Posted on 02/28/2007 12:02:38 PM PST by Sabramerican
As Buchanan pointed out, Mr. Gore has been right on the war from the beginning. And unlike Barrack Obama, he has the experience to soothe the jangled nerves of Democratic party bosses. The Nation's John Nichols also pointed out that Gore has more experience in Washington than Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama and John Edwards combined. That may not mean much when things are calm across the globe but these are not normal times.
America is fighting a war on terror, watching Iraq devolve into a bloody civil war, sitting back while Iran gains nuclear weapons, acting defenseless to North Korea's nukes, watching as Afghanistan grows more unstable by the day, and praying to God that radicals don't kill Pakistan's military dictator lest we see Islamic radicals gain control of that country's nuclear missiles.
Is now really the time to put a guy with two years of foreign policy experience in the Oval Office?
That's the question Democratic activists have to be asking themselves tonight. If they think it through, they will have to conclude that Obama can't win a national defense debate against John McCain or Rudy Giuliani.
But Al Gore can.
............
2008 is looking like Al Gore's year.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
You know, if you come right down to it, from a practical point of view, the Democrats have no one that they can offer with any kind of a positive agenda for America.
I think that Gore should join the fray. He is a one issue candidate; Global Warming and the reality of his shtick is only really universally validated by Hollywood. Real scientific standards for validation of a Theory were thrown out on so many levels by so many measures. Who else do the have? Obama? Edwards? Hillary? Sure one or more of them could get the nomination of the (D) party. They would have to FAR FAR left in order to satisfy the radical extremist Liberal faction, but they could run. Just think of those names I mentioned and there is a certain arena where the name “Gore” would be a more pragmatic candidate. Fortunately, I think that Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton has a better chance than Uncle Al. Al might get past the primary, but Rudy would make him look like a fool in any debate.
It gives one pause to think somebody imagines Al Gore capable of handling tougher times. The man isn't a suitable candidate for fluff times.
The poor writer is indicative of the confused liberal who hates war and firm leadership when Bush does it, but is suddenly for it when Gore looms. He will be disappointed, Al's cojones are merely airbrushed.
I'll take a Gore EarthFest presidency over a Hillary dictatorship with FR illegal and half of us in prison, or an Obama Hussein Islamic Republic.
Algore would be formidable if he can raise the money and if he can replace Obama as the anti-Hillary. Two big ifs.
Also, if he starts putting a sock back in his trousers we'll know he's running.
I used to watch and enjoy Joe's show, but that was 18-24
ago. He has been jogging to the left and is no longer fit to watch IMHO.
At this point, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Hey who would provide the most conservative America if elected.
Buchanan - the most
Gore - next best because the Republicans would fight his liberalism
Giuliani - no way because the Republicans would bend over for his liberalism
That's just it. He doesn't have a loser image. It fades to zero with the Iraq War and Bush's unpopularity.
To the Democrats he won and was cheated. His candidacy may be revenge.
To the Nation at large, who are angry and worse with Bush, a vote for Gore may be a way of correcting history. Fixing an unjustified derailment of history- from the happy Clinton days- by a Republican Court.
Gore is no joke. He is dangerous. If he runs in time, IMO he gets the nomination and is very possibly the next President.
You're absolutely right. Republicans shouldn't laugh, but they should definitely start digging up those clips of him screaming like a banshee for the last two years.
Enough people still think Gore was "robbed" in 2000 to say "oh, give him a shot at the Presidency - he should have been President 8 years ago..."
Of course, how many of us remember some of our Gore-voting friends saying after 9/11 that while they hated to admit it, they were glad it was Bush in the White House instead. Nothing's changed with Gore since then, and I sure as hell wouldn't trust him with the War on Terror.
Of course, he's got a lot to answer for with his hypocrisy regarding Global Warming ("conservation is good for thee but not for me")
In fact, with Gore running, we could win with Duncan Hunter.
I also have been saying for some time that Al Gore is the perfect Rat candidate this time around (for myriad reasons I have explained elsewhere) and that he would extremely tough to beat.
If he were inclined to run as Obama's VP, under cover that they would be partners and the No. 2 slot would allow him plenty of flexibility to pay attention to his global warming gig, the train would leave the station fast.
The GOP should not underestimate the possibility of Gore as an 11th hour nominee.
No,he disgusted Washington that much.
Better have enough to last 4 or 8 years, because if Gore runs, he's got a better chance than the Witch of winning.
In his own clumsy, white way, Al Gore has game.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1791315/posts
I used to be a huge fan of Scarborough when he was in Congress.
Now, I can't even watch his show. He may be a good guy, but I wish he'd just admit he's changed back to being a Democrat.
Damn straight - he is a FAR bigger threat than the witless Obillarys
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.