jlm_photo wrote: Guess I posted my opinion on the wrong side of the forums...but Al Gore is guilty of doing more damage to the enviroment than anyone.
No more than Rupert Murdoch or any other rich puke. Matter of fact, I'll bet the house Murdoch does ten times more damage than Gore. What we need here is one of those USA Today pie charts showing the relative ecological damage done by all rich pukes and the companies they own.
How come everyone who is "rich" is a "puke"? Is it horrible to be "rich" or want to have money?
jlm_photo wrote: How come everyone who is "rich" is a "puke"? Is it horrible to be "rich" or want to have money?
Nope. I'm just talking about the pukey rich.
Nothing wrong with wanting to get ahead and make a few bucks. Where it becomes not necessarily wrong but maybe not so good is when it becomes wasteful.
I know everyone has a different view of 'wasteful', but an example of true waste: there's a spit of land south of Kiawah Island known as Cap'n Sam's Spit. It's a barrier island which has ebbed and flowed over the years; for that reason it can't be covered under the coastal flood insurance program (federally subsidized flood insurance). A group has gotten together and bought the land for next to nothing. Now they want the federal government to grant an exemption so they can build multimillion dollar houses on the property. By their own figures, 25 years would be stretching it, the houses would probably be wiped out in a hurricane sooner than that.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-taxpayer-subsidies-for-capn-sams-land
Now that is wasteful.
^ +1 bro.
Apparently, losing the 2000 election was a catalyst (that took 10yrs) that led to a failed marriage:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/01/cbs_evening_news_gores_loss_to_bush_contributed_to_separation.html
I'm calling BS as many things have passed since TeamGore vacated the VP's residence..........
I'm still thinking they'll reconcile eventually, especially when ol' Al realizes he'll keep more money by staying home than he can make traveling the world.
Regarding the 2000 election: The Gores ran a poor campaign. It shouldn't have been that close in the first place. Whatever happened in FL shouldn't have made a difference. So Al and Tipper have no one to blame but themselves. That election was theirs for the taking and they lost it.
Jerry From LA wrote: Regarding the 2000 election: The Gores ran a poor campaign. It shouldn't have been that close in the first place. Whatever happened in FL shouldn't have made a difference. So Al and Tipper have no one to blame but themselves. That election was theirs for the taking and they lost it.
100% agreed!
Neither TeamGore nor their sycophants have owned-up to the campaign collapse; instead they chose to blame the SCOTUS and Bush43.
Regardless of Bush's short-comings, I firmly believe the opposition's refusal to recognize and admit their personal failures are key to a decade (plus) of political acrimony the country should never have endured - if responsible adults were at the helm, that is.
Jerry From LA wrote:jlm_photo wrote: Guess I posted my opinion on the wrong side of the forums...but Al Gore is guilty of doing more damage to the enviroment than anyone.No more than Rupert Murdoch or any other rich puke. Matter of fact, I'll bet the house Murdoch does ten times more damage than Gore. What we need here is one of those USA Today pie charts showing the relative ecological damage done by all rich pukes and the companies they own.
Don't remember where I saw it, but I did catch an article comparing Gore's "carbon footprint" to that of Bush since he left office. Gore's was multiple times higher. It was Bush that had all of the eco stuff on his house, compared to zip for Gore.
Jerry From LA wrote:jlm_photo wrote: Guess I posted my opinion on the wrong side of the forums...but Al Gore is guilty of doing more damage to the enviroment than anyone.No more than Rupert Murdoch or any other rich puke. Matter of fact, I'll bet the house Murdoch does ten times more damage than Gore. What we need here is one of those USA Today pie charts showing the relative ecological damage done by all rich pukes and the companies they own.
I don't pay attention to Murdoch, but he is part of the visible campaign to cripple our economy with taxes and say we all need to be careful of our resource use?
All the while having a home that spends more on utilities in two months than the average American makes in a year?
Interesting
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/240224/george_w_bush_vs_al_gore_who_has_the.html?cat=15
Duke wrote:aeronca65t wrote: A pity. I thought he was OK.....not perfect, but a FAR better choice in 2000. And I really liked her. As a parent, I thought her initiatives against strong language on videos was good and pretty balanced.I believe you're the first person I've ever seen who thought that Tipper Gore was anything other than a sanctimonious idiot.
Why thank you so much for your opinion.
I disagree with you.
oldsaw wrote: Regardless of Bush's short-comings, I firmly believe the opposition's refusal to recognize and admit their personal failures are key to a decade (plus) of political acrimony the country should never have endured - if responsible adults were at the helm, that is.
You mean all the problems of the Bush years were Gore's fault?
I agree that Gore's campaign was poorly run......he should have had Bill and Hillary on-board. He needed to look passed the personal dislike and been more of a politician. But he couldn't. As usual, Will Rogers was right.
aeronca65t wrote:oldsaw wrote: Regardless of Bush's short-comings, I firmly believe the opposition's refusal to recognize and admit their personal failures are key to a decade (plus) of political acrimony the country should never have endured - if responsible adults were at the helm, that is.You mean all the problems of the Bush years were Gore's fault? I agree that Gore's campaign was poorly run......he should have had Bill and Hillary on-board. He needed to look passed the personal dislike and been more of a politician. But he couldn't. As usual, Will Rogers was right.
I didn't and don't give Bush a pass.
However, I readily contend that post-2000, partisan politics were worse and more divisive than those experienced during Clinton's tenure. But, if had Bill owned-up to his dalliances, the country would have been in a much better mood and Gore's chances to gain the Presidency would have vastly improved.
Instead, we got a sore loser beatchin' about that "other guy" for a decade, backed by a party doing it's best to smear the opposition while being as guilty and duplicitous as everything in its' crosshairs.
As far as Al and Tipper's marriage, I hate to see any long-term relationship fail, but they will probably do less damage apart than they might together.
In reply to racerdave600:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
Tom Heath wrote: I have a special place in my heart for Tipper. It's right behind the stack of Dead Kennedys records. Jello v. Tipper, from the wayback machine.
I had zero interest looking at this thread. Now I'm glad I did. Jello Biafra in a suit. HA! What a miserable piece of facist garbage Tipper Gore was.
aeronca65t wrote:Duke wrote:Why thank you so much for your opinion. I disagree with you.aeronca65t wrote: A pity. I thought he was OK.....not perfect, but a FAR better choice in 2000. And I really liked her. As a parent, I thought her initiatives against strong language on videos was good and pretty balanced.I believe you're the first person I've ever seen who thought that Tipper Gore was anything other than a sanctimonious idiot.
I assume we run with different crowds.
At least the kids won't be affected.
As for his politics vs hers... I thought it was silly she got quiet about her moral outrage when he became VP.
You'll need to log in to post.
