Is it ethical?

This has nothing to do with censoring anybody. However, I have heard some local radio people compare Bush/Cheney to Hitler. Now Rush compares Obama to Hitler. Is it really ethical in American debate to compare anybody except maybe Joe Stalin to Hitler?

Thoughts?

Whether it is directed towards a Republican or Democratic President, it is the ultimate insult. On a PC basis, it is inexcusable, and perhaps slightly worse when directed towards Obama due to the racial/genocidal implications. As much as I disdain Limbaugh and find it regrettable, I don't think censorship should be applied. Hyperbole is a key element of political criticism, and while I would hope those who use it would employ it sparingly for risk of weakening its effect, it should remain on the plate as legitimate tool.

A few months ago I may have opined differently, but after living in Mexico and seeing the dominate control over the media, especially during the recent elections, I have to come down on the side of free expression. Let's hope there is responsibility that accompanies it, or such hyperbole becomes cliche or transforms into vitriol and rancor. Just my .02 cents.

Did Imus start this when he called Clinton the antichrist?

Calling almost anybody "Hitler" except Hitler is roll-my-eyes foolishness. It's so obviously ridiculous that saying that actually hurts the argument of the person making it because it can't be taken seriously and just displays irrational hatred.

I read this thread Wednesday night and instantly thought of it yesterday (Thursday) when the host filling in for Limbaugh was comparing The President to Saddam Hussein.

Bashing the President has been done since John Adams...only Washington received mostly a pass with this. This doesn't make it right...we became the political two party animal some of the Founding Fathers/Brothers feared.

Being called Hitler...being called the Devil...has went on for years (read what Lincoln was called). I remember when Reagan was in office there were those who spouted he was the Antichrist because six letters made up each of his names (Ronald Wilson Reagan).

On a lighter note....should only fictional characters be used for political comparisons...i.e. Blank is acting like Darth Vader...like Khan from Star Trek...like The Joker from Batman LOL

The Hitler thing is not particularly original or imaginative...then again, when was the last time you heard any talk host do ANYTHING original or imaginative...

Actually, Rush Limbaugh's music parody's are usually creative and funny.
Michael Medved's "Conspiracy Days" are unique and fun to listen to and Michael providing movie reviews is something other talk show hosts don't do.

jimwalsh2001 said:

The Hitler thing is not particularly original or imaginative...then again, when was the last time you heard any talk host do ANYTHING original or imaginative...

Click to expand...

..."The main difference between Limbaugh and Hitler is that Hitler was original and showed initiative." -- Mort Sahl, sitting in for Tom Snyder on ABC Radio in 1992 ;-) ...

johnbasalla said:

Actually, Rush Limbaugh's music parody's are usually creative and funny.
Michael Medved's "Conspiracy Days" are unique and fun to listen to and Michael providing movie reviews is something other talk show hosts don't do.

Click to expand...

Well, you're entitled to your opinion...

jimwalsh2001 said:

johnbasalla said:

Actually, Rush Limbaugh's music parody's are usually creative and funny.
Michael Medved's "Conspiracy Days" are unique and fun to listen to and Michael providing movie reviews is something other talk show hosts don't do.

Click to expand...

Well, you're entitled to your opinion...

Click to expand...

...specifically, an informed opinion, which rarely occurs to Limbaugh or Medved listeners...

Ultimajock said:

...specifically, an informed opinion, which rarely occurs to Limbaugh or Medved listeners...

Click to expand...

Or most talk audiences for that matter.

MsMusicRadio said:

This has nothing to do with censoring anybody. However, I have heard some local radio people compare Bush/Cheney to Hitler. Now Rush compares Obama to Hitler. Is it really ethical in American debate to compare anybody except maybe Joe Stalin to Hitler?

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I think the more that its done, the easier it is to ignore everything else the person doing the comparison is saying. It's just plain lazy, not simply because it's Hitler they're being compared to by vast exaggeration. But its also because the speaker assumes the audience is too dumb to be riled the comparee's own level of so-called 'evil'. But then again, that may be the point.

ulti said, "..specifically, an informed opinion, which rarely occurs to Limbaugh or Medved listeners... "

Yea, like YOU are more informed than these 2 guys who have done it for a living longer than you and have large syndicated success (not on 1 little squirt of a station like you)!

With respect, King Daevid, you might say "you can't argue with success" but some people wouldn't recognize success if it bit them in the butt and WOULD argue about everything, just because.

Prais said:

ulti said, "..specifically, an informed opinion, which rarely occurs to Limbaugh or Medved listeners... "

Yea, like YOU are more informed than these 2 guys who have done it for a living longer than you

Click to expand...

...my first paycheck from a commercial radio venture was in 1970, Limbaugh's was in 1971 and Medved's in 1992. Care to inform yourself before you strike again? ;D ...