"It's simply not credible to suggest the American people were duped, lied to etc, but then re-reelected the same person after those lies were discovered." (re-reelected? What is that? Some super dooper kind of reelection?)
It's quite credible to suggest this. That's why people are so pissed off now- and why Bush's popularity keeps plummeting, and why people think the Iraq war was a mistake, and why people want out of Iraq immediately. It takes a while for people to realize they've been had, but it's setting in now- and you can see it in the electorate, and their pissed.
"but it's obvious a majority of the American people didn't think he did on election day because, they re-elected him to office."
He wouldn't win today. People woke up too late, and that's the way it goes. Are you suggesting that because people thought he was ok on election day (because they were taken), it's binding on them now that they have more evidence? So, for example, if you made a mistake based on false evidence then found out you made a booboo, you wouldn't be able to change your mind?
"foreign policy decisions based on minority feelings "
Not the minority anymore. :-)
I'm suggesting (actually) that we remedy mistakes by the majority, when they make them, and WHEN the majority realize it (which is now.)
And please, where exactly was the cognitive dissonance in my post, because I'm not seeing it, and I'm wondering if you are making things up again... |
