Sponsored Links |
|
The problem with the truther designation, from my understanding of it, is that there are degrees of "truther". There are those hard core nutburgers, who think it was a conspiracy, with active participation, down to, and including, placement of explosive devices in the buildings. There are those, slightly less nutburgers who think it was actual knowledge of the specific event, and made the active decision to not do anything to stop it. A third group, who are still considered truthers are those who think that the administration knew about the event, but no specific knowledge as to time and date. A fourth group is those who believe the administration knew something was going to happen somewhere, at or around the date. Finally, there are those who believe the administration was told about Al Qaeda, and made the decision not to pay enough attention to them.
Compare that with the binary decision, ACORN did steal the election. That is a simple yes or no.
Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?
1 Kings 11:3: “He (Solomon) had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.” -- Biblical marriage. One man, seven hundred women.
"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?"
That was the question. That is a conspiracy theory.
Probably a combination of the three reasons you present.Originally Posted by Labgrownmangoat
Sponsored Links |
|
I could read the second question, in context of warning we know did take place, and were not acted upon, and come up with a non conspiracy. For giggles, I Googled this question...Who warned of 9/11.
I got hits from the NY Times, Washington Post, ABC News, and more. I think these hits could fall into the "truther" answer to that question. Or, maybe I am just missing the mark.
Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?
You are ignoring the "because."
That's the part that crosses the line from just negligent to purposeful. What you're defending is the idea that they were negligent.
But that's not what the question talks about. The question is a straight truther question. There are two broad categories of truther: "LIHOP" and "MIHOP" standing for "let it happen on purpose" and "made it happen on purpose."
That's what the question asks. If you fall into either of those categories, you are a truther.
If you are just saying that the Bush administration did not take the threat seriously enough; you aren't a conspiracy theorist. But I think you are engaging in a little bit of hindsight bias. That "Bin Laden determined to attack within the United States" memo is a good example of hindsight bias.
Oh boy.
My apologies, fellas. I was simply joking about the mental hurdle the triple statistical breakdown was making me go through. I was so tired, and I literally stoppped for 10 minutes trying to fully follow and understand the concept. I was just joking about my lack of ability to follow the mental math.
I did not intend to derail the thread, honestly. Sorry about that.
Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?
I'm still stunned that there was discussion (diversion) of the actual poll and the discussion shifted to Democrats and birthers.
Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!
I wonder how other, less partisan conspiracy theories would turn out when broken down by party. Are Democrats or Republicans, for example, more likely to believe in the moon landing hoax theory? Would it be split evenly? I have no idea, I'm actually asking here, but I'm wondering if there is something about one party or the other that might attract people of a mindset that is more accepting of conspiracy theories.
"There's no better public education than teaching kids that they should have been born to a parent who could afford their cancer treatments." - @LOLGOP
Often in political debates, the discussion becomes "well your side does it too!" and then people go back and forth to try and one-up one another on why the other's party is worse.
I think we can all agree that polls are often skewed, and peoples' interpretation of polsl are that they will agree with polls that represent their POV(or fit in line with their expected outcomes), and reject the validity of all others that do not.
Sponsored Links |
|