Gore Announces S.O.S.

Whoa!! In fairness to Snood, he didn't suggest that. I was merely having a little fun with this, by suggesting Gore could also claim he invented the Space Program by supporting it, as has been suggested he claimed concerning the internet. Apparently the argument here is that he was an "advocate" for the Petroleum Reserve, which to Snood and other supporters of Gore, merely means he supported the existence of it rather than having anything to do with its establishment. I tend to agree with MM that the wording tends to suggest more than mere support for, but rather insinuates some responsibility for its establishment.

My apologies here in getting between two guys slugging it out here. Gore is such an easy target for humor, I couldn't resist throwing in a comment, but if it is going to cause a major altercation here, forget I said it.

0 Replies

Where did it say Gore was listing just his political accomplishments?
The title is Al Gore's accomplishments. It doesn't say anything about it only being his political accomplishments while in Congress.

0 Replies

Hey mysteryman, you really don't want to open up the discussion to lowblows like "dumbass", do you?

0 Replies

If Gore was a Republican defending something, I would bet all you guys would be loving the criticism and derision aimed at Gore instead of defending him. I think he is hilarious. Thanks for people like Gore that can provide humor in these troubled times.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

If Gore was a Republican defending something, I would bet all you guys would be loving the criticism and derision aimed at Gore instead of defending him. I think he is hilarious. Thanks for people like Gore that can provide humor in these troubled times.

No okie, my standards wouldn't change.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Where did it say Gore was listing just his political accomplishments?
The title is Al Gore's accomplishments. It doesn't say anything about it only being his political accomplishments while in Congress.

Then show me one accomplishment that is listed that has nothing to do with politics.
Show me one accomplishment that is listed that did NOT happen during his career as a politician!

0 Replies

Mysteryman,
I'll take your non-answer to mean you think that kind of pejorative is fine. So don't whine when you get it back, hokie-dokie, you ignorant bumpkin?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Mysteryman,
I'll take your non-answer to mean you think that kind of pejorative is fine. So don't whine when you get it back, hokie-dokie, you ignorant bumpkin?

My non answer to what?
Never mind,I just saw the question you asked.

I do apologize for that,it was uncalled for.
But,if you want to call me names like that,go for it.
I dont care.

I dont let other people have that kind of power over me,to let their words hurt me.
I refuse to play the victim,nor do I go around looking to feel insulted.

So if it makes you feel better to call me names and insult me,please by all means go ahead and do so.
It wont bother me.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

parados wrote:
Where did it say Gore was listing just his political accomplishments?
The title is Al Gore's accomplishments. It doesn't say anything about it only being his political accomplishments while in Congress.

Then show me one accomplishment that is listed that has nothing to do with politics.
Show me one accomplishment that is listed that did NOT happen during his career as a politician!

Something that didn't happen while he was a politician? What kind of nonsense is that. The SPR was filled and expanded when he was a politician but you claimed that he couldn't be involved in that. Now you demand that we list things that didn't occur when he was a politician.

1978 the SPR was expanded from being able to hold 500 million barrels to 750 billion. (That would be legislation.) The first crude wasn't pumped into the SPR until August of 1977, 8 months after Gore took office. In 1978 it still only contained 69 million barrels, far less than the 250 it was supposed to have at that time. Yet somehow Gore couldn't be involved in supporting the SPR early on? The SPR was passed in late 1975. Gore was elected in late 1976. I suppose you are going to claim that the SPR wasn't an issue in the 1976 campaign now.

Why don't you look up Gore's accomplishments in the area of the Family Reunion conferences for items that were not political. The SPR was political. He was involved in the first 2 years of the program and voted to expand it in the first 3 years. That would be "early on" for anyone in the real world. Gore was in Congress before one drop of oil was put into the SPR. I would consider the first drop of oil going into the SPR to be "early on." Why don't you tell us where your cut off is for "early on" MM. Show us your intelligence and fair play and define "early on" from your perspective.

0 Replies

Just a dumb question, but who would be dumb enough to oppose SPR? This seems like a pretty lame issue to start with. So Gore supported it, after it had already been instituted and set into motion, big deal. With or without Gore, SPR would be as it is. What makes Gore so all fired important? The guy is an environmentalist whacko nut, who got to be where he is because of his dad, a dad by the way that was a southern Democrat segregationist.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

snood wrote:
Mysteryman,
I'll take your non-answer to mean you think that kind of pejorative is fine. So don't whine when you get it back, hokie-dokie, you ignorant bumpkin?

My non answer to what?
Never mind,I just saw the question you asked.

I do apologize for that,it was uncalled for.
But,if you want to call me names like that,go for it.
I dont care.

I dont let other people have that kind of power over me,to let their words hurt me.
I refuse to play the victim,nor do I go around looking to feel insulted.

So if it makes you feel better to call me names and insult me,please by all means go ahead and do so.
It wont bother me.

Nope, I don't want to go there, that's why I asked you about it. Has nothing to do with "playing the victim" - just has to do with what kind of back and forth we want to have. If you don't sling the insults, I won't either.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Just a dumb question, but who would be dumb enough to oppose SPR? This seems like a pretty lame issue to start with. So Gore supported it, after it had already been instituted and set into motion, big deal. With or without Gore, SPR would be as it is. What makes Gore so all fired important?

That's a very good question okie even though you got some facts wrong. Let's see if MM will answer it. He is the one that attempted to use SPR to smear Gore.

As has been already shown, there wasn't any oil in the SPR the first year Gore was in Congress. Let's see if MM can tell us what he thinks is "early on." I think the first year in Iraq is early on and we have only been there for 4 years. I am not counting from the time the legislation authorizing the use of force was passed.

Quote:

The guy is an environmentalist whacko nut, who got to be where he is because of his dad, a dad by the way that was a southern Democrat segregationist.

I guess it is your turn to play the smear game. Do you promote that the reason GW is President is because of his dad or is this partisan smear?

0 Replies

You use the word "smear," Parados. I do not consider it a smear when the criticism is deserved and accurate. Gore has in fact shown himself to be very extreme, mainly by his wild environmental claims, that are basically "whacko." I think he is a whacko environmentalist, and I have good reason to believe he is by simply examining what he says and does.

I will agree both Gore and Bush probably gained political stature partly because of the political involvement of their families. This is nothing unusual, by the way, or nothing new in American politics. It goes back clear to the beginning I think. Both Al Gore and President Bush had to do something on their own, I agree, to get to where they are. I threw out the "Gore got to where he is because of his dad" comment because Bush haters love to throw that at Bush, so I figured turnabout is fair play. To be perfectly accurate, both got to where they are through personal effort, but their family connections facilitated and influenced their efforts along the way.

None of that changes the fact that Gore is a very extreme and politically polarizing figure on the left, out of the mainstream in my opinion. How he almost became president was due at least in part to the media pushing his candidacy and ignoring his extremism, and beyond that, it was and still is a mystery to me how such people can fool so many people.

0 Replies

You seem to not understand the meaning of "out of the mainstream" okie.
Gore is the mainstream. It is people like Inhofe that are out of the mainstream.

Quote:

, according to a new TIME magazine/ABC News/Stanford University poll. An even larger percentage (88%) think global warming threatens future generations. More than half (60%) say it threatens them a great deal; 38% feel that global warming is already a serious problem, and 47% feel that it will be in the future.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1176967,00.html

Your statement is nothing but a smear okie. Find me one thing Gore has said about global warming that is whacko. Let's see what you based your statement on.

0 Replies

I could choose lots of quotes, some of the most famous are those attacking the internal combustion engine. If he thinks they are that dangerous, I would suggest he sell his cars, better yet, dispose of them instead of selling them to someone else that would only use them to destroy the earth. I suspect he won't because he perhaps doesn't? I think there are possibly other motives to his crusade, but to tell you the truth, I haven't figured out exactly what his motives are, besides political power.

But how about this quote:
"The world is once again at a critical juncture. We are invading ourselves and attacking the ecological system of which we are a part. As a result, we now face the prospect of a kind of global civil war between those who refuse to consider the consequences of civilization's relentless advance and those who refuse to be silent partners in the destruction. The time has come to make this struggle the central organizing principle of world civilization.
Source: Earth in the Balance, page 294

Such a statement makes me wonder, is he advocating and instigating this new global civil war between him and his fellow environmentalist whackos and the rest of us? Is he advocating a one world government? Is he advocating rolling back civilization's advance? Is technology evil in his view? Does he believe in the environmental movement more than nationhood? Is it more important than individual rights and freedom? Is it his religion? Just exactly what is in this man's mind anyway? I don't know for sure, but such statements make me wonder if he is some sort of an environmental madman.

Parados, can you honestly read some of the statements made by Gore and still argue he has a normal and mainstream attitude as most other Americans?

0 Replies

Not much there there okie. Other than you have to include items that aren't in the quote to make it seem like something that you can claim is whacko.

0 Replies

I guess you don't really get it, Parados.

Gore: "The time has come to make this struggle the central organizing principle of world civilization."

I think the environmental struggle Gore must be imagining is nonsense, Parados. I believe there are much larger struggles than that. And the way he talks, does he consider himself some kind of environmental messiah? And if he plans to enslave people to his agenda, then he might be talking about a war. At least he should have the courtesy to bring down his own $1,000 utility bills first before he delivers his pompous message to the rest of us peons.

0 Replies

I get it just fine.

Please point out where the statement advocates a one world government.
Please point out where the statement is advocating rolling back civilization's advance.
Please point out where the statement says technology is evil.
Please point out where he says environmentalism is his religion.

You can't provide any evidence of the above based on the quote. Without any of the above being in the quote how is he a whacko? I will say it again. You have to resort to making stuff up.

Who is really the whacko here? I don't think it is Gore. He hasn't made up things that are not in statements of others. Seeing things that aren't there could be catagorized as psychotic, okie.
http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Substance-induced-psychotic-disorder.html

0 Replies

parados wrote:

okie wrote:
Just a dumb question, but who would be dumb enough to oppose SPR? This seems like a pretty lame issue to start with. So Gore supported it, after it had already been instituted and set into motion, big deal. With or without Gore, SPR would be as it is. What makes Gore so all fired important?

That's a very good question okie even though you got some facts wrong. Let's see if MM will answer it. He is the one that attempted to use SPR to smear Gore.

As has been already shown, there wasn't any oil in the SPR the first year Gore was in Congress. Let's see if MM can tell us what he thinks is "early on." I think the first year in Iraq is early on and we have only been there for 4 years. I am not counting from the time the legislation authorizing the use of force was passed.

Quote:
The guy is an environmentalist whacko nut, who got to be where he is because of his dad, a dad by the way that was a southern Democrat segregationist.

I guess it is your turn to play the smear game. Do you promote that the reason GW is President is because of his dad or is this partisan smear?

I have not attempted to use the SPR to "smear" Gore.
There are plenty of other things to use for that,based on his own comments.

I AM counting from the time the SPR legislation was passed.
How can he have been an early supporter of legislation that was passed BEFORE he joined congress?

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

I have not attempted to use the SPR to "smear" Gore.
There are plenty of other things to use for that,based on his own comments.

I AM counting from the time the SPR legislation was passed.
How can he have been an early supporter of legislation that was passed BEFORE he joined congress?

That's funny MM. The statement says nothing about suppoting the legislation. It says "Gore supported the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to prevent dependence on foreign oil. Al Gore was an early, vocal advocate for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve."
First you change accomplishments to mean only political accomplishments and now you are trying to change support for the SPR to be limited to the first piece of legislation.

Your argument is also contradictatory. You are counting from the time the legislation was passed but then use a reference of "support for legislation." Support for legislation would be prior to its passage. After it is passed it becomes support for the law.

0 Replies

Gore Announces S.O.S.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know