[KarlInOhio]

We don't need more Neville Chamberlains, the man who thought "appeasement" would end Hitler's threat. We do need more Winston Churchills, though.

Before I saw this I was working on a new tagline. Looks like this is the place to test drive it.

[CGVet58]

well, just saw your tagline, and i must respectfully say that you give willie too much credit - he could never hold Chamberlain's jockstrap.

True, both are appeasers, erroneously believing that not confronting tyranny was the best way - but Chamberlain, to his credit, exhibited enough character after events proved him tragically wrong to not mount any kind of opposition against the war effort. He was wrong, he knew his name would forever be associated with the failure to pre-empt a brutal enemy and thus a failure to prevent the loss of millions of lives. Yet he remained silent.

Has Clinton, or Carter, or Gore or any other leftist who inhabit the party of the "enemy-within" done likewise? No.

Chamberlain, in the classic Greek sense of the word, was a tragic figure.

The other entities I've referred to above more closely resemble vermin, and have the mark of Quisling upon them.

So - in a nutshell - don't insult Chamberlain by the comparison. The man had his own unique hell as he lived through the horrible fruits of his labor - but he did it silently, and never strove to weaken the Briton resolve in their greatest test.

CGVet58