews? Fuck. That.


You notice how frequently people are outraged on behalf of "some people" - This unnamed silent group almost entirely fabricated for the purpose of a narrative. This is a non story with a bunch of chumps sitting around talking about how Mitt should watch his words in case "some people" get the wrong end of the stick. Find me these vegetable launchers, and if you do please explain to me why they matter?

Its sad because I think politicians are so afraid of being eviscerated for such minor "tactless" comments that they frequently end up saying nothing at all. We the people end up paying for this allergic reaction with politicians who will only answer in platitudes. It goes for policy too frankly. Perhaps if the democrats aim was to fulfill their promises rather than avoiding raising the ire of their opponents then more would have been done in the last 4 years...

As for the advances in science made by the Nazi regime...well thats tricky. Perhaps its unfortunate that we can't put some knowledge back in the box if it was discovered unethically. Still, the idea of liquified coal is quite seperate to say, the genetic experiments in concentration camps. We use Jet Engines that were first put to practical use by the Nazis, rocket science was given a big boost by the advances made in developing the V2...the list goes on. Unfortunately war of any kind is a big motivation for inovation. Even if we could, should we forget the advances made that have a loose connection to an ideology we oppose?

It seems like an awful waste to write so much in service of complaining about someone like Romney being taken out of context, or having strawmen created in his image. I mean, this is the guy who has taken the President out of context and based an entire nominating convention on it. I'm in Nevada, and I get two mailers a week and they both use this fallacious "gaffe" out of context.

It's really hard to have any sympathy for him here.

But with all that being said, although I think this doesn't rate much (if any) attention, what people are saying is generally true. If you've grown up in the western world, you generally know how a reference to Hitler is going to turn out and almost everyone uses it either in a strictly historical sense, or to demonize someone else. He used it in the historical sense, but I think most of us would have had the good sense to not be compelled to point out that the great idea we're talking about came from Nazis. He practically invoked Godwin on himself.

Shit like this is why he's got his foot in his mouth to the knee. I'm glad I'm not a Republican anymore - those who aren't embarrassed by this candidate are utterly indoctrinated.