I think everyone else understood the thrust of the OP to be honest. You will agree that there is no longer the same focus on AQ that there was in the wake of 9/11 and that the Bush et al no longer seem as willing to make public pronouncements on their intent to kill/capture Bin Laden?
What? 
And I didn’t say he did. Of course he deliberately implied it at every opportunity as has been well documented.
It could be. At a minimum, though, the linked article says that 52% did believe the link themselves.
Yes, that is when there was interest in the matter which led to the question being asked in opinion polls. If you have more recent evidence which shows that the situation has changed, feel free to cite it. I have no reason personally to believe that the situation has changed.
From that, I understand that the OP accuses Bush of stating that bin Laden is no longer a target, and that Evil One stating that bin Laden is probably being hunted would make Bush into a liar.
Quite the opposite as a matter of fact.
It may not get the same press a right after 9/11, but then we got that li’l war going on and all where Americans are dying.
What? you haven’t heard any Bush haters accusing Bush of saying Saddam was behind 9/11 in their perceived list of lies?
I believe anyone of that nature that was polled would have definately said yes while not believing it themselves.
And I guess you would be part of the 7 out of 10 right?
So saying Saddam had ties to AlQaida is automatically implied Saddam was behind 9/11?
And I have no reason to believe it is still the exact same.
I appreciate the cite. However, I agree with Puffs. Your statement was made in the present tense. I’m not going to hunt for a more recent poll, since you’re most likely right in assuming there isn’t one. The problem is that too many people don’t pay attention. I never believed there was a connection and have never heard anyone state that they did. However, I’ve never taken a poll.
When Puffs asked about the democrats, it was because it is obvious that the idea was shared on both sides of the political spectrum. You yourself used the term “average American” not those “radical right wingers.” 
Besides the obvious, I was also trying to point out that with the propensity of the left of accusing the Bush et al for lying, that there probably would be more democrats in that 70% than others and that they most likely would not have believed Bush anyway.
The PIPA poll (pdf) was taken just before the election, not a “year and a half ago”.
Why were Bush supporters so factually incorrect in their beliefs? People simply do not start believing false things randomly, otherwise Kerry supporters would have been similarly misinformed.
[quoteWhy were Bush supporters so factually incorrect in their beliefs?[/quote]
“Facts are inconvenient things.”
–Ronnie Reagan
They were never trying to find him. We do have technology that can see small words from way up high. They don’t want to “find” him, he’s a good person to blame for 9-11, thought they didn’t exactly have proof he was the mastermind (that would be people a little closer to home). I don’t even know if he’s still alive, but I doubt they’ll come up with him unless it advances an agenda.
Also, what everybody else said.
Who are “they”? According to the book Ghost Wars, Clinton and the CIA wanted to kill OBL, but could never get close enough to tell if it really was him on a couple of occasions. Once he spent a week at a falcon hunt, with the CIA close by. All they could tell was that there was someone much taller than the others present. Are you saying we would have been sure if only he’d been wearing his name-tag?
Name tag? No, they-in-charge know exactly where he is; they aren’t trying to “find” him, he will be trotted out if and when its expedient.
Do remember that if ObL gets hit by a 500 lb bomb laser guided bomb there won’t be many ways of positively ID him… and that can be a problem for the US. How do you defeat someone who doesn’t exist anymore and you can’t prove he is dead ?