Some More Congressional Updates
Now, first of all you must remember that 84% of the people believe in 9-11 Denial if you believe the idiotic "Truth" sites. But despite these remarkable beliefs, they somehow don't vote in big numbers for 9-11 Deniers. Here's the list that was posted here as "Truth" candidates:
Ernest Hancock AZ Secretary of State Libertarian
Harry Mitchell AZ 5th Congressional Democrat
David Nolan AZ 8th Congressional Libertarian
Joseph Sweeney AZ 7th Congressional Republican
Carol Brouillet CA 14th Congressional Green
Ted Brown CA 26th Congressional Libertarian
Michael Metti CA U.S. Senate Libertarian
Robert Bowman FL 15th Congressional Democrat
Brian Moore FL U.S. Senate Independent
Samm Simpson FL 10th Congressional Democrat
Robert Belin IL 2nd Congressional Democrat (Actually a Republican)
David Gill IL 15th Congressional Democrat
Danny Stover IL 19th Congressional Democrat
Larry Grant ID 1st Congressional Democrat
Andy Hedden-Nicely ID 1st Congressional
Paul Smith ID 1st Congressional Constitution
Donna Mancini KY KY House 3rd Dist Libertarian
Peter White MA 10th Congressional Independent
Coleen Rowley MN 2nd Congressional Democrat
Terry Bunker MO State Auditor Green
Mary Maxwell NH 2nd Congressional Republican
Howie Hawkins NY U.S. Senate Green
Rachel Treichler NYAtty.General Green
Bob Fitrakis OH Governor Independent
Mathew Woodson OK 5th Congressional Independent
Barbara Jean Pryor VA 6th Congressional Independent
Craig Hill VT U.S. Senate Green
Bruce Marshall VT Vermont House Green
Dennis Morrisseau VT VT House Libertarian
As I've said before I'm not sure how many of these folks were really 9-11 Deniers and how many were adopted by the "movement" but there are 29 people on this list. All but one lost; Harry Mitchell of Arizona knocked off J.D. Hayworth. I guarantee if Mitchell had made some point about 9-11 Denial he would have been crushed, so I am curious as to the rationale that got him on the nutbar list.
Carol Brouillet, in a very safe liberal district, is drawing about 2%. That strikes me as about right for the 9-11 Denial Movement, in fertile soil. Bob Bowman of Florida immediately becomes the 9-11 Deniers' candidate for president in 2008, after getting 44% of the vote in a Republican district.
posted by Pat @ 10:13 PM
11 comments
11 Comments:
I wonder how Mitchell got on that list too. His website certainly gives no hint of that.
On an international level, we should start by building strong and effective international coalitions. This means stepping up our efforts to find Osama bin Laden and root out al Qaida, as well as strengthening America's strategic relationships with important allies such as Israel, India, Pakistan and Russia. I support a foreign policy that works with others to place international pressure on nations like Iran who have a history of sponsoring terrorist organizations and activities.
http://harry2006.com/Issues.asp
Now that all the real 9/11 Denier candidates have lost, the movement will probably go through the winners, find one with a website that says something vague about 9/11, and claim he was on their team all along.
I suspect some of the people who made it onto the list either answered some sort of questionaire saying something still needed to be answered about 9/11 but that would include "why weren't we prepared" as well the usual Denier idiocy.
Larry Grant's race in Idaho hasn't been called. He makes no reference to 9/11 on his website but he appears to be the standard moderate Democrat.
The imbeciles in the Denier movement are so obsessed with any sort of nod in their direction that they will take it, whether it is real or not.
He does have section on his site dedicated to finding out the truth...but it concerns the truth NOT told by his opponent Hayworth, and has nothing to do with 9/11. I am calling this guy a non "truther", and adopted merely to fill their list.
TAM
PDoh, what Deniers are already in Congress? McKinney's out in January.
Semi off topic rant: There are six Libertarians up there. How come such a huge portion of the internet (and indeed, people I meet generally) have small-l-libertarian leanings but all the big-L-Libertarians are batshit insane? You'd think all the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" people could create a real Libertarian party somewhere that could grow into at least a regional powerhouse. Clean out the closet anarchists, CTs, 16th Amendment deniers and general whiners and make a real go at it.
Grr.
If I ever get a job where I have the freedom to be outwardly political, I think I'll give it a go. New York might be just the place to do it, since we have minor parties which often piggyback on the bigger-party candidates.
Grr I say.
You'd think all the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" people could create a real Libertarian party somewhere that could grow into at least a regional powerhouse.
There's a Free State group who's trying to get folks to move to New Hamshpire (my neighbor to the north, and a hyperrepresentative state) in order to make an "example" of "real libertarianism". They have 20,000 members, but only a few hundred have moved to the state.
There is a strong fringe libertarian wing in the 9/11 denial movement. I was offended to see Morgan Reynolds quoting Ayn Rand at length.
Who is John Galt?
Erm have you forgotten you already have truthers in congress?
Who gives a toss about these elections
We do. You see with the DEMs controlling the Congress, it sparks the end of the NWO and the Neocon agenda. That means me and all the other shills here are out of work now, or soon will be, and by god I am mad about it...lol
TAM
How come such a huge portion of the internet (and indeed, people I meet generally) have small-l-libertarian leanings but all the big-L-Libertarians are batshit insane?
I've often wondered this too. I think the problem is the difficulty of finding consensus among the disparate collection of souls that get involved with third-party politics.
The big-L-Libertarian party seems to be nothing more than a grab bag of Johnny One Notes, each campaigning on their own pet issue, which is usually an fringe issue nobody cares about one way or the other.
Like 9/11 conspiracy theory. I wonder if anybody on Matt Woodson's walking DVD tour asked Mr. Sendmeabuck what his plans were for Social Security, immigration, or any other important issue.
Even if you believe in the candidate's pet cause, that's not sufficient reason to vote for them. (I notice that one of the alleged 9/11 Denier candidates was running for State Auditor. What would the movement gain from having someone in that role?)
In other words, they're single-issue candidates running for multi-issue jobs. And they wonder why they get clobbered every time.
If there's ever going to be a relevant third party in America, their first principle is going to have to be "No Kooks Allowed." No conspiracy theorists, no tax dodgers, no multi-level marketers, no alternative historians, and no AM radio hosts will be allowed to be candidates. The platform would have to stick to broad fiscal, defense, and societal issues.
It is sad that Libertarians and many Greens have been infiltrated with Deniers. At their heart, these groups rebel against any institution of "power" thus thus they are susceptible to conspiracy theories. As they are fringe elements, they also atract fringe type people.
The actual number of Deniers in Congress is going down 1 because McKinney is leaving and lest the Twoofers have an honest victor, the new total will be zero.
Having said that, while we lampoon these idiots (often with good reason) they actually have been wildly successful given their "theories" are preposterous and their "evidence" is zilch.
They will never be viable political movement, they have succeeded in spreading, at minimum, cynicism here and especially overseas.
Post a Comment
<< Home