"he can't be the crowd-frenzying demagogue, while simultaneously the dictional idiot." (John Hardly)

Why not? I'm not clear what "dictional" means (it's not in my dictionaly - but assuming it means that he mangles language a bit, I can't see any inconsistency there. That's what crowd-frenzying demagogues often do "Man of the people" stuff.

In fact that combination worked very well for Hitler - though I disagree with trying to draw over close parallels. Bush is a very different creature in a very different situation. There are common features, as with other right-wing populists, but they are fairly superficial.

As for the Fascist label, it's a good pun, and I'm surprised noone has commented on that. But not an adequate summary of the true position.

When the fat cats in Germany helped Hitler into power they thought they were putting in someone who would be a useful and obedient tool. The reality wasn't exactly that, and was a lot worse than that, because Hitler had a nightmare agenda which had very little to do with that.

I doubt very much if Bush has any equivalent agenda. Maybe he is more like what the fat cats thought they were getting back in 1933.

But I find him more frightening than any political leader in either America or the Soviet Union since the death of Stalin. Not so much him personally, but the whole cabal of which he is the head or the figurehead.