Nitpick: It was not unprecedented. In 1824, John Quincy Adams was selected by a highly biased House of Representatives despite failing to win a majority of the popular vote. Ironically, he was also the son of an unpopular one-term president with extreme right-wing, anti-freedom policies…hmmm.
Nah, G.W.B. was too stupid to comprehend 9/11, even after it happened. Perhaps his puppet masters (Dick Cheney, etc.) knew about 9/11 beforehand, and allowed it to happen to justify seizing the Iraqi oilfields (and making a pretty profit in the process) but we’ll never know for sure, unless one of them confesses on their deathbed.
OK, thanks for the clarification. Next question: do you think that all the Democrats pouring over Sarah Palin’s belly or people like Cindy Sheehan are given acceptance by the main portion of Democrats or those in power with a (D) after their name? IMHO, while the majority of Democrats don’t like Ms. Palin, they also don’t give a crap about clothes-gate or what her belly looks like. Just like the overwhelming majority of Democrats don’t give a crap about the anti-globalization nuts and think Cindy Sheehan is a nutcase, a nutcase with a point maybe, but a nutcase nonetheless. The difference between the aforementioned conspiracies and this whole Obama birthplace crap is that only 42% of Republicans believe he was born in this country. The majority of the party is either not sure or believes that a gigantic fraud/conspiracy is being perpetrated on the US public. Because of this I have a hard time judging the Democratic Party for all the rumors flying about Sarah Palin, but an easier time judging the Republicans about this birther crap.
The difference between the current Republican and Democratic parties is highlighted by this whole fiasco. The Democrats, when confronted with a Cindy Sheehan or someone like Michael Moore, listen tolerantly to them and maybe adopt a point or two from their rhetoric, but in the main they view them with skepticism. Most Democrats I know think Cindy Sheehan is a nut and Moore is a blow hard propagandaist. On the other side, it seems to me that the majority of Republicans think that people like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly are speaking the truth and are not blow hard propagandaists (while Michael Moore is an Un-American liar) and people like Joe the Plumber are viewed as serious contributors and allowed to make speeches at the National Convention (when IMHO, Joe is at least as nutty as Sheehan and probably even dumber).
Completely wrong. 9/11 truthers are overwhelmingly on the Left. And in the Democratic party, they’re not a mere fringe group:
More than a third of all Democrats believe Bush knew all about the 9/11 attack before it happened, and another 26% think it’s POSSIBLE. A mere 39% believe he did not know.
On this subject, at least, sane Democrats are the fringe group within their party.
No, 26% said they’re “not sure”. I’m not sure why you’d change the wording on that.
“It’s possible” implies someone’s been thinking about it. “Not sure” means anything from “it’s possible” to “I have no clue what you’re talking about”.
Thanks for this; dissapointing to say the least! I always thought the truthers were a fringe group, but after reading this Wiki I find it isn’t so. What is wrong with people? Well, this brands the Democrats as much as the birthplace crap brands the Republicans, at least to my mind.
Oh, and Schuster does something I think is very unprofessional in that interview with Orly Taitz. She got flustered and called him a Nazi. A little later, he said something like, “Let me ask you this. Is it true you refused the driver NBC sent over because his name sounds Muslim?”
She appeared suprised and said no, but I think most people will come away from that thinking that she did just that.
It was interviewing through innuendo, and completely uncalled for.
If this includes people who by the time of that poll had heard about the ignored August 2001 memo titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in US” then it’s hardly an insane statement to say that “Bush knew the attacks were coming.” I’d say it sounds like an indignant exaggeration of “Bush should have known the attacks were coming” or “Bush knew something was coming and did nothing”.
I’d like to see how the question and available answers were worded before condemning 22% of Democrats as complete fruitbats. If it was “Bush knew the WTC and Pentagon were going to be attacked with hijacked planes on 9/11 and let it happen so he could start a war” or “the Bush administration themselves organized the attacks” then yeah, that’s fruity.
I don’t think that’s true. Michael Steele has said he has no doubts that Obama is a natural born citizen. John Boehner has said he has no doubt Obama was born in Hawaii. I don’t think you can say the Republican leadership has embraced the idea.
http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project It was a lot more than the memo Bush lied about receiving. The 911 Timeline is a compilation of the news stories and government reports that the Bush admin, was given. They just ignored everything.
It is definitely damaging because it is so completely and utterly preposterous that it makes anyone who espouses it look like a Scientologist giving psychiatric advice. I keep wondering what insane and idiotic plan the Republicans can come up with to hurt their party in a way that will top the last, and I thought renominating Bush in 04 was it. Then I thought torture and detentions would be untoppable, then I thought McCain tacking right would be untoppable, then I thought Palin would untoppable, but then she kept topping herself and now the birther thing looks to be the weirdest.
