There’s a movie out called Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter which supposes the 16th President of the United States was a vampire hunter. The writer of the book and the movie took great pains to weave the narrative of the President as a vampire hunter into a historical perspective, so while the mere suggestion is preposterous, if you allow just a slight bit of leeway you can allow yourself to believe there is a possibility it is somewhat true maybe.

There are a great many things that can seem improbable on the surface, but if you allow yourself just a little bit of examination of the possibility, if you can allow some doubt to be set aside, a seemingly preposterous premise can fit and have a chance of being acceptable. While all the logical evidence about the Twin Towers attack points to foreign hijackers taking over a plane and crashing them into the building, there are those who believe the attack was nothing more than an elaborate plan to justify the United States to impose a bit of martial law, gain greater control of the citizens, and allow for oil corporations to make a huge profit by gaining the oil fields in Iraq. The theory also has quite a number of sub branches to it with all working on the premise the attack was allowed to happen so others could profit from the aftermath.

I think it would be safe to say that most Americans would dismiss those arguments outright, and to be honest it doesn’t help that many of the people who believe a conspiracy was involved with the attack are, to be generous, a little off. Now, to be fair, there are a number of celebrities who have touted conspiracy theories about the attack and there are others who are just together enough to hold a convincing conversation about it, but it would be safe to say a majority of people don’t put much stock in a Twin Towers conspiracy. However, when people allow themselves to listen to the argument of those people with an open mind, you can see how they can fit their theory into the narrative at hand. There are bits of information that are vague enough or the events plausible enough to suggest an alternative answer.

That kind of brings me to Fox News. Granted, Fox News isn’t the only outlet working on the newest political myth, but as a news station they have a responsibility to dig for the facts in a story. They cannot claim to be a news organization then cry foul when their information is legitimately criticized.

Fox News and conservative commentators have been feeding a myth that the Obama administration, with the Fast and Furious program, has an ultimate goal of taking away the guns of citizens. The plan was to let some gun shops sell guns that would make their way into Mexico, which would escalate the drug war in Mexico with the obviously traceable American guns. This would be proof that our gun laws are too lax, since they are causing violence in another country, and from that the Obama administration could pass tough gun laws. On the face of it, the plan has some holes in it but if you were to think of something like Iran/Contra, you could start to see how some might give credence to the theory. What the conservatives have that the Twin Tower conspiracy theory people don’t have are elected officials willing to go on the radio talk shows and Fox News and lend their voices to the theory.

If it were Allen West or Michele Bachmann as people dispensing the theory, the left could probably dismiss the notion just on their reputation, but when you have Charles Grassley and Darrell Issa lending their voice to the conspiracy, you can present all the counter arguments you want but you have gone from dealing with the kooks to, at least in their circles, respected political figures. You can call Allen West irresponsible and some on the conservative front might believe you but saying that about Charles Grassley, well, that’s a pretty big hill to tackle. Rachel Maddow, Randi Rhodes and other liberal commentators have presented cogent presentations with compelling facts to back up the falsehood of the conservative theory but they face an uphill battle.

When you have something as wacky as the birther theory and with someone with the questionable credibility of Donald Trump and Sheriff Joe Arpaio and a good third of the Republican party at least will entertain the notion of it being true, it can be entirely believable that if you have prominent members of congress promoting the Fast and Furious, flood Mexico and push through gun ban scenario, you are going to get sane people believing it. Those folks are going to look back at comments by those on the political fringe and will regard them with more credence. Ever since Obama came into office, the fear on the right has been he was going to take away gun ownership. When it didn’t happen soon after Obama became President, it was shifted to once he gets a second term and doesn’t have to run again, just wait he will do it then. When you have an innocent comment caught on an open mike to a Russian leader, a small gaffe become proof in some eyes as to the validity of the theory.

Take the Ted Nuggent incident from a few months ago. Whenever I hear someone make, in my eyes, a wacky statement, I’ll listen to them but I’m more concerned about the audience they are selling to. In Nuggent’s case, when you heard what he said and then looked at the crowd with the bobbing heads in agreement, those are the folks who are going to believe the ‘take away my guns’ talk. Add to the mix politicians like Issa pandering to that crowd and, unfortunately, the death of a border patrol agents by one of those guns, someone who might not want to believe the story might take another look at the case.

We live and consume information that is unfiltered and in some cases deliberately changed to fit the overall narrative. If it runs counter to what we believe, we tend to dismiss it on its face. Tainted information is going to produce a tainted citizenship. While I would wish people would look at the information and come to an informed conclusion, people are more likely to go for the McInfo of talk radio and Fox News.