As far as rhetoric in general goes, Bush also said he'd be a uniter, not a divider; after all, he lost the popular vote. But he uses his office as if he had a huge landslide.
Curtiss
Doug:
> Our gang still uses rhetoric of freedom, pluralism, and individualism
> to describe what we're defending in Our Way of Life - that's what the
> Terrorists hate about us after all. The Nazis, though, were very
> explicitly anti-democratic, anti-pluralistic, and
> anti-individualistic. To the Bush gang, the state is supposed to
> reflect or subordinate itself to free individuals; to the Nazis, the
> individual was supposed to subordinate him- or herself to the state.
> Of course the Bushies are full of unfreedom and schemes to
> circumscribe individual freedom of thought and action, but still
> that's a big rhetorical difference. How does that fit in with the
> Weimar/Strauss/Shickelgruber analogy?