Oh, the Irony...

[Kanastrous]

Courtesy of the North Iowa Tea Party.

I'd add a comment if the picture didn't tell all.

[Dragon Angel]

Comparing Obama to Hitler and Lenin... Now that is a riot.

Although, I am surprised that they used Lenin's image instead of Stalin, who actually did manage to kill more people than Hitler.

[Sinewmire]

"Live free or die!" sounds astonishingly like a threat not a creed. Live Free obviously doesn't mean exercising your choice in a responsible way such as democratically electing the president of your choice, of course. Live Free means do as you're told, apparently.

[General Zod]

"Live free or die!" sounds astonishingly like a threat not a creed. Live Free obviously doesn't mean exercising your choice in a responsible way such as democratically electing the president of your choice, of course. Live Free means do as you're told, apparently.

It's a slogan from the Revolutionary war by a general from New Hampshire. Even with the hilariously stupid context it's a bit hard to interpret it as a threat.

Amusingly enough, it's being decried by other teabaggers. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38228744/ns ... sion_2010/

DES MOINES, Iowa — A billboard created by an Iowa tea party group comparing President Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin is being condemned by other tea party activists.

The North Iowa Tea Party began displaying the sign in Mason City last week.

The sign includes photos of Obama, Nazi leader Hitler and communist leader Lenin with the statement: "Radical leaders prey on the fearful & naive."

North Iowa Tea Party co-founder Bob Johnson says the sign highlights what the group argues is Obama's support for socialism. He says the pictures might be overwhelming the intended message.

For more on this story, visit RadioIowa.com

Shelby Blakely, a spokeswoman for the national Tea Party Patriots, says the sign isn't appropriate. She says her group opposes any comparisons of Obama to Hitler or Lenin.

The White House declined to comment.

[Kanastrous]

I just realized why there was something so familiar-feeling about that billboard.

It's straight outta fucking They Live.

Marry and Reproduce.

This is Your God.

Radical Leaders Prey On the Fearful and Naive.

Yeah, they sure do.

[Havok]

Although, I am surprised that they used Lenin's image instead of Stalin, who actually did manage to kill more people than Hitler.

Stalin isn't really credited with enacting any massive social change. Lenin gets that. At least they have a little intelligence.

The irony is nice though.

[Gandalf]

I like that they need to have a colour hammer and sickle on the poster, so people know who the hell Lenin is.

[wautd]

That billboard is a nice example of Poe's law. It's so absurd and downright moronic that I have a hard time taking it serious. Then again, never underestimate human stupidity.

[Kanastrous]

I like that they need to have a colour hammer and sickle on the poster, so people know who the hell Lenin is.

Can't say they don't know their audience...

[Crossroads Inc.]

I think the most entertaining aspect of this...as always... Are the comments:

The actions of our president speak so loudly its hard to hear the words. Why are people offended when Obama is labeled a Socialist when everything in his agenda and everyone that surrounds and supports him reeks of socialism? Some people just can't handle the truth! Granted, the Bush Administration didn't do a lot to help the USA, but it certainly didn't do anything to deliberately hurt us! To Charles E M's comment - dead on - if Bush had been on the billboard, nobody in the media would have objected. Now apparently, its an outrage? Really? Grow a pair!

The Democrats are racist with their remarks and actions and yet are blaming the TeaParty for only saying what is the truth. If this country doesn't wake up soon, this country will be another Germany right before WWII. The "Change" that everyone thought was going to happen didn't. Instead we got high unemployment and a debt that we will NEVER get out of as well as a healthcare bill that no one wants and yet they are jamming it down our throats.

What's the controversy? Obama is a socialist and a fascist. He has already taken over healthcare and most of the auto industry and the banks. He is a totalitarian who believes in top-down government control, NOT "government of the people, by the people and for the people."

The billboard is absolutely correct

The voices of '"The People''" speak!

[Night_stalker]

And once again, the Tea Partiers prove how utterly paranoid they truly are. Sometimes, they make me feel ashamed to be a American, with their blatant lies. I thought we outgrew this sort of revolutionary bullcrap in the '60s?

[Coyote]

Thank the post-war McCarthy era for destroying what was, once, a vibrant and strong worker's movement in the Midwest and West of the USA. McCarthy and a little help from Hoover. In the USA, basically, the Nationalists won big time.

It's especially funny (in a sad way) because the Democrats are almost as far away from "socialism" as the Rethugs are. But I would love to have a Democrat be wildly successful so the American public would look at that and say, "so, this is socialism, huh? Doesn't seem too bad". But then, that's why the Rethugs are so intent to do anything they can to destroy Obama and any other Democrat in power --even to the point of destroying the entire country-- to avoid any hint of Democratic ideas being successful.

[Kanastrous]

The problem is that American politicos getting a socialist program right don't seem any more likely than their getting anything *else* right.

Too pessimistic...?

[Hillary]

The problem is that American politicos getting a socialist program right don't seem any more likely than their getting anything *else* right.

Too pessimistic...?

What socialist programme? Obama is not a socialist by any sensible definition of the word. He would be a right leaning Tory in Britain, and we're hardly a beacon of Marxism ourselves.

[Kanastrous]

Any proposed socialist program. Along with virtually any other proposed program, for that matter.

[CJvR]

Although, I am surprised that they used Lenin's image instead of Stalin, who actually did manage to kill more people than Hitler.

Perhaps they were impressed by Lenin thinking Stalin was to liberal...

[Thanas]

But I would love to have a Democrat be wildly successful so the American public would look at that and say, "so, this is socialism, huh? Doesn't seem too bad".

It did not happen with Clinton who was probably the president under whom the economy flourished the most and the deficit was the smallest post WWII. If it did not happen under such circumstances, I doubt it ever will happen. The American populace as a whole is very conservative and very religiously minded, a potent combination.

Also, historically socialism has never won in the USA. That is too large a trend to turn around.

[General Zod]

But I would love to have a Democrat be wildly successful so the American public would look at that and say, "so, this is socialism, huh? Doesn't seem too bad".

It did not happen with Clinton who was probably the president under whom the economy flourished the most and the deficit was the smallest post WWII. If it did not happen under such circumstances, I doubt it ever will happen. The American populace as a whole is very conservative and very religiously minded, a potent combination.

Also, historically socialism has never won in the USA. That is too large a trend to turn around.

It couldn't have happened under Clinton because of the Republican majority in the Senate and the House.

[Thanas]

It couldn't have happened under Clinton because of the Republican majority in the Senate and the House.

I meant more the public perception of socialist=bad that is a standard of American politics than any such program being enacted.

[General Zod]

It couldn't have happened under Clinton because of the Republican majority in the Senate and the House.

I meant more the public perception of socialist=bad that is a standard of American politics than any such program being enacted.

Well yes, but Clinton couldn't have been wildly successful thanks to all of the opposition he had.

[Kanastrous]

Socialism as a movement in the USA probably hit its high-water mark in the 1930s. And it was not all that high.

[Thanas]

It couldn't have happened under Clinton because of the Republican majority in the Senate and the House.

I meant more the public perception of socialist=bad that is a standard of American politics than any such program being enacted.

Well yes, but Clinton couldn't have been wildly successful thanks to all of the opposition he had.

Yeah...but still, under him Americans had it the best in the century. So the circumstances were there for a public perception shift, but it still did not happen.

[General Zod]

Yeah...but still, under him Americans had it the best in the century. So the circumstances were there for a public perception shift, but it still did not happen.

I'm not really seeing how a public shift would have happened without Clinton enacting a number of programs or laws.

[Thanas]

Well, I do not want to argue a rather pointless alternate history scenario, but take note that public perception shifts do not have to happen due to the government. All too often they happen due to literature, university education etc. For example, people looking at the rest of the world and seeing that socialist programs work.

[Night_stalker]

Socialism as a movement in the USA probably hit its high-water mark in the 1930s. And it was not all that high.

Hoo yeah, and after WW2, Socialism pretty much vanished from the political scene entirely. There were some attempts to bring it back in the 60's, with all the revolutionary groups running around, but that was it.