I think there's something to looking at how recent nutty events (9/11; War in Iraq; loss of citizens' rights, etc.)have affected our psyches.

Even if you see big differences in Truthers and religious fundamentalists, I think he's right—we've all come to trust the govt/media even less and to become more paranoid generally.

He's arguing that this aspect of the Age of (Dis)Information sends people in different directions (generally toward their own specific In Group), but that the underlying cause is very similar.

That a person point out parallels doesn't mean the person is claiming A and B are identical.

Of course, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

Some people wondered if FDR let Pearl Harbor happen to convince a reluctant American public join the war:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate

Some people have similar questions about Bush and 911. There's no question at all that the event helped his popularity and presidency, and that he seized upon the opportunity to invade Iraq, consolidate his power, roll back the Bill of Rights, etc.

Wondering if he had advance knowledge but declined to act doesn't seem all that outlandish.

Some people do think the Bush administration conspired with who knows whom else to destroy the towers themselves. There are various theories about how this was done.

And plenty of people aren't pushing any particlar theory, but don't trust the official account. Considering the 935 lies Bush and Co. told the help launch the war, this doesn't seem terribly irrational, either.

In fact, the issue was apparently taken up in the Japanese parliament, of all places:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7803

But are you kidding me?

He's joked in the past that birds he shot didn't support him politically. Okay, if you ignore the unsettling image of a powerful former governer intimating that voters who don't support him should look out for birdshot, it is a funny off-the-cuff remark.

One's willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt on the potentially ominous tone of the remark, however, may not have survived his follow-up remarks in which he intimated that those running negative campaign ads against him (like Romney?) should pay heed to his skill as a marksman.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/12/27/huckabee-jokes-about-shooting-romney-will-msm-duck

In the case of the Obama "joke," well, as others have pointed out, it's doesn't make much sense.

Why do you need to bring a gun into the joke? Wouldn't it be funnier if Obama hid just because of the loud noise? But if part of the joke's appeal is the image of Obama cowering before the barrel of "sombody's" gun, maybe it works.

Jokes hold grains of truth, and debating political opponents with guns seems to be a recurring theme...

If Huckabee had real integrity, of course, he wouldn't be parroting the absurd Republican meme in the first place (that Dems are cowards who want to give in to the terrorists).

I didn't even touch on:

1) the joke's potentially ugly appeal to the racist strain hovering just below media coverage in this campaign

-or-

2) the joke's potential to be interpreted as tacit encouragment to anti-Obama agents (racist or not) who might be tempted to aim a gun at him themselves

Not that Huck would've meant either of these—Heavens no!—of course, but conservative politicians should display prudence and judgment, no?

No thinks you're a Democrat or that you'll likely to contribute anything thoughtful or constructive; why bother when you can spend time name calling and spinning out Neocon propoganda?

The "anti-War Left" is tiny minority if we take it to mean people absolutely opposed to all military action.

Of course, if you mean people who oppose WAR FOR THE SAKE OF WAR, there are plenty of us around: we are the grownups who don't our ego kicks by getting other people's children killed.

And if you mean people opposed to this particular needless war, any thinking Dem, Indy, Green, Libertarian, or Repub can remind you that what this absurd war has brought us includes:

-increased political strength in Iran

-greater

-great damage to U.S. Dollar, harm economony in general

-loss of U.S. reputation in the world

-has ratched up animosity against the U.S., serving as a wonderful gobal recruiting tool

-all of this of course puts U.S. soldiers in greater danger than ever (just like the ridiculous "Bring it on" comment by our dress-up cowboy/fighter pilot.)

Even if we actually believe the nonsense rationale offered as justification, none of the results of the "We're Tough Guys and Our Way Is Always Right" approach have made us safer or benefited the country (although I hear the oil companies an defense contractors are doing pretty well).

**So, yes, terrorism is a real problem. It doesn't logically follow that making informed, realistic decisions based on the U.S. Constitution is a bad idea.**

Based on the intelligence you've shown in your letters we know you know better.

You should be ashamed of yourself, troll, not as a Dem, but as an American.