Birds of a feather ...

I was thinking about your question and it occurred to me that in both instances these positions reveal, on a core level, the same attitude - a fundamental distrust of government. And that is a quintessential American characteristic.

Now I am of the opinion that conservatives (at least consistent ones) object to "big" government no matter the Party in power. These "Loose Change Liberals", the "truthers" as the 9/11 conspiracy wing nuts have come to be known, seem to believe that such grand plots can be hatched only when rich white men with an (R) after their name and ties to the oil industry are in office.

But I think you are correct in saying that neither of these attitudes are anything new to the American experience - both Obama and FDR (nearly 80 years his predecessor) speak in terms of a "post-Constitutional" government. The very word "progressive" describes, in my opinion, one whom wants to progress past the restraints installed by the founding document. Both men (or their legacy) extol the virtues of rights not guaranteed under our form of government, and attempt to put in place policy to effect such "rights." And Wilson before them, TR before that, even John Adams at one point thought an American monarch might be neccessary to rule our land, and we can go on. The desire to redefine what government owes the individual is a struggle as old as the Republic.

As a side note, as a conservative I think it's a struggle my side continues to lose when examining the arc of our history from inception till today, but there are nevertheless brief respites along the way where that trend is at least somewhat arrested (Reagan for instance).

Conspiracies - the Free Mason founders. Who was involved in the plot to kill Lincoln? Was his body stolen? Remember the Maine? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor ahead of time? The faked moon landing. Area 51. JFK's magic bullet. Our history is replete with conspiracy theories on who, what, when, where and why grand events take place. The difference with 9/11 is in few cases is the evidence so documented, so recorded, and so obvious to anyone that cares to examine it objectively that to continue to believe it was Cheney and Wolfowitz with the candle holder and c4 in the library is to immediately identify yourself as one lacking in necessary grey matter (ok, the moon landing guys have to ignore a lot of evidence too).

So next time you see these gents smile and take comfort in the fact that each of them are merely participating in old traditions; and that more often then not history assigns such beliefs the exact level of significance they deserve.