quote:
Rob, name a conspiracy, I'll talk about it. The thing is, the one I'm going with doesn't have any big holes in it.
of course it has big holes in it -- its a conspiracy theory!

and i stress the word 'theory' (actually, i literally stressed 'course' and then, later, 'stress', but i was speaking figuratively).

you're using the 'if - then' idea taking one fact to make something else fact, when thats really not possible. sure, you're able to use existing facts to make something else SEEM like a fact, but that doesnt necessarily make it so.

based upon that whole list of facts you provided the other day, you could make any number of claims. and, by you're thinking, of course they're true, because everything else you said is true.

for example:

my theory is that the bush family hates network tv's news coverage. my proof?

cnn came to major prominance in the early 90s mainly because of its detailed coverage during the gulf war. who initiated the gulf war? thats right! bush sr.

years afterward, during the clinton terms, cable news 'died down' to an extent, losing a majority of their ratings to competition and a general lack of around-the-clock story ideas. the monica lewinski scandal was covered wonderfully (and sufficiently) by the traditional network channels -- even gaining indepth one-on-one interviews on the regular, 'basic cable' channels.

the bush family needed to make a statement.

for starters, the election drama (centralized in florida, of course, run by members of the bush family) was highly covered by newcomer foxnews network.

and later on, of course, it was msnbc that hit alltime news-ratings highs with its various sept 11th (and afterward) coverage.

president at the time? bush jr.

so, with the above facts (and they ARE all facts), i have a theory that has become a working theory with my factual examples.

but its not a TRUE statement (not that i know of, anyway) -- just one that works.