All of the smug bashing of those who wondered aloud about malice regarding Tim Johnson

[bigtree]

looks smart now that information has been released describing his condition as a congenital one.

But it's still incredibly smug, and offensive.

It's not as if these 'conspiracy' folks were the only ones to immediately think of foul play in the wake of the cryptic, conflicting reports; they were just bold enough to voice them. Bold, I say, because of the predictable onslaught of 'protectors' of the 'truth' who come out of the woodwork here to scold and ridicule things folks here say that they don't believe to be true.

I remember the posts recalling the days after 9-11 here at DU where folks felt compelled to withdraw into the 'basement' to talk out of fear of some govt. backlash. Some of the same folks who worried about 'disappearing' after the passage of the 'torture and detention' bill, have popped up to knock down those concerned about a similar conspiracy surrounding the republican's zeal to hold on to power.

I admit that *I* never went over to the 'conspiracy' camp, I can understand the doubts and skepticism surrounding the incident which are obviously driven by incomplete, mostly speculative reporting; as well as by the very lying nature of the republicans who allowed Bush to lie us into the invasion of Iraq and continue to lie to keep our troops bogged down there.

How about a *little* understanding for the cynicism and skepticism which Bush and his republicans have caused out here with their nonsense? How about dropping the ridicule of folks who have little access to reliable information and come here to express their concerns, looking for a sympathetic ear. We don't have to feed into wild speculation to just give these folks an understanding hearing-out.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[WilliamPitt]

1. Tell it to Skinner

[bigtree]

4. I think I am

but this wasn't directed to him

[seabeyond]

2. first thing my 9 yr old said this morning when i was explaining

the importance of losing a dem in the senate

[bigtree]

8. I read your post and appreciated it greatly.

many folks I spoke with last night had similar concerns, wondering about some sort of craziness going on.

I took pains to listen and try to modulate their theories, but I was more concerned with the lack of faith in our leaders that they would be so convinced that such malice might occur that I thought it was important that they express it.

Most folks are feeling their way through politics because they think it's absolutely necessary they pay attention and get involved. Many of these things are new to folks, no matter how confident they may seem in their assertions. It's a perfectly natural response to be highly suspicious of the republicans and the media. I don't think these folks deserve to be ridiculed. They need understanding and guidance, perhaps, but not ridicule.

[seabeyond]

15. just as i didnt ridicule my child either. there ARE reasons he immediately

went to this thought and i could totally understand why. i had never seen myself as a conspiracy person UNTIL this adminstration. but... we do go off the handle pretty quick here and was a small amount of time to watch and listen and be informed without taking that juncture to be sure.

what i have found with this administration and the news it is important to listen to the very first reports because often we will get more information that is usually filtered out after time, that is necessary on seeing what really happened.

[dbt]

3. IBTL

And THANK YOU, bigtree.

:tinfoilhat:
dbt
Remember New Orleans

[warrens]

5. There are many people here who go hysterical at every event

It's tiring, it's embarassing, and it's silly. If you have some evidence of foul play, by all means, post it. Want to make a joke that this might save Cheney the trouble of sabotaging someone's airplane? Fine. But 20 threads about how this is some huge conspiracy is ridiculous.

[bigtree]

9. They come on at different times and many don't search

I think it's a mistake to lump all concerns into the 'silly' group.

I'm sorry you're tired and embarrassed by it all. I just think there needs to be more understanding. All of our posters aren't savvy political operators like some of us.

[Joe Chi Minh]

6. For crying out loud, medical professionals and legal professionals,

up to the highest levels were suborned into complicity in the JFK cover-up.

I'm not saying that's the case here, but only a cretin would say it is wholly implausible, given the Republicans' m.o., this last half century and more.

[zreosumgame]

7. a lot of PC crap goes on on this board

evn if I did not consider this a likely 'hit' by the GOP or anyone else. Hell, if they were going to do that I would have thought Teddy first not some new guy just taking office.

[bigtree]

16. I think the clear ban on conspiracy theories by Skinner actually helped

It's the sniping afterward at those who had concerns which I think is unseemly and unnecessarily harsh given the unbelievable events over the last decade, including the recent poisoning of the Russian spy.

Then, there was all of the media speculation - all over the place - combined with the sparse reporting on his actual condition. It was an unusual situation which invited wild speculation.

[FredStembottom]

10. When a government is so utterly cloaked in secrecy.......

.....we are left to speculate all kinds of things. So.....if someone comes up with a speculation, relax and decide whether they have something there - or not.

If not - move along.

This place is wide open. The government is locked tight.

Things get posted.

Move along.

Use "ignore thread".

Whatever.

[rman]

14. While the government tells us "the innocent have nothing to hide"

By that measure, the government looks extremely and increasingly guilty.

[jarab]

11. Respectfully disagree .....

I think since conspiracies are a minute part of life - including political - the odds are so much against any story being a conspiracy. Therefore, it would appear sensible that one so inclined to twist any story into a whodunnit should do more listening before coming to that far-fetched conclusion.
They'll occasionally be right, and more often avoid being embarrassed.

jmo
...O...

[hughee99]

12. I agree...

I also recall those bold enough to voice their concerns about how the * administration was the real cause of everything from the Tsunami, to the Patriots Super bowl win over the Rams in 2002, to the disappearance of Natalie Holloway.

There's no reason to personally ridicule anyone for advancing such conspiracies, but if you don't agree with their speculation, you are doing everyone a disservice by not speaking up and making an argument as to why they may be wrong.

[jobycom]

13. Speculation shouldn't be bashed. Proclamation should be, and hard.

I have no problem with people who wonder what could be happening, and suggest that maybe there was a nefarious cause. If no one asks the questions, then no one will investigate, and the bad guys will take advantage of that.

My complaint is with the people who post, basically, "BushCo strikes again, just like on 9-11 and in Dallas, and anyone all you suckers who deny it are just stoopid!"

Bash them hard. But there's no reason, IMHO, to bash people who voice a question that--whether we will all admit it or not--did cross everyone's mind.

Just my thoughts. Probably wrong, as always. i admit that in this case I forced myself to not read a single comment, just to avoid the CT firestorm.

[sniffa]

17. i Love the sweet smeLL of smug

smug, yes, and rightfuLLy so. one shouLd react just as smugLy to anyone espousing their beLief that the WTC was taken down by a controLLed expLosion... or that a pLane didn't hit the pentagon... that neiL cavuto is a journaList.

don't want to feeL put down by others' smugness? then don't act the fooL.

[wildflowergardener]

18. I agree

I don't see anything wrong, with wondering if there might be someone out there who would want to harm the senator. There are crazy people - not necessarily ones high up in power (though I would venture to say some in power are as well).

It appears that this is not the case, as we now know more about his condition - but that was not the case, last night and early this morning.

Starting 20 threads about it is not a good idea though.

I think that this certainly makes me think there should be a better way of deciding who is able to pick a successor if something happens to a house or senate member. It seems as if either a special election should be held, or a person of the same party should be required to be appointed. That would take away any incentive any "crazy person" might have for doing a person harm.

Meg

[Broken_Hero]

19. Locking

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the DU Admins.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/contact.html

Thanks,
petersond
DU Moderator