I didn't realize there were 250+ people there. I thought there was two sides to it from those that were there.
And is it harder to get 12 people to "remember" something the same way or get 250+ people to "remember" or blatently lie about events? Well, it depends. In any observed occurrence, people will disagree with what they saw. Defense attorneys expose this all the time. Therefore, of the people that were there and actually saw what happened, there will be varrying degrees of what they saw. Are any of them wrong, not really. It's how they perceived what occurred.
However, it is easy to get massive amounts of people to "remember" something that didn't exist. Easily. As long as they have an agenda other than the truth. One of the Bush supporters that was there even came out publically and stated that he saw what occurred according to the official military report.
I wasn't there. I can't say what happened. If the records say it happened one way, I have to take it as such and move on. There will never be any definitive proof, so I move on.
Both sides are great at taking things out of context, distorting the facts, etc. Let's just agree that they are both guilty and decide on the positions that have come out through the debate.
Now, was Bush wired during the second debate... He sure did put up a better performance.
