Critical Mass! Bush is lying (16%) or covering up (56%) about 9/11!

It will only get worse for him. We have passed the tipping point.



(T)he (O)ffense (A)lways (S)tops (T)here

:kick:

between lying and covering up?

Given the form of the question of this poll.

I'd like to look at the raw data.

is how corrupt the Republican party has become.

Evidence: Compare the Republican responses to the Independent responses. Clearly there is brainwashing going on.

T
O
A
S
T

The campaign slogan can be...."VOTE YOUR CONSCIOUS"

If even half of Republicans think he's lying or hiding something...

we were attacked. ergo, the natural instinct is to support the president, no matter how illiterate, moronic, imbecilic, super-religious, warped or wrong-headed he might be.

In times of war we come together. It is human instinct. It matters not that we are now fighting the wrong war, nor that our efforts in Afghanistan are undermanned, undersupplied and doomed to failure. It matters not that we have successfully united shia and Sunni for the first time in ages, not in a democratic Iraq, but in a anti-US, hate-filled cause, only further fueled by stupid soldiers pissing on POWs.

My history is getting rusty. Other than Viet Nam, have we had a change in presidents during a war not caused by term limits or death?

Too bad so many people see a difference between lying and hiding something.

The problem with this poll is that it doesn't reveal how people feel about "hiding." So, a large number of that 56% could believe that Bush was hiding something, and that it was being legitimately hidden for national security reasons. In fact, Bush's approval numbers tend to suggest that about half of those who stated that the Administration was "hiding" something it knew about 9/11 approve of such hiding, or don't think it reflects badly on Bush (say of the 56%, 32% disapprove of the hiding, while 24% approve of it: 16% LYING +32% Hiding-Negative = 48%, or the current disapproval rating; 24% TRUTH + 24% Hiding-Postive/Neutral = 48%, or current approval rating).

In other words, just cuz people think that the Bush Admin is hiding something, doesn't mean they disapprove of the Bush Admin hiding something!

Ask someone if Bush is hiding something about 9/11, the normal reaction is that if he is, then it must be something which will hurt HIM if it gets out. Like the pre 9/11 warnings he ignored. And his failure to alert the airlines. And taking his one month vacation.

You are assuming respondents believe he is hiding the truth because of National Security. Why would Bush hide anything about 9/11 now, three years later? Surely it's not National Security.

It's Bush security.

If all of those who thought Bush was lying or hiding something disapproved of it, then Bush's approval numbers would be much lower.

National security was only one possible reason for the HIDING (positive or neutral) position.

A few examples:

1)Republicans might believe in large numbers that Bush is hiding the details of Clinton's stance toward terrorism in order to "protect the office of the President" In fact, I know a number of Republicans who believe this, and it is a common trope on the Internet.

2) People might believe Bush is hiding details of the attack because the DHS is not yet equipped to handle them. This would be a kind of neutral position, since Bush could be blamed for not getting the DHS up to speed, or the blame could be laid at the feet of bureaucratic inertia. In any case, hiding the information would be viewed as a national security concern that still exists.

One could, of course, go on and on in this vein. There's no accounting for all the possible reasons why people would approve of Bush hiding something about 9/11. But the simple fact is that the poll does not discriminate on these bases, and therefore tells us very little. It is a bit like the poll that asked "Has your opinion of the President changed as a result of the State of the Union." The poll tells us little, since it doesn't specify a previous opinion. Here, the slippage is one of valuing the act of hiding information. The poll doesn't tell us how people value this act, so it tells us little about how the numbers translate into positive or negative feelings about hiding. You have not made a positive argument for how these numbers can be translated into approval or disapproval - I think because there is no positive argument that can be made. We simply lack the information as a result of the form of the question.

Assume Bush approval consists of
1) All of those who believe he is telling the truth = 16%
2) Half of those who believe he is partially telling the truth and partially hiding something = 56/2 = 28%
3) All the rest = 4%

Adding them up:
16+28+4= 48%, which is EXACTLY his current Job approval rating.

At least some of those who think he is hiding somet5hing still approve of him.

Truth: 24% (not 16% as you falsely say above
Hiding(with approval
Total 48%, or current approval rating

Of course, his was my original point, so how is it that you are disagreeing with me????

they are consistent with the Bush job approval poll numbers. I never implied otherwise. And of course some who feel he is hiding something still approve of him. That is EXACTLY the point. They are slowly peeling away, as his declining numbers attest.

But the VAST majority don't believe Bush is cooperating on 9/11. He is paying for this now and will pay much more as the months go by. That is MY point.

We agree. So why did you criticize the analysis in the first place? Maybe I'm missing something here.

And yes, it should be 24%. My bad on the 16%. Thanks for the correction.

So: 6% of the republicans thing he's lying, 27% of the democrats think he's lying and 15% of the independents believe he's lying.

The column of "hiding something" is the most telling. It's tough to reach those numbers (43%, 60%, 61%) in polls. So it looks like the vast majority of people are not buying into the hype.

My suggestion to anyone who's wondering about these guys: look really closely at Bush the next time he's making a speech. Notice the eyes which are shifty. Look at the right corner of his mouth, which turns down so often which displays an inner conflict of his incessant lying. Check out the tone of his voice, which in spite of professional coaching, does not betray the lies he is telling.

You can lie to some of the people some of the time, but you can't lie to all of them 100% of the time. They try, though.

For DUers new to the subject and Americans in general who give a damn about their country -- Bath was the bin Laden family's business agent in the USA. Bath also was George W Bush's buddy from their days in the Texas Air National Guard. They were both grounded for failing to take a physical back when TANG started testing for drugs. Here's the order:



Source: http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp