Former President George W. Bush made rather shameful remarks during a 9/11 ceremony at the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. See Bush’s comments below.
“We have seen growing evidence that the dangers to our country can come not only across borders but from the violence that gathers within.”
“There is little cultural overlap between violent extremists abroad and violent extremists at home. But there is disdainful pluralism in their disregard for human life, in their determination to defile national symbols.”
“They are children of the same foul spirit, and it is our continuing duty to confront them.”
Presumably, Bush was referring to the January 6 protest believing that the Trump supporters at the event were “white supremacists” because he believes in their lack of pluralism. Bush basically referred to those 75 million people who voted for Donald Trump as just like, or even worse than the 9/11 terrorists. Quite a revolting statement. See a brief video clip below of Bush’s comments below.
About to blow a gasket. The guy who commenced the most disastrous campaign in the Middle East is suggesting the Biden talking points that the savage terrorists in the Middle East aren’t so different from the so-called white nationalists here. pic.twitter.com/gnVGGDGOJ9
— JON MILLER (@MillerStream) September 11, 2021
Bush’s comments are not new from the people of his ilk. In a July appearance on MSNBC’s ReidOut with Joy Reid, former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd said he felt the Capitol riot was “much worse” than 9/11 and that this is the “most perilous point in time” since the beginning of the American Civil War. See Dowd’s comments below.
“To me, though there was less loss of life on January 6, January 6 was worse than 9/11, because it’s continued to rip our country apart and get permission for people to pursue autocratic means, and so I think we’re in a much worse place than we’ve been.”
“I think we’re in the most perilous point in time since 1861 in the advent of the Civil War.”
See a brief video clip below of Matthew Dowd’s comments.
This is absolutely BONKERS and offensive to the thousands murdered on 9/11.
Appearing alongside MSNBC's Joy Reid, Matt Dowd says "January 6th was worse than 9/11 because it's continued to rip our country apart and give permission for people to pursue autocratic means" pic.twitter.com/UnJfAID5SN
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) July 6, 2021
Not to be outdone, Lincoln Project co-founder Steve Schmidt cited Dowd’s claim but added that not only was January 6 worse than 9/11, but it was actually going to kill more Americans, even counting all those killed in the US wars, which ensued from the 9/11 attacks. See Schmidt’s comments below.
“The 1/6 attack for the future of the country was a profoundly more dangerous event than the 9/11 attacks. And in the end, the 1/6 attacks are likely to kill a lot more Americans than were killed in the 9/11 attacks, which will include the casualties of the wars that lasted 20 years following.”
See a brief video clip below of Steve Schmidt’s comments.
These triggering comments from supposedly “friendly” Republicans to other Republicans is an effort to change a political narrative. For what purpose is not the focus of this article. The question that arises is – when is it appropriate to use a triggering horrific event and then make comparisons to other lesser events that could lead to the triggering horrific event in an effort to get people to react to one’s political beliefs? We have seen similar attempts of this kind of tactic when referring to the Holocaust or Nazis. These attempts can be rather manipulative and despicable.
One can appreciate that little events can lead to bigger events. Making warnings about the future based on smaller events is not necessarily wrong – if it is a rational comparison and done reasonably. The examples shown in this article were irrational and highly inappropriate comparisons. Consider the following on why this might be the case – and provides safety tips to know when a comment has become irrational political hyperbole.
- A horrific event is NOT the same as a lesser event. One can say a lesser event could lead to a horrific event, but the two events are not equivalent or worse – as suggested in these examples. The 9/11 event killed nearly 3,000 people. The January 6th event did not.
- The lesser event narrative must be presented accurately and not be distorted to fit a narrative. In our example, to suggest that the majority of the January 6th event participants were “white supremacists” (and by reference, the 75 million that voted for Donald Trump) and participated in the storming of the Capitol was simply not true. However, there could have been a few, along with some provocateurs.
- The extrapolation of a lesser event to the horrific event must be reasonable. For example, could the events of January 6th have any reasonable chance to remove Biden and install Trump as president through “violent” protests? The January 6th events merely delayed for a few hours the inevitable. The American Republic is far far more resilient than this. To say that “democracy” was under any reasonable attack and make further extrapolations is absurd.
Let’s take an example of a comment that could be reasonable to say. Joe Biden’s demonization of the Covid unvaccinated is eerily similar to the demonization of Jews that lead to the Holocaust.
- This statement does not say the current Covid “pandemic” situation today is the same or worse than the Holocaust.
- Biden’s statements about the unvaccinated accurately labeled (in Biden’s opinion) the unvaccinated as the problem people in our society that should have their civil rights significantly removed as similarly occurred in the early 1900s concerning Jews in Germany, though Biden’s unvaccinated demonization does not appear racially motivated.
- The extrapolation to potential deaths on the scale of the Holocaust could happen if the demonization results in future policy faults on a global basis.
Politicians, both Republicans, and Democrats, understand that irrational political hyperbole works. It is often used on an unsuspecting public to trigger political responses. President Bush, Matt Dowd, and Steve Schmidt should have known better. It does make one wonder whether these politicians did this “not knowingly” or “knowingly” – the latter being highly problematic.
Don’t let these types of politicians play you. If you have further comments and suggestions on these political hyperbole safety tips, please comment below.
If you found this article informative, please consider a small donation to our coffee cup to help support Conservative Journalism – or spread the word. Thank you.