Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dy156
well, it had a bad title, but this idea could bring about some interesting discussion. I'll try my best to elevate this thing and even maybe allow some insight, too.
For every white-trash confederate flag waving moron who supports Bush, there is an equally out of touch treehugging peacenik hippie that supports Kerry. For every wealthy lawyer that supports kerry, there is an even wealthier doctor that supports Bush. For every brilliant professor that supports Kerry, there is a corporate vice president of something-or-other that supports Bush. For every billionaire that supports Kerry there are two millionaires that support Bush. You get the picture.
|
Yes. There are stupid people everywhere supporting anything.
But show me where the majority of Kerry's supporters support him because they believe in a known fantasy.
Quote:
The conclusions of this report are based on two false premises.
1. there was no link
While I think it is clear that Iraq did not have direct involvement with the 9/11 attackers, the ongoing problems there and the influx of non-Iraqi islamic people wanting to destroy Americans and violently create havoc might lead one to believe that there is, in fact a link.
|
This is not a false premise of the report. It
might lead someone to believe there is a link - but the reality is that there was no link. It is not a false premise of the report that people believe something which is not true. That is actually the entire premise of the report.
Quote:
|
2. as was stated earlier, the presumption that support of the war in iraq meant a belief that wmd existed in iraq. Personally, I thought Bush was using the possibility of WMD as justification, or an excuse, to enter war, and make it more palatable to the world to do so. It was a very good justification, if true, but I for one, and at least one other poster above would have supported an invasion of Iraq even if there had not been "proof" of WMD.
|
This is all past-tense. We're talking about people that
currently believe the fantasy that Iraq had WMDs. And I have already addressed the question of why I am claiming that these people are basing their decisions on this fantasy: I find it hard to believe that someone who very likely says that they support Candidate X because he is tough on terror and Iraq is good does not base a LARGE portion of that support on their belief in the fantasy that Iraq had WMDs and a connection with Al Qaeda.
Quote:
|
You could just as easily create a questionaire and ask Kerry supporters about economic issues like, have the bush tax cuts helped the rich and hurt the poor? Kerry supporters would likely say yes.
|
Except there are many experts on both sides who will give you their opinion on both sides of the tax issue. There are no experts who now believe Iraq had WMDs or a connection with Al Qaeda. This is not a question of which opinion do you believe, it is an issue of believing something which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be false with no evidence of its' validity.
We could argue over the color of the sky - you could say it's neon green and I could say it's blue. I can walk outside and prove my opinion, but you cannot prove it is neon green. Therefore the belief that the sky is neon green is a fantasy.