Why is Larry Elder Shocked?

Mr. Elder is shocked....just shocked, I tell you, because a vast number of Democrats, in a recent Rasmussen poll, indicated that they either believe that Junior knew about the 9/11 attacks before they happened or say they are unsure.

Why would anyone find this shocking?

In a Zogby poll taken in New York, just prior to the GOP convention in NYC, August, 2004, over 30% of Republicans said they had a similar belief.

One does not have to believe the far out conspiracy theories floating around the Net to believe that Bush (and/or a high-ranking official or officials in this administration) knew the attacks were coming and did nothing to stop them.)

I have no way of knowing what the poll questions were, how they were ordered or anything like that, but if a pollster asked me if I believed that Junior had prior knowledge, this independent would say, yes.

Why?

Because he had been warned. We know that. That fact is in the record and has gone uncontested by this White House. The administration had been warned, on occasions to numerous to list in this post.

And yes, even though Condi says that no one could have imagined that planes would be used as flying bombs, they had been warned of this possibility as well.

They were warned of the possibility with regard to the G-8 in Genoa in June of 2001. Who warned them? Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. What's more, they did not discount the warning. Junior spent every night of the conference on a U.S. Naval vessel off the coast of Italy. They knew!

One careful read of Paul Thompson's Timeline, which is carefully composed of contemporaneus reporting from legitimate, trustworthy press and electronic media, is enough to convince me, especially when considered in light of everything this administration has done since then.

I defy anyone to read Thompson's timeline and say they are anything but convinced that the White House was warned and went deaf.

The NeoCons, by their own admission in the PNAC manifesto, needed a "New Pearl Harbor," Mr. Elder, and they got one.

Just a coincidence? O.K. I'm reasonable.

But how many coincidences would it take to cause your eyebrows to go up?

Just wondering, because there are plenty more where that one came from?


While studying psychology in college, I read about an experiment on the pressure to conform.


Several people sat around a long, rectangular table. The "instructor" and all but one person seated at the table were confederates in the experiment. The instructor held up a sheet of paper with a line drawn exactly six inches long. He then handed the sheet to a seated confederate and said, "Guess the length of this line."

The man, as previously agreed, said, "About two inches." The paper then went clockwise around the table until it reached the only person not in on the experiment. Until then, each person "guessed" anywhere from two to three-and-a-half inches, even though the line was obviously much, much longer.


When the paper was slid to the final person — the only one not in on the ruse — he, too, said, "About three inches."

Perhaps this explains a recent poll put out by the "non-partisan" Rasmussen Reports. A mind-blowing 35 percent of Democrats believe the president possessed prior knowledge of the 9/11 terror attacks that killed over 3,000 Americans. Another 26 percent of Democrats said that they are "not sure." Thus 61 percent of Democrats believe or consider themselves uncertain about the assertion that the president knew in advance about the terror attacks of 9/11, yet did nothing to stop them.


Now I've long since accepted that many Democrats flat-out hate the president. Democrats, for example, far more so than Republicans, believe in the idea that government must "level the playing field." So Democrats oppose tax cuts that "help the rich." I strongly disagree, but I get it.
Because Republicans — more so than Democrats — believe in limited government, they stand accused of selfishness. This argument, too, I at least understand. Never mind that in the recent book, "Who Really Cares?," Syracuse University Professor Arthur C. Brooks found Republicans gave more to charity — in both time and money — than Democrats. It turns out that if one supports smaller government, he or she is more likely to feel the need to step in and help the needy by donating time and money. Also, the more religious the person, found Brooks, the more likely he or she gives to charity. Religious Democrats gave as much as religious Republicans, but Democrats as a whole were less religious than Republicans. Some secular Democrats feel uncomfortable with a religious president, whom they feel "gets his guidance from God." So I can understand the discomfort of the Democrats with the president's religiosity.

On the issue of global warming, many Democrats side with Al Gore' , who believes the "debate on global warming is over." They find it obscene that the president objects to a worldwide accord to deal with the "crisis." I believe they're wrong, but this, too, I get. If the scientists all agree, why this leaves only the dissenting global-warming-denying, gas-guzzling, smoke-stack-belching capitalists.


Health care is a "right," so says former presidential candidate John Kerry .

Most Democrats nod in agreement. Never mind that of the 46 million people in America who lack health-care insurance, about half go without health care for only a few months, while they are between jobs. About three-quarters go without health care for less than a year. And 10 percent have high-paying jobs, but choose to pocket the money they would spend on insurance premiums. Millions more without health-care insurance came here illegally. But at least I get the Democrats' objection to government "failure" to provide health-care insurance.


As to the war in Iraq most Democrats oppose it. Most Republicans, however, still support the war, and still think victory possible. Only two House Republicans supported the war-funding-with-troop-withdrawal-deadlines legislation passed, at the end of April, by Congress. In the Senate, two Republicans voted for it.

This complicated war now approaches its fifth year, with nearly daily headlines of setbacks and American military deaths. We awaken nearly every morning to headlines of American military deaths and Iraqi sectarian violence. The current Iraqi government appears confused and ineffective; and the international chorus calling Iraq a "blunder" grows louder and louder. Thus, I get the Democrats' anger towards Bush's "stubbornness" for continuing to prosecute the war despite near worldwide opposition and the dwindling number of allies, including the British.

But do 61 percent of Democrats "honestly" believe the president "allowed" 9/11 to occur, taking no measure whatsoever to stop it? Please tell me this reflects an insincere desire to simply conform rather than a sincere belief that the president willingly allowed over 3,000 Americans to perish. Tell me you say this with your fingers crossed.

Please.


Larry Elder is a syndicated radio talk-show host and author. His nationally syndicated radio program airs 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. PST and can also be heard on X-M and Sirius satellite radio. To find out more about Larry Elder, visit his web page at www.larryelder.com.

CREATORS SYNDICATE COPYRIGHT 2007 LAURENCE A. ELDER

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. The Lantern has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is The Lantern endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

....And The Truth Shall Set Us Free