Then why didn’t Gore simply deny that he regularly uses private jets? Or deny that he used them extensively during the 2000 campaign?
Can you repeat it? Or at least tell me which post it was in? I must have missed it.
Perhaps he doesn’t give a rat’s what Sean Hannity thinks, does, or says?
Perhaps, but this pundit’s webpage suggests otherwise:
Quite honestly the 2000 campaign is a different issue entirely for anyone not just out to smear Gore. He was running for President, that was realistically his only means of running. Bringing it up does not seem to help your argument. Why do it?
Why?
Sure, but why should the rest of us care? Do you really think that the fate of the Earth’s environment should be chained to the ship that is Al Gore’s credibility, to sink along with it?
Again, Al Gore isn’t required to impoverish himself any more than George W. Bush is required to put on a helmet and start patrolling downtown Falluja. Each will tell you he’s serving in his own way. (For that matter, I’d like to ask how much of Bush’s private fortune has been spent on armor for the troops?)
I would just as soon move past the global warming = Al Gore phase and move into the global warming = serious-problem-that-we-can-solve phase.
That’s a subject for a different thread. This thread is basically about whether or not Gore was a good choice for the Nobel Prize.
Because I would think it would take an obstinate or obtuse person to think that anyone could run a serious campaign for the Office of President of the USA without making extensive use of Private/Chartered flights.
Would you care to supply any facts or reasoning to support your opinion? Or is it my burden to prove that your speculation is wrong?
It was a statement. What facts would support or disprove it. Do you seriously entertain that someone could launch a serious Presidential Bid in this day and age and win the popular vote without air travel?
Nice try, please play again.
I don’t know, but it’s not a question about air travel versus no air travel. It’s a question of private jets versus regular plane service.
Your position is that it’s impossible to be a serious presidential candidate without making use of private plane travel. Go ahead and try to prove it.
It’s not my responsibility to disprove your unsupported speculation.
No thank you, I will leave it out there as a definitive statement by me. I see no need to support it. No one has run a serious Presidential Campaign* in the last 30 years without using non-commercial jets part of the time. Once again, you are simply nitpicking where your statement appears illogical. You set the bar to an unreasonable level for Gore and then sit back and expect others to play your game and try to defend this unreasonable level.
Jim
- Came in at least second for President
Suit yourself.
Now that’s funny…assuming the confusion between the two was intentional, your examples clearly demonstrate the political origins of these and other manufactured outrages. Any seed at all can be planted if the claim has enough “legs”, and once the media noise-machine gets going, all these so-called debates begin to look the same. That’s because there is absolutely no point to the “debate” other than to keep the phony meme alive. Once the issue is framed (long before the outrage is manufactured), the media battle is won. This one has gotten to 355 posts over seven pages, and I doubt that’s because this issue is any more complicated than, say, what to do about Taiwan (11 posts) or the reason why some Republicans are bucking their party’s traditional stance on free trade (2 posts).
And, as has been amply demonstrated over the past 7 years, wishing really, really hard and declaring it over and over on your blog doesn’t necessarily make it so.
But at least you have people talking according to the phony frame of the debate–there are folks actually writing long, detailed analysis of Gore’s home energy consumption, and now you’re goading them into defending the rather obvious notion that modern presidential campaigns require private plane travel–so on a certain level you’ve already won. Congratulations.
Sure.
You seem to think I have some agenda; that I am one of these partisan pundits. I’m not and I don’t.
You’re exactly right about pushing this phony baloney as being the real goal. That’s why 83 of the 355 posts have been from brazil84, twice as many as the next most frequent poster (who is only that high because he disregarded his own recommendation to ignore the nonsense). 83 posts, working with nothing but “According to Sean Hannity…”
That’s an agenda at work right there. Maybe the wife-beater thing didn’t catch fire, but it hasn’t been a total loss for these folks.
That’s nonsense, but please take your personal attacks elsewhere. Thank you.
You doth protest too much, methinks.
Hentor the Barbarian: You are correct, I am a fool. :smack:
All right.
Everyone stick to the topic and leave the personal observations out of this trainwreck.
[ /Moderating ]