Imagine that! For all the contemptuous sniggering from certain quarters about how the nutters’ concentration on the tenor of the post-911 political rhetoric (be it from Congressional Democrats, their media handmaidens, or the rabid blackfacers and conspiracy theorists slithering through the intertubes) and its likely effect on the electorate, it turns out our fears have been well founded.
Rather than being just so much obfuscation to distract brave and clear-thinking Americans from facing, with brutal honesty, the IRAQ QUAGMIRE and THE CONSTITUTIONAL UNDERMINING BY THE MOST CORRUPT AND FASCISTIC REGIME IN AMERICAN EXECUTIVE HISTORY, it turns out that the arguments claiming that what our politicians say, how our media frames stories to fit pre-selected narrative contours, and what kinds of subtle (and not so subtle) misinformation campaigns we let go uncorrected, have a demonstrable effect on that portion of public opinion that takes its cues from people like Rosie O’Donnell, Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Jimmy Carter, and crackpot continental “scientists” peddling ludicrous Zionist conspiracy theories.
Bottom line: this is precisely the kind of disturbing yield one could expect from such a coordinated and all-out anti-administration blitz. And like it or not, when your party is polling at 42% for the proposition that Bushco either carried out the 911 attacks themselves, or else allowed them to happen so that they could eventually fight an unpopular war, your party has a sickness that needs more than a few booster shots of reality serum.
Quips Allah:
I guess we should be grateful it’s not a clear majority, eh?
To which I’d reply, give it time, brother.
Hollywood is positioning itself to bring in narrative reinforcements.
If we truly had a dispassionate or “objective” press, these poll results would be introduced at every Democratic presidential candidate debate, and the candidates asked not only to agree or disagree — but to account for how over 40% of their party members polled have come to believe that Buscho either endorsed (tacitly) or actively carried out attacks against its own citizens and economy.
Bonus question for John Edwards: from which America, precisely, do these 42% hail, do you think? And would your national health care plan force them to take anti-psychotic drugs? Because if so, I might just be convinced to climb on board the COMPASSION EXPRESS!
(h/t CJ Burch; more, from SCL)
Comment by I say "pwned" too much. on 9/6 @ 2:12 pm #
Hollywood is positioning itself to bring in narrative reinforcements.
You mean we can expect something even worse than “Syriana“? Maybe a big-budget “Loose Change“? Well, at least we’ll have Cyrus Nowrasteh’s The Path to 9/11 to counteract that rubbish. Er,…won’t we?
Comment by stwendelder on 9/6 @ 2:16 pm #
What isn’t a Rovian Conspiracy, btw?
However, it is interesting that the Democratic Party is more solidified in believing in MIHOP or LIHOP than they are in supporting a particular Democratic candidate for President.
Comment by sinistar on 9/6 @ 2:17 pm #
Maybe we should start doing Michael Moore style ambush interviews and hit em with those very questions. We’ve gotta have some College Republicans who could do that, right?
Comment by sinistar on 9/6 @ 2:18 pm #
Hell, we wouldn’t even need CRs to do it, anyone could.
Comment by E4Puke on 9/6 @ 2:32 pm #
You can also include Shooter, and the new Bourne movie in that list.
Comment by JD on 9/6 @ 2:36 pm #
They should be held accountable for encouraging and supporting this type of lunacy, but alas, it will not happen.
Comment by E4Puke on 9/6 @ 2:41 pm #
I got a conspiracy theory for you. The Craig scandal broke 3 months after it happened and not near election time to keep the Hsu fundraising fleeing the country back to china scandal out of the news. Whose with me?
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 9/6 @ 2:43 pm #
I don’t think we really want to tap into that kind of paranoia.
Now if you’ll pardon me, I need to go collapse in hysterics at my own joke.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 9/6 @ 2:50 pm #
Ooh, ooh, look at Jeff’s sitemeter counter! He’s going to hit the 8 million mark within two hours time. Congratulations in advance!
Comment by E4Puke on 9/6 @ 2:56 pm #
Does that mean 8 million people aka 20 percent of the Republican party agrees with my conspiracy theory?
Comment by Kevin_B on 9/6 @ 3:01 pm #
The numbers in that poll are not totally surprising, given that in every movie or TV show made in the last twenty years, it always turns out that it wasn’t the bad guys wot dun it but a deep dark conspiracy at the heart of government/ big business/ the cops/ the FBI/ the CIA.
Not that I’m saying these shows are predictable or anything.
No, the people who really burn me up are the ones who know it really was AQ who plotted and carried out this atrocity, but who pay lip service to the conspiracy theories to further their own partisan ends.
I’m talking politicians and media people especially here.
They are telling us not to trust the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary, as well as the Civil Service – from the local cops and firefighters to the Justice Department- and they know its all lies.
Pretty soon America is going to be ungovenable, and these craven bastards will probably blame Bush for that as well.
Comment by Cafe Alpha on 9/6 @ 3:02 pm #
Yes, well 58% of Republicans polled said that the 9/11 commission should have investigated “building 7″, that’s 85% as many as democrats.
Apparently the whole fucking country is made of troothers, including Zogby of course for crafting this poll.
Comment by Cafe Alpha on 9/6 @ 3:06 pm #
That’s more damning than the 42% since the question was ambiguous.
Does “let it happen” mean:
1 that they knew, or
2. that they should have paid attention to the little bits of intelligence they had, or
3. that they should have had better intelligence/more competent agencies.
Answer it obviously means the same thing you believe if you happen to believe either 1, 2 or 3.
It’s a multiple-interpretation, catch-all question. Not a well designed poll, unless this misinterpretation is what you’re shooting for.
I’d say Zogby is skilled at using polls to manipulate the press. The ambiguity of the question was intentional.
Trackback by 123beta on 9/6 @ 3:07 pm #
Thursday Good Stuff…
There some very interesting posts out today from some of my favorite bloggers. Here’s a round-up……
Comment by JD on 9/6 @ 3:08 pm #
Cafe – That is an abberration in comparison to the rest of the poll. Given the amount of mainstream criticism of how the government blew up that building, I am surprised the numbers weren’t higher.
Comment by JD on 9/6 @ 3:13 pm #
Cafe Alpha – Your definitions, #’s 2 and 3, simply do not and cannot fit logically with “let it happen”. Letting something happen means it was known about in advance, and it could have been averted. It does NOT imply that they could have known about it, or that they should have known about it, and if they had they might have been able to avert it. Your attempts to expand the plain and obvious meaning of “let it happen” are not at all surprising, given the fact that it sheds a pretty fucking bad light on your party.
How about you give this kind of scrutiny to the next poll that says President Bush’s approval ratings are lower than Saddam’s, or something to that effect.
In conclusion, no rational person could take the phrase “let it happen”, and interpret it in the manner you suggested, unless they were intentionally being dishonest.
Comment by Farmer Joe on 9/6 @ 3:18 pm #
I SOOOOOO hope this question comes up in the general election. Let’s just fucking have this out in public right now.
Comment by dicentra on 9/6 @ 3:38 pm #
[N]o rational person could take the phrase “let it happen”, and interpret it in the manner you suggested, unless they were intentionally being dishonest.
And this doesn’t describe 42% of Dems?
Comment by Pat Curley on 9/6 @ 3:50 pm #
Thanks for the link, Jeff. Our focus at SLC is battling the MIHOP crowd, so we’re thrilled with this poll since 4.6% is a staggeringly low number for them; it’s almost within the margin of error (3.1%). The Democrats do have a problem with their base on LIHOP, but this may partly be the way the media have oversold the “warning” in the August 6 PDB, and of course simple BDS.
Comment by Cafe Alpha on 9/6 @ 4:06 pm #
[N]o rational person could take the phrase “let it happenâ€Â, and interpret it in the manner you suggested, unless they were intentionally being dishonest.
And this doesn’t describe 42% of Dems?
Bingo. I always thought that the polls need to take sarcasm into account, but maybe rhetorical dishonesty as well.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/6 @ 4:07 pm #
Karl looked at this the other day… the article directly talks specifically about trutherism, and postulates that it becomes more entrenched the more it is argued against, though it also says this:
Comment by mastour on 9/6 @ 4:21 pm #
Jeff,
After careful consideration of your post, I claim racism in your using the word “sniggering” to describe the malfactors involved in attempting to change the narrative of who and how the attacks on 9/11 transpired. Too close to the word itself, therefore verboten. Additionally, the term “blackface” brings too much attention to those completely enthralled with the Democratic party, again reflecting the in your face attitude so often reflected on your blog. Other than that, carry on.
/s off
Comment by MikeD on 9/6 @ 4:25 pm #
Funny, I always thought that universal suffrage was predicated on the understanding that the electorate was smart enough to tie its own shoes. The Democrats sure seem intent on putting the lie to that.
Comment by JD on 9/6 @ 4:25 pm #
“I always thought that the polls need to take sarcasm into account, but maybe rhetorical dishonesty as well.”
Who is being sarcastic, or rhetorically dishonest?
Comment by Good Lt. on 9/6 @ 4:46 pm #
The 9-11 Commission was not formed to investigate the collapse of the Twin Towers. It was formed to investigate AQ, Bin Laden and the criminal and governmental failures that led to the attack.
The NIST report and FEMA report were the scientific and engineering analyses that examined the actual building collapses.
Any Troofer who blabs about the 9-11 Commission and mentions WTC7 or collapses in the same sentence is erecting a straw man to attack and a factual inaccuracy that is easily countered by simply mentioning this fact.
Today’s anti-Twoofer tip is brought to you by a sane person :-)
Comment by ahem on 9/6 @ 5:17 pm #
Me.
Comment by BenPope on 9/6 @ 6:01 pm #
Gee, you missed the really interesting stat.
41% of Catholics are truthers or quasi-truthers.
Whats the explanation for that?
Comment by Jeff G. on 9/6 @ 6:19 pm #
That there are plenty of Catholic Democrats?
Pingback by Blue Crab Boulevard » A Lesson In Push Polling on 9/6 @ 8:21 pm #
[...] Others: The Jawa Report, protein wisdom, Gateway Pundit, Dr. Sanity, Discerning Texan, [...]
Comment by Cafe Alpha on 9/6 @ 8:22 pm #
Who is being sarcastic, or rhetorically dishonest?
I meant some of the poll respondents, obviously.
Tip for pollsters, when your sample responds to your question with “sure, of course” he just might be sarcastic.
Comment by Jeff G. on 9/6 @ 8:26 pm #
If maggie, rto, brd, major john, et al are around, I thought they’d like this, from John Cole, posting in the comments over at Outside the Beltway (where he is making the case that Bush is the worstest villain EVER):
.
The loss, it is inevitable. Because of the overstretching. And of course, Petraeus can’t be trusted.
True conservative.
Reasonable.
Interestingly, James Joyner believes we’re losing the war, as well, and cuts the Dems calling the upcoming Petraeus report the “Bush Report” a whole lot of slack. But as a commenter over there notes that the White House is required to have a hand in the report:
The law is the Supplemental Appropriations Law (Public Law 110-28, “U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007″)
(A) The President shall submit an initial report, in classified and unclassified format, to the Congress, not later than July 15, 2007, assessing the status of each of the specific benchmarks established above, and declaring, in his judgment, whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is, or is not, being achieved.
(B) The President, having consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Commander, Multi-National Forces-Iraq, the United States Ambassador to Iraq, and the Commander of U.S. Central Command, will prepare the report and submit the report to Congress. [...]
the law mandates no written report from him or Amb. Crocker. What it does mandate, however, is that Petraeus and Crocker deliver an assessment via testimony to the Congress prior to the Sept. 15th benchmark report to be delivered by the WH.
(due to time constraints i lifted this)
I’m no lawer and this could be total bunk but i’ve seen it before.Anybody care to comment on the legal bit?
Sad to see Joyner’s site picking up a host of recognizable commenters, from Markg8 to davebo to Cole to others who know that the war is lost, and that any suggestions of progress will be an effort to hide the larger defeat.
Meanwhile, the guys over there reporting — Yon, Ardolino, Roggio, Emmanuel — keep telling stories that fly in the face of such dire assessments. Joining them of late are European skeptics, from the Guardian to the BBC to Der Spiegel.
What to make of all this?
Beats me.
Cole has absolute moral authority, though, having served — even if these days all he does is shit on the Administration, pronounce the war lost, claim that the military broken, and tout himself as one of the very few honest righties around.
From the seat of his recumbent bike.
I weep for such pessimists.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/6 @ 8:36 pm #
That says July.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/6 @ 8:45 pm #
(Sec. 1314) States that, hereafter, U.S. strategy in Iraq shall be conditioned on the Iraqi government meeting specified political, security, and economic benchmarks, as told to Members of Congress by the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and reflected in the Iraqi government’s commitments to the United States and the international community. Requires the President to submit reports to Congress on how the Iraqi government is or is not achieving progress in accomplishing the benchmarks, and to advise Congress on how that assessment requires, or does not require, changes to the strategy announced on January 10, 2007. Provides report deadlines.
Trackback by Blue Star Chronicles on 9/6 @ 9:39 pm #
42% of Democrats Think George Bush Caused 9/11 or Let it Happen…
The Truthers are absolutely giddy at the Zogby poll results that confirms 42% of democrats believe that the Bush administration orchestrated the events of 9/11/2001, or at the very least set back and let it happen.
Screw Loose Change dissec…
Comment by maggie katzen on 9/7 @ 1:56 am #
I’m too tired to even know where to start with that…
anyhoo, I’ve mentioned it before, but it really annoys me that they seem to think that President Bush is micromanaging the war. I don’t know how you break that circle of “the generals are just saying what the president told them to” it couldn’t POSSIBLY be that the President is accepting the military’s reporting and analysis (but then, they want to keep their jobs, so of course they’ll only tell him good things). Perhaps if he stormed out of a briefing one time or something.
I’ll try to give RTO a heads up on this, I think he’s been avoiding the intertubes lately, not sure what he’s up to, seen him all of a half hour today (show opens tomorrow!). maybe he’s getting ready for his trip to DC. Let’s just pray he doesn’t snap (as veterans are prone to do) upon spotting Reid or Pelosi or Murtha, or etc. and get himself arrested.
m’kay, conkin’ out now.
Comment by U.S. Grant on 9/7 @ 8:14 am #
Where do I go to get my reputation back?
Comment by Bender Bending Rodriguez on 9/7 @ 8:44 am #
41% of Catholics are truthers or quasi-truthers. Whats the explanation for that?
Mexicans?
A quick look at the racial/economic breakdowns shows that a the biggest truthers are blacks and Hispanics making less than $35K a year.
They’re buying the insane conspiracy theories that Real Americans won’t believe.
Comment by McGehee on 9/7 @ 8:52 am #
Yet another data point correlating conspiracy theory with the victim-identity outlook. I guess anything, no matter how discordant with observable reality, is better than just accepting that your life sucks because your life sucks.
Comment by memomachine on 9/7 @ 9:18 am #
Hmmmm.
Remember folks. Fire never melted steel.
What I find curious is that these liberals have such a tenuous hold on reality, science and logic that they simply are too ignorant to realize that they sound like complete idiots.
Comment by JD on 9/7 @ 9:23 am #
memomachine – Since this will never see the light of day in the mainstream media, they are not even bothered by it. If it does, they will just attack polling, ignoring their reliance on same.
Pingback by On "the Bush Report" on 9/7 @ 9:49 am #
[...] why not? After all, they must know by now that at least, say, oh, 42% of their constituents, will believe the worst without even batting a critical [...]
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 10:50 am #
I’ll see the 42% who think Bush was responsible and raise you the 41% who think Saddam Hussein was responsible (Newsweek, June 23 2007). I can’t be sure they don’t overlap, of course, but if they don’t, that leaves only 17% who might think it was Al Qaeda, which explains the general populace’s OJ-esque attitude towards the search for the real killer.
Or, and I’m going to go out on a limb here, not every poll that comes down the pike is worth getting all fussy about, given the tendency that Cafe Alpha pointed out for reductive fallacies.
Comment by B Moe on 9/7 @ 11:05 am #
“I’ll see the 42% who think Bush was responsible and raise you the 41% who think Saddam Hussein was responsible (Newsweek, June 23 2007). I can’t be sure they don’t overlap…”
I would guess there is a significant overlap: Saddam helped and Bush looked the other way. What? Don Rumsfield shook Saddam’s hand, you know, how much more proof do you need?
Comment by JD on 9/7 @ 11:15 am #
Those aren’t really comparable, Gabriel. It does not take mental gymnastics to think that Saddam could have had a role, given his ties to terrorism in general, and AQ in particular. On the other hand, one must subscribe to a whole system of beliefs, motivations, and overall bad faith in order to believe that President Bush knew about 9/11 in advance, and failed to stop it, or even worse, had a hand in it.
Comment by Jeff G. on 9/7 @ 11:24 am #
Got the link to the Newsweek poll, Gabriel?
And I don’t get “fussy” about every poll that comes out. However, when Zogby starts polling based on the wishes of Troothers, I perk up a bit.
Brightens my otherwise nondescript day.
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 11:34 am #
It maybe didn’t used to take mental gymnastics, but in mid-2007? Is there anyone (other than Cheney) who hasn’t openly repudiated that claim, including the president? These people are either basically ignorant (5% of those polled thought Brezhnev was the leader of Russia) or overly indulgent of conspiracy theories (the Liberal Elites are covering up Saddam’s involvement with their total newspaper control, and backing it up with reinforcement from Hollywood!), and either way I’d put them on par with the “false flag” brigade as far as gullibility goes.
Unless, of course, you want to concede that the likelihood that half the Democratic party thinks Bush called in an airstrike on the Pentagon is not ENTIRELY plausible and that such a conclusion casts more doubt on the reliability of the polling than on the beliefs of the lefties who picked up the phone.
Comment by JD on 9/7 @ 11:46 am #
Then why is it that polling is used by the Leftist to attempt to bolster their position about the war, approval ratings, and popularity of their positions? Are we to believe polls when they are working in the Libs favor, but argue against the methodology when it paints them in a bad light?
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 11:54 am #
It was this one. I didn’t try to link to it because I’m terrified of messing up html codes. And using words like “fussy” brightens MY otherwise nondescript day. No offense meant (don’t get all fussy about it). I think that perhaps Zogby is not immune to wording poll questions in order to elicit more “newsworthy” results, and that Alpha’s point is just the sort of grain of salt with which one ought to take it. Given that the sort of horrifically inelegant sentence structure I just deployed and am currently continuing to deploy could have snuck its way into the poll and caused just enough confusion in the pollee to make him or her think that perhaps the answer that most closely tracked to the position that perhaps Mr. Bush could have taken the threat of terrorism a smidge more seriously was “Bush let this happen” and, in his or her desire to be heard and understood, checked that box.
Comment by Jeff G. on 9/7 @ 12:01 pm #
“Do you think Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001?”
Define directly.
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 12:08 pm #
No sir JD. We are supposed to believe that politicians lie, compulsively and reliably, and that therefore you can be relatively certain that if they’re agreeing with you for any reason, it’s because they want something. Or, in other words, nothing’s as bad as they make it sound on TV. Sure, there are people who think that Bush let the 9/11 attacks happen, but 42% of Democrats? And there are people who think that Saddam was going to make a nuclear bomb and just GIVE it to a foreign organization (that was none too fond of him) on the basis of a handshake agreement that they would smuggle it into the US because the one thing that they all agreed upon was that they really just hated the crap out of our freedom, but is it that large a group? It just doesn’t sound especially plausible. We’re not a nation of tinfoil-hat-wearing cave-dwellers.
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 12:17 pm #
“Define directly.”
Well yeah. That question lumps those who think Saddam slapped Atta on the back as he climbed into the cockpit with those who think that Iraqi funding earmarked for supporting the intifada suicide-bombers’ families could have reasonably been diverted into procuring a green card for a guy who helped negotiate visas for one of the bombers. It’s not reliable.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/7 @ 12:21 pm #
If anyone let the 9/11 attacks happen, it was Bill Clinton. Democrats know this, and displace the blame onto Bush. The “Bush caused 9/11″ meme, in other words, is blame-shifting, not a true embrace of conspiracism. That explains the resonance these questions had with Democrats.
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 12:38 pm #
I’d consider it a joint effort. True bipartisanship. Reaching across the aisle to make a difference for ordinary Americans.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/7 @ 1:01 pm #
But you are not a truther person.
Comment by JD on 9/7 @ 1:03 pm #
Well said. And now we know that Pres. Clinton flat out lied on Fox when he went apeshit over the question about OBL. His (over)reaction seemed odd at the time, and it turned out he tried to used bluster to cover for a complete lack of action.
Comment by Gabriel Fry on 9/7 @ 1:13 pm #
No, I’m not a truther. Bush sniggers when he thinks he’s getting away with something. I could take that guy to the bank in poker. No way he could pull that off. Not even with the help of the Trilateral Commission and/or the Illuminati.
Trackback by Low Fat Sampler 2 on 11/24 @ 1:45 pm #
Low Fat Sampler 2
Sample 2 (Figure SAMPLE MENU: BREAKFAST 2 slices wholemeal toast with jam or marm
Trackback by Tefl Ratings on 11/25 @ 11:40 am #
Tefl Ratings
By: TEFL Worldwide Prague Plays: 45 Comments: 0. Overall user rating TEFL Teac
Trackback by Tefl China on 11/27 @ 4:54 am #
Tefl China
An incredible employment opportunity with a prestige school in China. I ve been teaching in China fo
Trackback by Poker Face Rug on 12/6 @ 4:28 pm #
Poker Face Rug
This great accent rug is made of 100% nylon, complete with a non-slip foam backing, and is
Trackback by Tefl Ratings on 12/18 @ 2:43 pm #
Tefl Ratings
0 ratings I own it, Not rated, Your rating Don t like it I love
Trackback by Tefl In China on 12/28 @ 1:00 pm #
Tefl In China
The Pearl River Delta, which includes The LTI TEFL course provides both the traini