|
To understand why they don't react to stories like this. First, they are told stories like this daily, about both parties, even about friends of theirs. 99% of the conspiracy theories they hear are ridiculous nonsense. So they tune out anything that doesn't have a federal indictment attached to it.
Second, they are busy. They don't have time to read as much as we do here. They have staff that does it for them, then summarizes, but in summary, again, some of these ideas don't make much sense. They assume someone else will take care of it and report back to them if they learn something.
Third, most people in Congress face a dozen of these types of accusations each time they run for reelection. They know it is a lie about them, so they give others the benefit of the doubt. Especially people of the same party.
Fourth, even those few who believe there is something to it aren't going to shout about it without proof. Look what happened to Cynthia McKinney. Even those who aren't afraid of looking like idiots know that speaking out is wasting their breath without proof.
Fifth, keep in mind that people who run are type As. They are aggressive, with quick attention spans, and don't dwell on things they can't do anything about. It's just their personalities. If they had other personalities, they wouldn't get elected as often.
Sixth, there are a lot of facts in stories like these, but there are also a lot of tenuous connections without proof. We know that Bush has had a close connection to the Saudi gov't, and to the Bin Laden family, through investments. We know Bush has been investigated. We know Bush got the Bin Ladens out of America after 9-11. That's what we know. The idea that there is a history of complicency, or less, just of being blinded to the wrongdoings of friends, is another argument. It is constructed from facts, but the facts can lead to other conclussions, especially when stretched out over that long a period. Everyone in Congress can be linked to unsavory business deals, often that they aren't aware of. It's the nature of money. There aren't a lot of really rich people, and so money tends to be connected at that level. You can play monetary seven degrees of Kevin Bacon all day long, and link anyone with over 200K to a terrorist, a drug dealer, a criminal. They did it to Clinton. You can do it to anyone. So again, Congress isn't inclined to believe these connections, since those same types of connections have been drawn about most of them.
Even Bush hurrying the Bin Ladens out of America makes sense, even by Bush's explanation. He was worried about the backlash to the family. They were investigated and found to have no connection. For their safety, they had to be flown out, quickly. What can be more American than protecting the underdog? heck, I even believe it. Think about it-- if they had some knowledge of what was about to happen, why in the hell would they have been here still? They would have understood what blame they would face.
That's all stuff you have to understand to get anything done in Washington. It's also why you can't plan on the magic wand of impeachment or even the smoking gun of damning evidence being waved at Bush. We have to beat him the old fashioned way, and all of our efforts have to go to that. Otherwise, we will wind up like the Republicans in 965, wondering why no one saw how bad a guy our opponent was. It wasn't true with Clinton, it is with Bush, but without strong evidence -- and Bush is hiding that-- most people can't see the difference.
We look no different to the outside world than the accusers of Clinton did. You know that, right? To an independent, to a non-involved voter, and to much of Congress, that's how we look.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
