This thread shouldn't even have been made. It's Hitler by miles. There's no way Bush could ever compare to him in terms of raw evil (which I personally don't think Bush is, just more idiotic and out of touch then evil).
To even begin to compare, Bush would have to forcibly take complete and utter power in the country (Hitler did this when *someone* burned one of the major governmental buildings, letting him declare a state of emergency and grant him absolute authority at which point he declared himself ruler for life and disbanded the legislative body if I remember correctly).
He'd also have to start a war, against the entire world. That's right, not just what are more similar to peacekeeping actions in several countries, but all out war with drafts and hundreds of thousands dieing (7 million from Germany alone during the war years, not including those in the Holocaust). Then, when it was obvious that he'd lost, Bush would have to 'unish' his country for losing by forcing people to keep fighting so that any potential recovery afterwards would be long and painful.
And on top of that, there would have to be a genocide on the scale of millions. Innocent people put to death for no reason rather then you weren't liked.
Bush hasn't done any of that, and I honestly believe that he thinks what he's doing is good (even though it hurts a lot of people). Bush isn't evil, perhaps misguided, but not evil while Hitler was irredeemably vile. The two don't even compare, and to do so risks belittling what Hitler actually did, and making it easier for people to disregard things like the holocaust.
