Who, and why would you axe a psycologist about this?
Some conspiracies are REAL!
Tell me Nixon didn't conspire to cover up Watergate!
Tell me Barry Soetoro isn't conspiring to cover up his true identity, among many other high crimes, and misdemeanors!
“Tell me Nixon didn’t conspire to cover up Watergate!”
Whenever Watergate is mentioned, rational people should immediately come back with the facts. To wit:
Both parties wine and dine moneyed citizens as part of their efforts to obtain donations. They try to get the citizen’s head spinning by inviting him to any event that will put him in the company of the famous and powerful.
At that particular time, the demonrats had expanded this itinerary to include treating potential donors to the services of prostitutes, paid for out of DNC money. You know, Joe Sixpack’s ten bucks that he contributed to have a voice in our representative republic.
That was a felony. Actually, each instance was a separate felony.
Some of Nixon’s subordinates, without his knowledge, decided to try and obtain documentary proof of this, with the intention of exposing the dims’ felonious behavior. Unfortunately for America, the people of South Viet Nam, and mankind in general, they were not practiced and proficient criminals. As one might have guessed, they made a hash of it.
Nixon’s subordinates, then, were guilty of conspiracy to expose multiple felonies involving the improper use of DNC funds to pay prostitutes.
When his subordinates finally told him the truth, Nixon decided it would be best to cover up this trifling indiscretion. This was entirely reasonable, in view of the heinous crimes that the media had covered up for Roosevelt, maybe Truman, certainly Kennedy and Johnson.
Later, they even covered up murder for a sitting president.
The demonrats, knowing that they had the media in their pocket, decided to lie, lie, lie, and spin, spin, spin, and artificially escalated this tempest in a teapot to the status of a (barf alert) “constitutional crisis.”
They had a few reasons for knifing Nixon.
1. Nixon had been involved in the effort to root foreign agents of influence out of the State Department and other government posts, which was an unforgivable sin against the Evil one.
2. The huge cloud of dust they raised with their hysterical blather about Nixon’s “crimes” completely obscured the reason for the break in: multiple demonrat felonies, involving a vice that most of America still found repugnant.
3. Nixon’s Vietnamization program had succeeded, and he was on the brink of Peace with Honor in Viet Nam. That would have been a ghastly defeat for the left.
4. And, of course, a hodge-podge of obvious reasons: To embarrass the GOP, to demoralize the Silent Majority, to move the demonrats further to the left, and to forestall any good things Nixon might have done in a second term, with reelection off the table. You can probably name others.
With their customary shameless dishonesty, the left has elevated the Watergate incident to near-mythical status, like the assassination of Abe Lincoln or the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. This needs to be contradicted with the truth at every opporknockety.
I think it’s important, because every time a lib realizes that one of the left’s axiomatic propositions is nothing but lies and deceit, the possibility exists that he will begin to question other planks in their platform.
Exactly.
Yes, some conspiracies are real. Notice that this is being published by the NYT. Why do you suppose they decided to publish this now? Do you suppose that the Zippy myth is about to unravel? If they can discredit “conspiracy nuts” in advance, it will be easier to perpetuate the lies for a much longer time.
The flip side of this is that people hang on to their beliefs long after the sell date. For example, people hang onto losing investments, a boss will keep an terrible employee he hired, etc. for much longer than is rational. An outsider can much more easily see that the stock is tanking or the employee is horrible than the person who bought/hired.
This is why Zippy voters defend Zippy long past the time it is obvious to the rest of us that he is evil / corrupt / failing.
Articles like this in the NYT are just a further example of the lenghts people will go to in order to defend an earlier poor decision.
The Fast and Furious / Mexican gunrunning was a second amendment assault. All these new scandals are a concerted effort to undermine the first amendment.
And in the case of the IRS, an effort to prevent the Tea Party from effectively organizing. If true, that is a conspiracy to throw the election itself.