It's happened before, repeatedly, when the right wing runs into serious trouble. It's already been noted that the John Birch Society identified Eisenhower as a Communist dupe. But several decades later, the JBS graduated to seeing Communism itself as merely a front for the Illuminati and other secret societies. (The Illuminati conspiracy was itself a right wing fabrication to explain away the French Revolution as not being the result of decades of monarchical/aristocratic misrule.)
So, now what we're seeing is not really an abberation at all. It's simply happened too often on the right. Because they need to have been right about WMDs in Iraq, they need to have some sort of explanation, and given the amount of support this story has already gotten, it bids fair to become the official wingnut version, which the 30-percenters of future generations will come to regard as gospel.
I am interested in knowing more about how her global warming denial fits into the mix. Is the IPCC controlled by China, for example? The Soviets? And once global warming becomes utterly undeniable even by them, will it suddenly turn out that it was all a plot to decieve us by presenting such phony evidence that we never suspected it was real?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox