Reply #15: I can't remember which blog it was [View All]

But the main point of the posting I read in it (and it was very well constructed) was that republicans prefer to view the world in archetypes that are easily boiled down, and the example used was Chamberlain, Churchill, and Hitler. Any enemy of freedom is automatically cast as another Hitler by republicans. If you don't stand up to them, you're an appeaser like Chamberlain who should be replaced by a steadfast, strong leader like Churchill who would never retreat from the enemy. These are easy concepts to hold as long as you don't look at the details...

1. Chamberlain liked Hitler's anti-communism and thought that he alone would be able to rein him in, surrounded himself with yes-men, and dismissed critics as not being as smart as he was.
2. Churchill, on the other hand, was more open to input, realized that England wouldn't be able to go it alone, and in the 1920s had written to the then-prime minister that it was time to withdraw troops from - of all places - Iraq as they weren't doing any good there.

Bush and his supporters are hoping that he will eventually be seen as Churchillian instead of as a stubborn moron who got in over his head.

Anyway, Reagan did a lot of military films so he was seen as very patriotic and pro-military. Arnold's a big strong tough guy. Thompson... Well, I don't watch tv so I don't know what character he played, but I'm sure that it's one that makes republicans swoon.

TlalocW