Fahrenheit 9/11

[cantdog]

I'm afraid hundreds of us armed ourselves after Kent State and Jackson State.

They had to go after some of us with death squads.

Surely you jest.

cantdog

 

[shereads]

I'm afraid hundreds of us armed ourselves after Kent State and Jackson State.

They had to go after some of us with death squads.

Surely you jest.

cantdog

"No, and don't call me Shirley."

~ Leslie Nielsen in the landmark art-house film, "Airplane."



"He's in the hospital?! What is it?"

"It's a big building with patients. But there's no time for that now."

Don't make me continue with this, cantdog. After Airplane, there's Young Frankenstein, and then Blazing Saddles.

My point, which you dodged as blithely as a greased neo-con (sorry, I'm not really comparing you, I just couldn't resist the imagery) is that if our government fears us because some of us own guns, they can kill us with missiles, tanks, grenades, bombs, anthrax or smallpox. They're better armed than you are, no matter what.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

This rather silly logic doesn't hold water. One can't kill you from 500 meters away with a knife. Nor can one accidentally blow your heart out of your back with a knife. You seem to want to limit subject of discourse to bolt action rifles used in what you term "notorious crimes" I don't stipulate to that arbitrarily narrow distinction. As I said previously, people are killed with hunting rifles all of the time. But a gun is a gun, and the United States leads the world in gun deaths and gun murders. In 2001 there were 29,573 gun deaths in the United States, 11,348 of them were classed as homicides. That is a figure 19 times higher than the combined rate of 35 other rich industrialized nations. Most of those guns, as you well know, were legitimately purchased firearms.

Given America's epidemic of gun violence, the last thing anyone needs to be giving away is another gun.


15-year-old boy was shot with a hunting rifle.

Toddler Shot



Gun Deaths John Hopkins

I did set the term bolt action hunting rifle. That was the scope of the discussion based on the gun that the bank was giving away. You don't like "notorious"? Okay, just find crimes or murders with bolt action hunting rifles.

Your first link was an accidental shooting. It wasn't the purposeful comission of a crime or murder. The second link called toddler doesn't work.

Here's some stabbing news:

Man kills gandmother and ex GF. Particularly gruesome

As for the "rcih industrialized nations", here's a nice one from Japan.

Japanese girl kills classmate

Let's keep it in the "rich, industrialized nations" for a little bit. Japan has strict gun control, as do England and Australia.

Australian woman stabbed

British cop stabbed

Back to America now.

Man kills wife, child and himself with knife

Penn man stabbed

Houston woman

Funny that you mention 29,573 gun deaths. Did you know that included in the term "gun deaths" are suicides? Did you know that suicides make up OVER HALF of the "gun deaths" in America?

Pasted quote from a rather lengthy dissertation from the CDC's website:

Older people's gun deaths are most likely to be suicides. Suicides typically make up 56.5% of all gun deaths according to the Bureau Of Justice Statistics. In fact, drugs and suicides account for more than 2 out of every 3 gun deaths in the USA.

A gun is an inanimate object. It has no will of it's own. Yet, certain people try to villify the gun as an evil object instead of looking at the person that used the gun to commit an act of violence. If a drunk driver kills someone, do you blame the car? The car maker? The alcohol maker? No, you blame the driver. Yet when a gun is used to kill someone, you blame the gun. 9-11 was done with boxcutters. Do you blame the boxcutter? There's over 3,000 dead in one day with no guns involved at all.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

"No, and don't call me Shirley."

~ Leslie Nielsen in the landmark art-house film, "Airplane."



"He's in the hospital?! What is it?"

"It's a big building with patients. But there's no time for that now."

Don't make me continue with this, cantdog. After Airplane, there's Young Frankenstein, and then Blazing Saddles.

My point, which you dodged as blithely as a greased neo-con (sorry, I'm not really comparing you, I just couldn't resist the imagery) is that if our government fears us because some of us own guns, they can kill us with missiles, tanks, grenades, bombs, anthrax or smallpox. They're better armed than you are, no matter what.

LMAO to the Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles. Two true american classics, both of which I have on DVD.

Somebodys gonna have to go back to town and get a shit load of dimes.

 

[Clare Quilty]

Funny that you mention 29,573 gun deaths. Did you know that included in the term "gun deaths" are suicides? Did you know that suicides make up OVER HALF of the "gun deaths" in America?

Of course I knew it. I mentioned in my post that + 11,000 of the 29, 573 gun deaths in 2001 were murders. I don't quite understand your logic in making the distinction between murders, suicides and accidental gun deaths. Take away the guns and the combined number drops to zero. Only a nation suffering from some sort of gun crazed mania would think that roughly 30,000 easily preventable gun deaths per year is acceptable.

As to the tangential knife business, I'm not willing to indulge you in that silliness -- that is unless you show me where 30,000 Americans were killed with knives in a single year.

 

[cantdog]

My point, which you dodged as blithely as a greased neo-con (sorry, I'm not really comparing you, I just couldn't resist the imagery) is that if our government fears us because some of us own guns, they can kill us with missiles, tanks, grenades, bombs, anthrax or smallpox. They're better armed than you are, no matter what.

Miss Eads, I do love you. No offense taken at your simile.

Of course they are. More powerful, better armed, and everything. And still wrong. I am always humbled when people resist that kind of force, like they do, time and again. More courage than I could muster.

I made my share of demos, and I've been doing it again lately. But when they do one in Haiti, where they had to get by machine guns to even vote last time, for instance, I just can't imagine where the courage comes from.

Labor history is full of such examples in this country. They are always more powerful. I didn't happen to think, myself, that walking around with a gun on my leg was the answer to Jackson State, but if they'd stated with the tanks I might have. Guerillas win.

cantdog

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Of course I knew it. I mentioned in my post that + 11,000 of the 29, 573 gun deaths in 2001 were murders. I don't quite understand your logic in making the distinction between murders, suicides and accidental gun deaths. Take away the guns and the combined number drops to zero. Only a nation suffering from some sort of gun crazed mania would think that roughly 30,000 easily preventable gun deaths per year is acceptable.

As to the tangential knife business, I'm not willing to indulge you in that silliness -- that is unless you show me where 30,000 Americans were killed with knives in a single year.

I've already pointed out over 3,000 being killed because of a boxcutter in one day. Isn't a boxcutter a knife?

I spent 5 minutes searching and found the ten stabbing responses to your one instance of death by hunting rifle. All mine were less than two weeks old. I was particularly impressed by the guy in NJ beheading his grandmother and chopping off her hands and feet as well.

I also put one in there of a guy that killed himself with a knife after killing his wife and one of his kids. There's your suicide.

You completely avoided the issue of the gun being an inanimate object. You wouldn't blame the knife or the car because of what the person did, but you're all over blaming the gun. Yet at the same time you admit owning three.

I also resent you calling me a gun crazed maniac in the other thread, though I'm not suprised. It's a tactic of the weak minded when they realize they're losing an argument to launch into personal attacks. Divert attention away from the things that you can't defend or dispute.

So how am I a gun crazed maniac, or whatever it was that you called me? I've never comitted a crime, never been in jail, never even been charged with any type of crime other than a speeding ticket.

I defend my RIGHT to keep and bear arms as a law abiding citizen, and you attack me on a personal level. I'll debate the issue with you all you want, but if all you've got to offer is personal attacks, let me know so I can bow out of this one.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

... I spent 5 minutes searching and found the ten stabbing responses to your one instance of death by hunting rifle....

I just Googled: Kentucky “Mental Disease” and came up with 3,440 hits.

I don’t know if that means there are 3,440 mentally diseased patients in Kentucky, or whether all those citations were about you, but I am impressed by the way you use statistics.

 

[shereads]

I made my share of demos, and I've been doing it again lately. But when they do one in Haiti, where they had to get by machine guns to even vote last time, for instance, I just can't imagine where the courage comes from.

Why, from America's promise of support for their emerging democracy, of course.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Time for rebuttal of some of Claires quotes and statements:

This is simply isn't true. People are murdered with hunting rifles all the time. Whether or not those rifles were 6.5 mm bolt-action Mannlicher-Carcano's or not is immaterial.

Most of those guns, as you well know, were legitimately purchased firearms.


This rather silly logic doesn't hold water. One can't kill you from 500 meters away with a knife. Nor can one accidentally blow your heart out of your back with a knife.

Define legitimately purchased. All of the data that I am about to post comes from the dept of Justice. I'll provide links to all of it. It centers around a study done of inmates at both the state and federal level concerning guns and crime.

Among prisoners who carried a firearm during the offense, 14% had had bought or traded for the gun from a store, pawnshop, flea market or gun show.

That translates into the only "legal" way to get a gun. The rest of the gun acquisitions came through illegal manners such as friends or family, which is a straw purchase. Or buying them on the street. So your theory of most of the guns were legally purchased is officially rebuffed by the Dept. of Justice. Only 14% of them were.

DOJ website

Make sure to download the acrobat file at the bottom of the page, that's where all the actual numbers are. It is an 18 page file.

Other interesting tidbits from that database are:

1. Of the prisoners surveryed in that poll, only 1.3% of them were armed with a rifle during their current offense. This doesn't simply mean "bolt action hunting rifle", it means any rifle to include SKS, AR-15's and any other semi auto assault rifle.

2. Less than 2% of inmates reported ever carrying a fully automatic or military style semi automatic rifle. If less than two percent are carrying assault rifles, how many do you think were carrying bolt action rifles?

3. Inmates reported that a handgun was their preferred firearm. Of those carrying a firearm, 83% of state, and 87% of Federal said that they carried a handgun during the offense for which they were serving.

Now onto your assertions that knives don't pose the same threat as a long gun because you can't knife someone from 500 meters.

In the following data from the DOJ, they classify guns in two categories: Hand gun and other gun. Other gun includes any type of rifle or shotgun. Among others it includes all assault rifles, street sweeper shotguns, and regular rifles and shot guns. Anything other than a pistol.

From 1990-2000, stabbings accounted for 39,009 deaths in America. During that same ten year span, 29,998 deaths were reported by "other guns". So if the rifle is so much more dangerous than the knife, why did 9,000 more people die by the knife in that ten year span?

DOJ graph

Click on the graph itself, and it will give you a year by year breakdown in numbers of deaths by different weapons.

Your argument of rifles being so much more of a menace to society simply doesn't hold water according to the Dept of Justice.

Here's an interesting fact sheet that I found in my search. I haven't referenced anything off of it in this post, but it has a lot of information for those that may be interested in reading it.

Just facts.com

Lastly, where does John Kerry stand on the issue of guns? Here's the pasted text from his website:

John Kerry is a gun owner and hunter, and he believes that law-abiding American adults have the right to own guns. But like all of our rights, gun rights come with responsibilities, and those rights allow for reasonable restrictions to keep guns out of the wrong hands. John Kerry strongly supports all of the federal gun laws on the books, and he would take steps to ensure that they are vigorously enforced, cracking down hard on the gun runners, corrupt dealers, straw buyers, and thieves that are putting guns into the hands of criminals in the first place. He will also close the gun show loophole, which is allowing criminals to get access to guns at gun shows without background checks, fix the background check system, which is in a serious state of disrepair, and require that all handguns be sold with a child safety lock.

johnkerry.com

So does this mean that Kerry is a "gun crazed maniac" as well? He is a hunter and gun owner. He believes that law abiding adults have the right to own guns. I agree with every word that Kerry says in that statement. So I guess that means Kerry and I are on the same level on this one. Either we're both "gun crazed maniacs", or we're both responsible gun owners that believes in the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns. I know how I classify myself and Sen. Kerry on this issue, you can call us whatever you want.

 

[Clare Quilty]

I made my share of demos, and I've been doing it again lately. But when they do one in Haiti, where they had to get by machine guns to even vote last time, for instance, I just can't imagine where the courage comes from.

That's the price that must be paid to undo tyranny. You have to be willing to die in opposing them thereby exposing their true nature to the international community. The powers that be don't care about a lightly armed ramble. They are never going to be in harm's way. The way to defeat a vastly militarily superior unjust government is by taking a page from the book of Ghandi and King.

 

[Clare Quilty]

Why, from America's promise of support for their emerging democracy, of course.

Why does this sound like "America's promise to install a brutal anti-communist strong-man who'll grind your bones to make his bread" to me?

 

[shereads]

Why does this sound like "America's promise to install a brutal anti-communist strong-man who'll grind your bones to make his bread" to me?

"We're from the government. You can trust us."

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Time for rebuttal of some of Claires quotes and statements:



Define legitimately purchased. All of the data that I am about to post comes from the dept of Justice. I'll provide links to all of it. It centers around a study done of inmates at both the state and federal level concerning guns and crime.

Among prisoners who carried a firearm during the offense, 14% had had bought or traded for the gun from a store, pawnshop, flea market or gun show.

That translates into the only "legal" way to get a gun. The rest of the gun acquisitions came through illegal manners such as friends or family, which is a straw purchase. Or buying them on the street. So your theory of most of the guns were legally purchased is officially rebuffed by the Dept. of Justice. Only 14% of them were.

DOJ website

Make sure to download the acrobat file at the bottom of the page, that's where all the actual numbers are. It is an 18 page file.

Other interesting tidbits from that database are:

1. Of the prisoners surveryed in that poll, only 1.3% of them were armed with a rifle during their current offense. This doesn't simply mean "bolt action hunting rifle", it means any rifle to include SKS, AR-15's and any other semi auto assault rifle.

2. Less than 2% of inmates reported ever carrying a fully automatic or military style semi automatic rifle. If less than two percent are carrying assault rifles, how many do you think were carrying bolt action rifles?

3. Inmates reported that a handgun was their preferred firearm. Of those carrying a firearm, 83% of state, and 87% of Federal said that they carried a handgun during the offense for which they were serving.

Now onto your assertions that knives don't pose the same threat as a long gun because you can't knife someone from 500 meters.

In the following data from the DOJ, they classify guns in two categories: Hand gun and other gun. Other gun includes any type of rifle or shotgun. Among others it includes all assault rifles, street sweeper shotguns, and regular rifles and shot guns. Anything other than a pistol.

From 1990-2000, stabbings accounted for 39,009 deaths in America. During that same ten year span, 29,998 deaths were reported by "other guns". So if the rifle is so much more dangerous than the knife, why did 9,000 more people die by the knife in that ten year span?

DOJ graph

Click on the graph itself, and it will give you a year by year breakdown in numbers of deaths by different weapons.

Your argument of rifles being so much more of a menace to society simply doesn't hold water according to the Dept of Justice.

Here's an interesting fact sheet that I found in my search. I haven't referenced anything off of it in this post, but it has a lot of information for those that may be interested in reading it.

Just facts.com

Lastly, where does John Kerry stand on the issue of guns? Here's the pasted text from his website:

John Kerry is a gun owner and hunter, and he believes that law-abiding American adults have the right to own guns. But like all of our rights, gun rights come with responsibilities, and those rights allow for reasonable restrictions to keep guns out of the wrong hands. John Kerry strongly supports all of the federal gun laws on the books, and he would take steps to ensure that they are vigorously enforced, cracking down hard on the gun runners, corrupt dealers, straw buyers, and thieves that are putting guns into the hands of criminals in the first place. He will also close the gun show loophole, which is allowing criminals to get access to guns at gun shows without background checks, fix the background check system, which is in a serious state of disrepair, and require that all handguns be sold with a child safety lock.

johnkerry.com

So does this mean that Kerry is a "gun crazed maniac" as well? He is a hunter and gun owner. He believes that law abiding adults have the right to own guns. I agree with every word that Kerry says in that statement. So I guess that means Kerry and I are on the same level on this one. Either we're both "gun crazed maniacs", or we're both responsible gun owners that believes in the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns. I know how I classify myself and Sen. Kerry on this issue, you can call us whatever you want.

Wlidcard,

I promised to stay out of political threads. But, I do have some advice for you that I feel needs to be given. You are wasteing your time. Gun nuts are scary, but compared to the anti gun fanatics they are positively reasonable. These people don't care about your consitituional rights, they won't be happy till the only people with guns are criminals. It's just the way they are. If your right to own a gun for personal protection is important to you vote republican. The democrats & liberals prefer you to be at a disadvantage should someone break into your home. Nothing you say will move them, no statistic you provide or example you show has any weight. They don't care. I've already had this argument in another htread and you are really wasteing your time here. Not because you are wrong, but because you are not dealing with people to whom rational arguments have any bearing in this matter.

-Colly

 

[cantdog]

There are things anyone is unreasonable about. Even I, as I daresay everyone long ago noticed.

It depends what you've come here for. I find the thing to do, when I'm face to face, talking to someone, is to step back off the sacred ground when I find I've wandered onto it. I never try to sway religionists to atheism unless the person is extremely important to me, for example. That's a good example of a transrational conviction. But there are many others; everyone's are different.

In a forum like this, it's less easy to do that-- just back off. It doesn't feel the same way that face-to-face does. Plus, I think, one is conscious that others, third parties, will read the thread, and will be looking over your shoulder. You feel obligated to carry through.

I'd like to value the social more, especially here; but the medium itself drives people to be more contentious. Anonymity is a factor, too; impunity can be very liberating, but it is dangerous.

cantdog

 

[Colleen Thomas]

There are things anyone is unreasonable about. Even I, as I daresay everyone long ago noticed.

It depends what you've come here for. I find the thing to do, when I'm face to face, talking to someone, is to step back off the sacred ground when I find I've wandered onto it. I never try to sway religionists to atheism unless the person is extremely important to me, for example. That's a good example of a transrational conviction. But there are many others; everyone's are different.

In a forum like this, it's less easy to do that-- just back off. It doesn't feel the same way that face-to-face does. Plus, I think, one is conscious that others, third parties, will read the thread, and will be looking over your shoulder. You feel obligated to carry through.

I'd like to value the social more, especially here; but the medium itself drives people to be more contentious. Anonymity is a factor, too; impunity can be very liberating, but it is dangerous.

cantdog

Yeppers, everyone holds some things so dear they aren't willing to let them go. This is one of those issues. Wildcard is free to continue his defense, I am sure those opposed will continue thier attacks, but I have walked this road once already in these forums and I thought he should know he is really wasteing his time suporting his argument. It won't make any difference to them. Not going to get involved, I know it's a fight you can't win. But he is putting in the time and deserves to know it's not going to yeild anything.

-Colly

 

[Guest]

"Michael Moore's campaign"

Uh... back to Moore and his film. This is on Salon.com's "War Room '04" page. The piece has links. P.
-------------
The war room isn't just for candidates anymore. Michael Moore, whose film "Fahrenheit 9/11" opens on Friday, June 25, is staffing a war room of political strategists -- veterans of Democratic presidential campaigns, like Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane -- to fire off rapid responses to the conservative attacks Moore expects for his new anti-Bush film. "When you think 'without mercy,' you think Chris Lehane," Moore said.

The right is already slamming Moore. George H. W. Bush called him a "slimeball." A group called Citizens United announced an ad campaign smearing Michael Moore -- and George Soros -- as "America haters." "These liberal America-haters cannot undo President Bush's track record of success in the War on Terror," said the group's president, David Bossie. Bossie may want to check out the recent news that terrorism has gone up under Bush, not down. We're sure he'll correct his press release pronto, as the State Department is correcting its own records. (Bossie also might want to update his "Boycott France" page now that we're begging Jacques Chirac for help in Iraq.)

While Moore says he's not overtly supporting John Kerry, he clearly aims to motivate people to get to the polls -- and not to vote for George W. Bush. He ends the film with the plea: "Do Something." Moore is offering ticket discounts and prizes to newly registered voters who see the film or visit his Web site.

If you haven't seen the trailer yet, it's here. The last scene of Bush on the golf course is priceless.

-- Geraldine Sealey [11:44 PDT, June 11, 2004]

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Yeppers, everyone holds some things so dear they aren't willing to let them go. This is one of those issues. Wildcard is free to continue his defense, I am sure those opposed will continue thier attacks, but I have walked this road once already in these forums and I thought he should know he is really wasteing his time suporting his argument. It won't make any difference to them. Not going to get involved, I know it's a fight you can't win. But he is putting in the time and deserves to know it's not going to yeild anything.

-Colly

I appreciate the sentiment Colly. I realize there are some that I would be wasting my time with. There are people reading that are somewhere in the middle of the issue and I posted to be sure that they heard the other side of the argument as well.

People like Clair go off on this anti gun rhetoric without knowing the facts. If I let that rhetoric go unchallenged, then I'm a hypocrite to my beliefs. If I let it go unchallenged, the people in the middle that are watching this thread only hear one side of the story, and think that it must be factual because I didn't bother to dispute it.

Apparently Clair is finished with this topic, so I will leave it alone now as well.

 

[Clare Quilty]

I'm downloading a file which purports to be a rather large .avi of " Fahrenheit 9/11." Hopefully it isn't a fake. I'll know in a few hours. Of course, even if it's real, I'll be taking my kid to see it the day it hits the art-house movie circuit -- so no harm, no foul.

 

[Clare Quilty]

I don't really think our government fears putting down opposition because we might shoot back. If that were the case, they'd just take us out with a bombing raid.

Even if an untrained mob with light arms could mount any kind of defense against a military force using military weapons, the government still wouldn't care. It wouldn't be them nor anyone one they know out there dying in the streets. It would be some working class schmuck who joined the National Guard with hopes of making some money for college.

Where the government screwed up with regard to Kent State, is that they killed some middle class kids. That is a no-no.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Catching up on what I missed, most has been covered, but I Since the Korean War, I am unaware of any American-made war film, which was released while that war was taking place.

Aw, wait a minute! The Duke made "The Green Berets" in something like 1965. It was just like the Duke's 1942 movies all over again, but set in Viet Nam, with the noble freedom-loving Americans, the doughty yellow-skinned little South Viertnamese brothers who just wanted to be free, and the evil, central-casting Asian Menace North Vietnamese, wily, deceitful, and lusting after our women.

I can't swear to it, but I'm pretty sure that every time they showed a gook they played that usual oriental music riff and banged a gong. It even ended with the Duke walking off into the sunset with a grateful Viet Namese orphan. It was that kind of movie. Embarrassing even for a John Wayne flick. I saw it on TV one day. They don't show it much, and it's pretty obvious why.

---dr.M.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Wlidcard,

I promised to stay out of political threads. But, I do have some advice for you that I feel needs to be given. You are wasteing your time. Gun nuts are scary, but compared to the anti gun fanatics they are positively reasonable. These people don't care about your consitituional rights, they won't be happy till the only people with guns are criminals. It's just the way they are. If your right to own a gun for personal protection is important to you vote republican. The democrats & liberals prefer you to be at a disadvantage should someone break into your home. Nothing you say will move them, no statistic you provide or example you show has any weight. They don't care. I've already had this argument in another htread and you are really wasteing your time here. Not because you are wrong, but because you are not dealing with people to whom rational arguments have any bearing in this matter.

-Colly

Wait a minute. I'm a raging liberal and I don't care much about guns either way. I'm a guy. I think guns are kind of cool. I just wouldn't have one in my house.

---dr.M.

 

[rgraham666]

to me, guns are like cars. it isn't the tool that scares me, but the people wielding them.

And so far as guns keeping you free goes, freedom is like souls. Hard to take by force, but easy to give up. If you're willing to give up your freedom, all the guns in the world can't help you.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Aw, wait a minute! The Duke made "The Green Berets" in something like 1965. . . It even ended with the Duke walking off into the sunset with a grateful Viet Namese orphan. It was that kind of movie. ...---dr.M.

That’s right, Doc!

I sit corrected. I even saw that movie. I can remember wondering why the Indians were so pale.

Did I imagine it, or did he kiss his helicopter?

 

[shereads]

Aw, wait a minute! The Duke made "The Green Berets" in something like 1965. It was just like the Duke's 1942 movies all over again, but set in Viet Nam, with the noble freedom-loving Americans, the doughty yellow-skinned little South Viertnamese brothers who just wanted to be free, and the evil, central-casting Asian Menace North Vietnamese, wily, deceitful, and lusting after our women.

Through my tears during the "missing man" formation at the Reagan funeral this evening - it occurred to me that millions of people watching probably now think Reagan was a combat pilot. That's when I stopped crying and just felt lousy.

I used to wonder how John Wayne and Ronald Reagan managed to acquire the aura of military heros. This year, I finally understand. I participated in a telephone poll last month, and one of the questions was, "Which presidential candidate is a decorated Vietnam veteran?" Coming on the heels of all the media uproar about Kerry's ribbons vs. medals controvery and Bush's absense from the National Guard, I thought it was a silly question and I told her so. She said, "You'd be surprised how many people are saying Bush is the Vietnam veteran."

And I was surprised. I'm constantly surprised at the willing suspension of disbelief. People don't look at current events deeper than the headlines, and some people miss even those. They do see images on TV, though. Aircraft carrier landing = Bush is/was a Navy fighter pilot; must have been during Vietnam.

All the images on film of Ronald Reagan and John Wayne as WWII heros were all it took to elevate their staged war experiences to an accepted reality among a significant number of people.

Seeing is believing. Questioning what's shown to us can be painful. It's so much easier to simply believe what feels good.