Anyone else see this thread as a good reason to vote for Nader?
So, does Al Gore support a government subsidy for dog medication too?
I hate to post “me toos” but…
Well said John Corrado! You are my new hero.
This link has the best explanation of the Al Gore/Dog medicine statement I have seen. Lots of other fun Al Gore stuff too. Everyone misspeaks from time to time. http://www.interstat.net/gargaro/algore.html
“A zebra does not change its spots.” - Al Gore, attacking President George Bush in 1992.
John Corrado,
No big Al Gore fan here, but I don’t think his lie in this case was so substantive. The numbers he cited were not taken out of thin air, but were taken from some Democratic Party (or affiliated group) study. What he did was pretend that this “average cost” in the study represented a situation that actually existed in his family. What he was doing was dramatizing (what he claims is) a true fact, by personalizing it.
Having said that, it does fit a longstanding Gore pattern of playing loose with the facts, and speaking with an assumed passion about personal issues.
I won’t ask you for a cite, because we both know you’re just dramatizing the situation by ascribing your impression of my beliefs to my actual mouth. Good thing you’re not running for office, huh?
To clarify: I don’t believe Dubya is a “complete moron for making verbal mistakes.” I believe he is a complete moron who happens to make verbal mistakes. I don’t see the mistakes as proof he’s a moron, they’re just the most fun symptom of his moronia to make fun of. The proof lies elsewhere, and I’m not terribly interested in debating it with a bushbaby because it’s like discussing Bill Gates with a Microsoftie or evolution with a fundamentalist; it’s like talking English to a French cat.
Personally, my beliefs are closer to those expressed by jmullaney in his last post, but that doesn’t mean Dubya isn’t an easy target. And I’ll vote for whoever subsidizeds doggie drugs!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by John Corrado *
**
Hey John Corrado, I’m willing to bet that if we sat down over a beer that you and I would find ourselves to be in agreement about a lot of things. This just does not happen to be one of them. Perhaps I place too high of a value on self expression but, in my own experience, anyone that I have ever met who mangles not just individual words but syntax and grammar like Bush does is a few tacos short of a fiesta.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
And, of course, if a non-“bushbaby” :rolleyes: calls you on it, you’ll simply dodge or ignore them, because it’s more convenient to pretend that the only people who object to your premise are Bush supporters.
Yeah, something like that.
Perhaps not. I’m not concerned with a single instance of Gore’s, shall we say, obfuscation. It’s the interminable pattern that concerns, nay, shocks and frightens, me. The man is too stupid to stop a destructive behavior. He’s repeatedly “personalized” easily disprovable things about his life in shameful attempts at self-aggrandizement. If he’ll lie about such silly, pointless events, how the hell can he be trusted to represent an entire nation?
Now, lissener, what the hell does this mean?
Didn’t you make the OP? If your aren’t interested in debating the issue, why the fuck did you start this topic in this forum? Oh, I think I see. You just wanted to hear a shithousefull of, “Hallelujahs” from the left-wing choral society. Well, fuck that.
Here’s more Gore casuistry on oil.
At a campaign stop last Thursday announcing that he favored using the strategic petroleum reserves to fight high oil prices, Al Gore said that “people should be able to get in their cars and drive where they want, when they want, at a low price.”
But Gore wrote in his alarmist book, “Earth in the Balance” [page 326], “Today, we must recognize that our heavy reliance on cars as our primary means of transportation accounts for a large proportion of the carbon dioxide emitted in the atmosphere from the industrial world. Objectively, it makes little sense for each of us to burn up all the energy necessary to travel with several thousands pounds of metal wherever we go…”
You explain it. I can’t. Except to say that Gore will say anything, try anything and promise anything to get himself elected.
Well, no, I didn’t expect a lot of leftish hallelujahs. I expected a bunch of rightish sputtering, so I this has been like my birthday or something.
And I guess, if I were to honestly examine my motivations for posting the OP, I would be forced to admit that, though it was honestly not my conscious intention, I seem to have perpetrated a troll: I’d honestly have to say I was just tossing a rock into the Republican nest, as it were.
I guess I posted it here assuming somebody would debate it, but I suppose I must confess that I had no intention of doing so. (My first clue to my real intentions was that I said “Discuss,” not “Let
s discuss.”)
Sorry to have wasted your time, but thanks for the entertainment.
No problem, but GD isn’t the best forum for that type of post. And although my opinions hold little sway over the content of the forum, I’d have to say there are three forums better suited for stirring up the hornets.
[Edited by UncleBeer on 09-26-2000 at 06:53 PM]
You know, UncleBeer, I have to agree with you entirely here.
Americans are spoiled rotten when it comes to oil prices, as they are with beef prices and taxes.
But as far as characterizing Gore as someone who “will say anything, try anything and promise anything to get himself elected,” that’s why they call 'em politicians.
That’s baseline stuff; that’s almost like saying he’s a white male with a power fetish. That’s what the pool of electable candidates starts off with. In order to play this game at all, you have to overlook that in all the candidates; to suggest that it’s unique in Gore is, frankly the single most naive thing I have ever seen in my way-too-many-hours spent reading this forum.
You show me where I said that trait is specific to Mr. Gore. Betcha can’t.
Wait a damn minnit. Americans are spoiled with taxes? How so? I find them usurious and criminal. You arent’ going to tell me that because citizens of other nations may pay a higher tax rate, that Americans should, too, are you? That’s absurd.
Maybe tax rates are another thread you’d like to start.
You didn’t specifically say “that trait is specific to Mr. Gore” ( :rolleyes: ), but by bringing it up in defense of Bush–and yes, this is implied when you bring it up in a thread that was begun to badmouth Bush–by bringing it up in defense of Bush, by using it to denigrate Gore in contrast to Bush, you suggest that, when it comes to that principle, Gore is somehow “more so” than Bush, which is naive at best, and dishonest at most.
And re taxes: I’m not saying “that because citizens of other nations may pay a higher tax rate, that Americans should, too,” but I am saying that the crybabies who find U.S. taxes “usurious and criminal” should take other civilized nations’ taxes into account and get some damn perspective. You get what you pay for. You want more than any other nationality, and you want it for free.
Amen!
As for Gore’s latest game with oil prices…Yeah, I am pretty pissed at him for what he is doing! And, it makes Nader look better all the time to me. On the other hand, at least Gore got it right in his book, even if he is now backpedaling to get elected…Bush doesn’t get it period!
Also, it is a sad state of affairs in this country when politicians feel the need to offer tax cuts and lower fuel prices in order to get elected…No thank you to both!
Hey lissener I like the way you debate. Your propostal:Bush is a moron. Your evidence:you think that all imports come from overseas. When this evidence turns out to be wrong you claim Bush was wrong somehow because you think hes a moron. Reminds me of the Fundies and their circular arguements.
That being said I think id vote for Gore for the simple fact that hes to stupid to affect the way this country is run with a republican congress. Bush however would be able to actually do some of the stuff he promised and that would be bad. IMHO people who defend or attack Gore or Bush over Gore or Bush are wasting time. Voting for either would be throwing your vote away.
I really don’t see anything that even close to resembles intelligence in Gore. Where do these people see it?
And yet, when bringing up Bush’s repeated malapropisms, and someone else brings up Gore’s malapropisms in defense of Bush – and yes, this is implied when they bring it up in a thread that was begun to badmouth Bush – by bringing it up in defense of Bush, by using it to denigrate Gore in contrast to Bush, you suggest that, when it comes to malaprop, Bush is somehow “more so” than Gore, which is naive at best, and dishonest at worst.
Not long ago, you were one of my favorite new posters. Now it appears you’re just another hypocrite who changes the rules when it’s his ox being Gored.
I need some perspective on taxes? I think perhaps you need to take a look at the wasteful subsidies your government “buys” for you. Yes, it is criminal. Try the book being hawked at this site, http://www.federalsubsidies.com It’s an eye-opener.
An editorial in today’s Washington Post called “Dumb vs. Dishonest,” concerning Bush and Gore.
Since I can criticize from the comfortable position of planning not to vote for either of these two candidates, I can say I’d rather have a person who says what he means and does what he says, but can’t speak well or pronounce words, as opposed to a person who constantly and deliberately misleads, misrepresents, and tells outright lies while engaging in hand-waving distraction.