John Kerry, Truther

Allah pooh-poohs this, as is his wont. I disagree.

...I thought we’d do him a solid this time and debunk this before it gets started.

Debunk? Oh dear, no. It may be true that Kerry is confused about the exact details of which walls were pulled down, but two facts are undeniable:

FACT ONE: Kerry knows full well what the "Truth" movement is, and their basic conspiracy theories. There is not a politician in America -- nor anyone politically minded, for that matter -- who has not been exposed to the "Truth." These guys get emails, faxes, phone calls, on-the-street harrassment ("Why won't you tell the truth about 9/11?," etc.). They see signs. It is simply impossible to believe he does not understand what he is being asked about in general terms, i.e., about the truth or falsity that the government was an active participant in the 9/11 terrorist attacks (or should I say "terrorist" attacks).

FACT TWO: He actively seeks to pander these imbeciles instead of telling them, properly, to get bent. Rather than simply saying "9/11 was caused by planes hitting skyscrapers, not a government-sponsored controlled demolition," he says he'd be willing to look into any theory "based on fact."

"I haven't been informed about that enough to have an opinion" is a go-to evasion used by politicians to dodge questions that might alienate part of their base, or part of the independent voting bloc they need. How did Al Gore answer when asked about Bill Clinton's alleged rape of Juanita Broadderick? He didn't know enough about it, and no, of course he had not seen the Dateline special. He just plum couldn't say a word about it.

John Kerry does the same thing here. His claim of ignorance is a cynical -- and vicious -- attempt to pander the worst sort of America-hating conspiracy schizophrenics. An elected Senator is now telling these people that their claims may have some merit; he just hasn't had the time to do all the reading necessary to form a solid opinion. And he further panders by offering to accept their "witness" (sounds sort of religious, doesn't it?) and evaluate it so that he can, perhaps, finally get to the Truth of exactly what went down on 9/11.

Rather than dismissing them as they should be dismissed, he encourages their pathological delusions. Just so he doesn't alienate that key "Truth" vote.

Debunked? I think not.

Do I believe he's a capital-T Truther? Not in the sense that he's a true believer in this lunacy. But he is a Truther in an even worse way -- he doesn't believe it, but he's perfectly willing to encourage continued libels against America. He's a supporter of the Truth movement, though not actually one himself. For the "movement," but not of it, as is often said of Republicans who aren't deemed to be conviction conservatives.

Disgraceful.

Shall we also pretend that Dennis Kucinich's proposed legislation to ban the government from using mind-control rays wasn't likewise a nasty attempt to pander to the diagnosably insane, and also a cynical calculation to elevate lunacies into respectable political discourse?

Rhetorical Questions: Sean offers the opinion that John Kerry was simply surprised and baffled by the question, which explains (and excuses) his failure to offer a straight-up refutation of the Truther conspiracy mongering.

I think that's wrong.

If someone suggested to him he had evidence the Holocaust never happened, does anyone belive he would have repsonded in the same "sure I'll look at the facts" way...?

How about if someone suggested to him Saddam had WMD's post 2003 , or that Saddam had lower-level involvement with 9/11?

You think he would have been baffled by such questions and offered a similar "I'll have to read up on that before offering an opinon" dodge? Or would he have been a tad more definitive in his answer?

Or let me put it this way:

Currently, John Kerry is on record as being of the belief that the debate over global warming is closed and no futher questioning is proper at all, but that the debate as to whether the American government blew up the WTC, WTC7, and the Pentagon -- and executed all the passengers they had taken off the remotely-controlled airplanes -- is, currently, open and subject to further review "based on fact."

posted by Ace at 04:44 PM

| Access Comments