Olmert compares Ahmadinejad to Hitler

[Scurrilous]

In interview with German newspaper Bild, acting Prime Minister says Iranian president a ‘psychopath of the worst kind who speaks as Hitler did in his time of exterminating the entire Jewish nation’; adds that ‘West will make certain Iran doesn’t reach position in which it will be capable of holding unconventional weapons’

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3245121,00.html

<snip>

"In a recent interview with German daily Bild Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert launched a scathing attack against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, referring to the Iranian president as a “psychopath” and comparing him to Adolf Hitler.
"He is a psychopath of the worst kind," Olmert was quoted by the newspaper as saying.

"He speaks as Hitler did in his time of the extermination of the entire Jewish nation."

According to Olmert, this is the reason Iran must be prevented from furthering developing its nuclear program.

When asked whether he believes Iran will be attacked, Olmert said "this is a sensitive question. The West, under the United State’s leadership, will make certain that Iran does not reach a position in which it will be capable of holding unconventional weapons."

[Selatius]

1. It sounds like it is an "affirmative"

Whether it's next week or ten years from now, I doubt we will be able to avoid a devastating military confrontation in the Middle East if cooler heads do not prevail on both sides. War can be prevented only if reason is allowed to act.

[Syrinx]

2. not a big fan of Israeli policy, definitely against war with Iran, but...

Ahmadinejad is definitely a lunatic.

[FrannyD]

22. I don't think so

When people write about him after interviewing him, you can tell they genuinely like him. If anybody is a lunatic, it's Bush.

[Hoping4Change]

33. I'd like to think your kidding but I know you're not.

Google "the twelfth imam". The idiot belongs to a wacko Islamic sect that believes in the Islamic equivalent to Armageddon. This idiot son believes it is his mission to bring about the END OF THE WORLD (not just Israel) to hasten the arrival of the Twelfth Imam (the equivalent of the second coming).

p.s. Millions of people genuinely like bush, lots of criminals and psychopaths are likable. You need to develop a better way of judging people.:crazy:

[The Stranger]

41. So does Bush.

Paraphrasing you:

The idiot belongs to a wacko Christian sect that believes in the Christian equivalent to Armageddon. This idiot son believes it is his mission to bring about the END OF THE WORLD (not just Iraq) to hasten the arrival of Jesus (the equivalent of the second coming (actually, it is the second coming, not just "equivalent")).

And Bush has already attacked a nation illegally and unprovoked. And Bush has far more nuclear weapons than anyone comes close. And Bush could destroy the fucking planet, unlike anyone else.

[Hoping4Change]

44. Exactly my point except the poster doesn't give bush the

benefit of doubt she gives the Iranian wacko. She lets the Iranian Pres off the hook because he is likable. Defending someone on those grounds is dangerous lunacy.

[sandnsea]

45. So am I, but I'm not friggin' Hitler n/t

[TomClash]

3. This is bull

Israel would be trying to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons whether Iran's President was Ahmadinejad or Rafsanjani.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. hmmm...

Your crystal ball tell you this or your was it your in-depth knowledge into the working of the political workings of the Israeli government? :eyes:

[Syrinx]

7. huh?

You don't believe that Israel wants to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons? :shrug:

[Behind the Aegis]

9. simply...

I think Israel would try to prevent any leader who declared that the nation of Israel should be nuked from gaining the ability to follow through on its threats. The previous poster's implication was that one Iranian president was completely different from the other. However, both (have) call(ed) for the destruction of Israel.

[Syrinx]

15. okay

My read of the post is different from yours. Almost diametrically opposite, in fact. But that's okay. Best wishes to you.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. what was your read?

[The Stranger]

43. Didn't Iraq say the same fucking thing?

This is like deja vu all over again.

[TomClash]

8. It was Israeli govenrment policy

long before Almadinejad took office. It has been Israeli policy to keep nuclear weapons out of the region (except its own nuclear weapons) since Osirik in 1981.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1004/chafets_2004_10_05.php3

Note that Almadinejad was elected in June of 2005. This article is from 2004. Note who Giora Eiland is.

Your end of the lesson.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. Still no point...

There is still no official proof that Israel is "nuclear." Also, unlike her neighbors, she has never threatened to "wipe them off the map." Even if it were Israeli governmental policy to keep nukes out of the mid-east, except for Israel, it still doesn't change the fact that Israel has not threatened to eliminate the population of any country.

[TomClash]

11. So how does that relate to my original or subsequent post?

Answer: it doesn't.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. 9

[leesa]

29. No official proof that Israel is nuclear?? Funny. I guess the years of

quotes by Israeli leaders threatening to push Palestine into the Sea and to kill all Muslims don't count. Sheesh.

[Behind the Aegis]

37. have any proof?

[wordpix]

52. Huh, "kill all Muslims?" When did "Israeli leaders threaten" that? Links,

pls. :crazy:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

31. Oh, my. The implied threat of Israel's nuclear weapons has kept....

...the Islamic nations at bay for quite some time.

And yes, Israel has done their level best to eliminate the Palestinians...do they count since they don't have a country?

[Behind the Aegis]

38. .

:eyes:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

59. Yep...when you don't have an answer, just roll your eyes. Impressive.

[Behind the Aegis]

62. Some things are so stupid all one can do is roll the eyes...

...everything else is futile.

[wordpix]

53. "eliminate the Palestinians?" Do you think Israel is suicidal? Links?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

58. Try reading articles from the media for the last 58 years....

...where have you been? The Israelis have been pot-shotting the Palestinians for years.

[kysrsoze]

57. That's a B.S. answer. Israel has refused to acknowledge its possession of

nukes and chemical weapons, which it was documented using on Palestinians. I saw the videos. I'm much less worried about Iran wanting nukes. Until we started fucking with them, the younger voters were ready to elect a sectarian leader. Assuming they are building nukes, Iran would not use nukes offensively, knowing they could be completely destroyed. If they want nukes, they just have to let us keep escalating the situation and Russia or China will gladly supply them.

[cantstandbush]

60. Just your saying there is no point, doesn't make it so. n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

61. and vise versa.

[The Stranger]

42. How about the war going on in Iraq? That is one giant crystal ball.

Wars based on lies are still going on there.

[Behind the Aegis]

46. and your point?

Are you saying the war in Iraq is because of Israel?

[Behind the Aegis]

4. And?

Hell, how many posters here compare Bush to Hitler on a daily basis? Because an Israeli made the comparison, does that mean he "loses?" That is a reference to that whole "who ever refers to Hitler first loses the argument" thingie.

The PM is correct; the Iranian president does sound like Hitler. Is Ahmadinejad a 'psychopath?' Well, I am not sure, as I don't have his charts, but as we say in the South...."that boy ain't right!"

How do we know this is the correct translation? Maybe it is all just a ploy by the media to paint the acting PM of Israel as a crank! Maybe it is propaganda directed against Israel! Maybe the media lies! (For those reading who may get confused this is :sarcasm:!) Sometimes, what is reported is actually what was said!

[bluestateguy]

6. Really? I didn't know Ahmadinejad invaded Poland.

Any good ball games on TV today?

[Behind the Aegis]

12. Really? I didn't know Bush invaded Poland.

"Bush is more like Hitler because Bush has far more power than that asshole in Iran. Ahmadinejad is a racist, sexist prick, but how much power does he really have? And how does he threaten the United States? Otherwise, overthrowing him is the responsibility of the people of his country." your own words

[bluestateguy]

14. You still didn't answer my question about any good ball games on TV today.

Oh, and today I can try out my new cookie recipe.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. Nope.

I don't care about ball games...at least not the ones shown on public TV. :evilgrin:

As for the cookies...do try the "blood of un-Christened babies, like we do;" it makes it all that much sweeter.

[no_hypocrisy]

18. Crazy thing is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad probably likes being called

Hitler.

Why are * and Co. and Israel playing into his hands?

[shain from kane]

19. To be technically correct, Hitler did not set out

to destroy the "entire Jewish nation", since no Jewish nation existed at the time. His target was the European Jews.
Destruction of Israel would also destroy a good number of Palestinians. I don't think nuclear bombs would make any distinction.
By the way, do the Palestinians in Israel get to vote? If so, is there any danger that a Palestinian Arab could be elected to lead Israel, and, therefore, control its nuclear arsenal that supposedly doesn't exist?

[Scurrilous]

20. "If so, is there any danger that a Palestinian Arab...

...could be elected to lead Israel, and, therefore, control its nuclear arsenal that supposedly doesn't exist?"

It's a possibility. Certainly something to keep in mind.

[enigma000]

21. Well, since the population of Israel has, 10-20% arab

Christian or Muslim, I would expect several seats in the Knesset to go to Arab political parties.

Am I correct in this?

[Scurrilous]

40. Israeli-Arab parties currently hold 10 seats in the Knesset. n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

30. No, sorry...it's not even a distantly remote possibility. There is....

...absolutely no way that the powers-that-be in Israel would EVER allow a Palestinian Arab to govern Israel.

[shain from kane]

49. So Israel is not a democracy, after all that lip service provided by

enablers? I am assuming that the Palestinian Arab birthrate exceeds the rest of the population's, and that some day in the future, according to voting trends, the current disparity will be reduced, and a balance will be achieved. That is not to say that I would welcome such a turn of events. But 50 years ago, did anyone conceive that blacks would rule South Africa? Or that granting amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States will eventually affect voting trends?

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Actually he set out to conquer europe.

Killing all the jews was part of the plan, but the primary goal was the conquest of europe. Modern Iran has no history of military aggression. None.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

32. And once Nazi Germany was in control of Europe, Hitler was....

...originally going to go after the U. S. But, he derailed his own plans when he went after the USSR in 1941 without having first conquered the UK.

Jews living in any country under the control of Nazi Germany were subject to the Nazi "Final Solution". One has only to read about the SS death squads that followed the German Army into conquered territory in the USSR to understand that salient fact. Then, when you add in the systematic killing of the Jews in the concentration/death camps, one has to see quite clearly that the Nazis did not intend to stop at killing just the European Jews.

[shain from kane]

50. Historically, were any Jews other than European Jews subject

to The Final Solution? Even the Russian Jewish victims were from the European portion of the USSR. Were any African Jews, if there were any, shipped to Germany and put in concentration camps?

And how was he supposed to invade and defeat the United States of America? Have there been any plans for such a conquest been released from the Nazi archives? Or from Japanese archives? Remember, a sleeping giant was awakened.

[wordpix]

54. I am told that Arab Israelis can vote

[PCIntern]

23. Hitler comparisons often fail to

communicate the fact that Hitler was a very special brand of sociopath. It's like saying that some kid on the Yankees is the next Mickey Mantle. We would have to see after his career, not a priori. I hate sports analogies but use them on occasion because I'm actually a pretty shallow guy.

the fact of the matter is that these guys in Iran are dangerous to all of civilization and the people who think that they won't do something, that they're just posturing, have read little of the history of mankind. These people who are driven by their 'unerring' fundamentalism are dangerous. If they say that they're going to attempt to wipe a sovereign nation off the face of the Earth, (and Israel is a sovereign nation no matter what gabble degook has been emanating from the usual suspects)then I'm happy to take them at their word. It's like waving a gun at a cop...you are inviting calamity of the first order.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

28. Are you talking about Herr Busch and the NeoCon Junta?....

...Who was the last country to illegally invade/occupy another sovereign nation, and essentially wipe them off the map?

What country currently has thousands of nuclear weapons and has threatened to use them in preemptive strikes?

Which country is currently the biggest threat to civilization?

Which country is governed by a group that is "driven by their 'unerring' fundamentalism", and has actually acted on it?

And which country is "waving a gun", and is currently using it against any nation that stands in their drive toward global domination?

If you answer "Iran" to any of the questions above, you flunk the exam.

[PCIntern]

36. We're not discussing Bush and Co.

You can't just ignore...let me restate that...ONE can't ignore - what you do is of course your business - the direct threat of a nation which has a powerful army, thousands of suicide/homicide bombers and the will to engage in a fundamentalist-driven war. To do so is to engender extremem peril.

Since you like to phrase it in terms of American politics and foreign policy, here goes: Kerry did not answer the scurrilous charges of the Swift-boat c--ks--kers and it cost him. Engagement is absolutely critical in this business - what do you think Israel should do - roll over and apologize and leave for Uganda?

It's just not going to happen that way, just b/c the US is in the midst of a national tragedy/disaster does not change the way of the world. One of the criteria which we have used in judging America's role here - is "Was Iraq a threat?" Well, it doesn't appear that they were, in truth. Is Iran a threat to Israel? You bet.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

48. Yep...just what I thought. You've chugged vast quantities of....

...the NeoCon Koolaid, haven't you?

The rationale the NeoCons are using for attacking Iran is the exact same rationale they used to attack Iraq. Do you not recognize that?

Is Iran any more a threat than Iraq was? Heck, no. Where are their nuclear weapons? How long will it REALLY take them to develop any nuclear weapons at all? Just because the NeoCons tell you it's so, doesn't mean that it is. I thought most people had learned that by now.

Unlike Iraq, Iran has developed powerful allies like China, Russia, and India. IMHO, it is not very likely that those countries are going to put up with another illegal and immoral incursion into yet another Middle Eastern country. How much are you willing to risk to attack Iran? Is it worth getting embroiled an a theater-wide or global conflict?

What do I think Israel should do? I think Israel should handle their own issues in the Middle East and quit expecting the U. S. to do it for them. If they feel that Iran is a threat to their security, let's see THEM take out Iran's nuclear program.

[madrchsod]

24. ahm is no hitler

he`s just a guy who does what he is told. i cannot believe that people cannot or will not acknowlege the men behind the curtain. ahm and bush are just two puppets and are told what to do and say. iran and the usa will never go to war because the people who control the world will not allow it because at this time it will cost them to much money. china,india,and russia will not allow the manufactured crisis to get out of hand. it`s not our problem anyway. if we had a real energy policy and a president that wasn`t a puppet covered in oil, we wouldn`t have to chose which side to take in this tribal war of words.

[wordpix]

55. who in your opinion is controlling Ahm? He's a fundie Islamist wacko who's

set up by his fellow fundie wackos as far as I can tell.

[hogwyld]

26. There's nothing we can do about it.

Once Iran gets it's nukes, and shares them with Syria and other Arab countries, we'll have no influence whatsoever in the ME. Ahm is the democratically elected leader of a sovereign nation, and the people put him in there.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

27. Why would you think we have any influence at all in the Middle East?....

...The NeoCon Junta has completely exhausted any good will the U. S. may have had in that region prior to 911.

What makes you think that "Syria and other Arab countries" won't get their nuclear expertise from Pakistan, India, China, and/or Russia? Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were allegedly from Saudi Arabia...what makes you think they think any more of us than the rest of the Middle East?

India, China, and Russia would love to see the U. S./NeoCon Junta sink themselves on the rocky shoals of the Middle East, just like the Soviets exhausted themselves in Afghanistan.

[hogwyld]

39. My point excactly!

We have no influence, so that's why we need to tuck our tails, not just in Iraq, but everywhere, and bring all of our troops, ships, airplanes back home. Once where out of their yards, they'll forget about us (hopefully).

[Selatius]

47. We won't as long as we seek power and control (that includes oil)

Foreign policy that supports corporate interests instead of human interests is the problem. It is why this nation would ever support the overthrow of democratically elected governments (like Iran's in 1953) and support dictators from Saddam to Pinochet and Suharto. These crimes were done in the interests of the private greed of a few in the business world who hold awesome power and are the captains of industry.

[Poll_Blind]

34. A little method in Ahmadinejad's "madness"? Political opportunism...

Has anyone played poker here? You know, I used to work for a world-class poker champion in a capacity that had nothing to do with poker. Anyway, he was a perceptive fellow in all things and once said "'Go Fish' is a card game you play with people. Poker is a people game you play with cards." Therein lies the truth, in my opinion: Ahmadinejad is playing international politics- which makes poker look like a kid's game. There are bluffs, feints, playing the fool, playing the pride-filled idiot. Ahmadinejad is no fool. Ahmadinejad is making these statements for a reason.

In my opinion, that reasons are:

A) There has never been a better time to challenge the United States. Debt-riddled, almost paralyzed from the internal political battles within it, stretched militarily thin. There is also something else- Ahmadinejad has noticed that of the postures taken by nations toward the United States, especially developing nuclear nations, North Korea has gotten away with its ambitions, scott-free. He has see the intense political hyperbole given by Kim Il-Jung and he has watched the United States stay the hell away from that country. The United States is toothless economically and militarily, aside from nuclear weapons, is spread so thin as to be in a position of weakness.

B) There has never been a better time to challenge Israel. Their economy is faring only a little better than that of the United States. A number of successive conservative governments and responses to terror attacks have shifted the overall political climate of Israel much farther to the right than I believe its founders would have ever been comfortable with. The Israeli poverty class now exists with bread lines for the poor. This in itself is a horrible thing for most Israelis to contemplate- Israel was created to be a safe haven for Jews everywhere but especially a place where they might be allowed to prosper. However, it always comes down to guns or butter and through necessity or choice they have selected the militarization of their country.

Now let's look at who the US makes war against: Make no doubt about it- the U.S. does not fight against foes it does not think it can win against. To it's people, it says one thing, but it is not the reality. Look at the numerous invasions of foreign countries, starting at least as far back as the 1980's: U.S. Invasion of Grenada, US sends troops to seize Panama's Manuel Noriega, U.S. invades Iraq a la Gulf War I, U.S. invades Iraq a la Gulf War II. I may have forgotten some and certainly the small paramilitary organizations and corrupt nations we have propped up are almost countless.

But do you notice something in the scale of conflicts?

The U.S., simply put, is an empire in its twilight unable to address any of it's publicly-declared enemies: Famously, Russia, China, North Korea. Nor does it wish to- most of these countries are major holders of the public debt. Yes, we have been selling our debt to our enemies. We owe money to them. This puts us in a very weak position. Outside of militarily conquering those nations there is no way to remove that debt. No way.

So the U.S. contents itself with an invasion here, an invasion there when the smaller members of the formerly-U.S. "world" get out of line in a manner of speaking.

But Iran is no Iraq. Not geographically, not politically, not militarily. They are a much stronger, more cohesive nation than the tin-pot dictatorial regime that Saddam ran. They also have some very big friends. The same friends we owe lots of money to: Russia, China. If we attack them the most immediate repercussion will likely not be militaristic but economic.

What flies faster than an ICBM? A stock trade, a currency sale. A nuclear weapon may be able to only destroy one city, or depopulate a region. However economic leverage can take the meat off of every table in a nation. That is power.

And that is the sort of power that Iran and it's supporters bring to the table. In a conventional military conflict, the Iranians would beat us with the current state of our armed forces. Read that last line again.

But Ahmadinejad is the PM of Iran and so all things he thinks, all things he does are meant to increase Iran's share of a rapidly-dwindling global pie of influence and wealth. His machinations make Israel nervous, and with good (but maybe not obvious) reasons. Economically, as the dollar goes so does the Israeli shekel. The Israelis know this and are worried that their own economy, tied so closely to the United States', is also in jeopardy. I believe very few sensible Israelis believe that as soon as Iran gets the atom bomb that it will use it on Israel. It's preposterous, suicidal and if Iran had such a death-wish they could have exercised it a decade ago and been utterly destroyed by Israel as they would be today.

Also, something to note: The Iranians are switching their oil sales from Dollars to Euros. When you're allegedly so hell-bent on destroying the world, bringing about the armageddon, or whatever, it is an interesting footnote to observe that Iran is making special preparations to be as wealthy as possible, as long as possible. These moves do not smack so much of an immediate desire to bring about World War III but to do something even worse: Iran's hyperbolic posturing will likely result in U.S. hesitation, allowing Iran to both acquire nuclear technologies (making it a world-class political player) and to sink another skewer into both the US and Israeli economies.

Iran knows that if they can ramp up this escalation of words the United States will be preoccupied with a military solution to what is really an economic blade- aimed squarely at the solar plexus of both the United States' and Israel's economies. And sure enough they are. To the Israelis and the Americans, if Iran is allowed to switch to Euros for sale of oil, it could mean the death-knell for their own flagging economies. And the Iranian oil bourse (exchange) is set to go live next week. Iraq, just before our latest invasion of that country made an attempt to switch from PetroDollars to PetroEuros. After the invasion we changed it back to Dollars.

Not only, as Frank Herbert says in the book Dune, must the spice flow but it must be sold in our currency. Sale of oil in US dollars is one of the main reasons why the dollar is a worldwide currency.

If the United States, or Israel, or both, attack Iran, especially after our behavior in Iraq, there will be a worldwide cry against us both. Will those nations condemn us to the sword? Hardly. They can destroy or at least cripple further both of our nations' economies simply by selling the Dollars they own in exchange for the Euro.

In short, they've got us by the balls. And they are squeezing. If we attack them, we increase the chance that foreign holders of US Treasury Securities will sell them. If we do not, the popularization of the Euro will eventually become so attractive as to cause the Dollar dump anyway.

Ahmadinejad is neither insane nor a fool. With the council he receives from Russia and China he is playing us like a fiddle and will continue to do so. If the United States or Israel or both attack and destroy Iran, we will only bring about our eventual economic collapse more quickly than scheduled.

I invite criticism of this perspective.

PB
This reply became so long I also decided to post it as a separate message in General: Politics here.

[shain from kane]

51. Actually, our interventions can be traced back to 1898, with

the Spanish-American War. However, you have concentrated on the period since 1980. Guess who was President in the 1980s? Of course, it was Ronald Reagan, who was embarrassed by the results of Viet Nam (another intervention), and immediately by the changes in Iran, of all countries(nudge, nudge)that occurred during the Carter administration. His reaction was to spend more money on the rathole of the military, removing resources from our domestic economy, that would have enhanced our position as the world's economic powerhouse. So his next course of action was to intervene by supporting the rebels in Afghanistan, of all countries (nudge, nudge). That is his legacy that we have to live with, while he is dirt-napping in California. Thanks a lot, Mr. Great Communicator.

[ConcernedCanuk]

35. Israel has hundreds of nukes - Iran has no intention of "attacking"

.
.
.

IF Iran is indeed trying to make a nuke or two (of which there is not one shred of proof yet) - I am quite sure it is just to keep them "pre-emptive" crazies off their backs

I don't think the rulers of Iran are stupid

They know that to attack ANYONE with a nuclear weapon could bring hundreds of nukes raining on them -

USA has been itching to use theirs again after they saw the massive destruction at Hiroshima and Nagasaki

sick fu*kers

(sigh)

[wordpix]

56. BushCo already calls Ahmadinejad "Hitler." See this article (again)

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

snip: Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged the reality of the Holocaust and said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official said. “That’s the name they’re using. They say, ‘Will Iran get a strategic weapon and threaten another world war?’ ”

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”

snip: “This is much more than a nuclear issue,” one high-ranking diplomat told me in Vienna. “That’s just a rallying point, and there is still time to fix it. But the Administration believes it cannot be fixed unless they control the hearts and minds of Iran. The real issue is who is going to control the Middle East and its oil in the next ten years.”

snip: The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war. “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”