Posted on 08/15/2011 8:09:32 PM PDT by RED SOUTH
In an interview with an Iowa radio station on Monday, the Republican presidential contender explained his role as the Gore campaign’s Texas chairman by saying that “this was Al Gore before he invented the Internet and got to be Mr. Global Warming.”
But in fact, global warming was already a significant theme for Gore in 1987 and 1988 — long before his activism led to several books, a Nobel Prize and a part in an Academy Award-winning film. It was also well before the right gave him the "Mr. Ozone" nickname and talk radio heaped endless mockery on the future vice president.
You are proving a different point. You are showing that Al Gore was involved in global warming, not that he was seen as an environmental nutcase.
It is clear Perry wasn’t trying to refute that point, since he mentioned it and mentioned that he disagreed with Al Gore about that.
The argument is that Perry lied about Gore’s involvement in global warming, apparently to hide it; that argument falls on it’s face given that Perry MENTIONED Gore’s involvement in global warming and said he disagreed with it. That’s an odd way of “hiding” something, by speaking it publicly.
As was said in a previous palin thread, if you are going to call someone a liar, look at all the words they said, don’t just take a soundbite, mis-interpret it, and come to your conclusion.
I think he should be asked as many times as people think it is necessary. If people don’t understand what he said, they should ask him to explain. It’s certainly a legitimate issue, just one that seems somewhat less important than, say, saving our country from an overreaching federal government that is bankrupting us. But if we want to throw out a possible candidate because of Al Gore, well, I bet that will make Al Gore very happy.
Or maybe not. I thought this board would be thrilled that Michell Bachmann was moving to the top, but it seems a good number of freepers really don’t want her to be the nominee. I haven’t seen a groundswell for Cain, Pawlenty is gone, Gingrich certainly appears to be unacceptable to conservatives. Ron Paul is threatening to actually gain traction in the vacuum, while Romney is skating along on the top of the pile, while conservatives scream “no more RINOs”.
If Palin decides to join the race, then the arguments over whether Perry should be dumped because we have a true conservative in the race will make a lot more sense. But right now, looking at the polls that are coming out, Perry looks to have a decent shot at deflating Romney.
As to whether Perry is some manchurian-candidate RINO, I’ll just say this — Would Sarah Palin REALLY endorse and speak highly of a manchurian-candidate RINO, even for the position of Governor? Is that how little her supporters think of her opinion?
Sarah Palin supported him, called him a true conservative, when she clearly knew that he had been a democrat, that he had worked on the trans-corridor, that he had given children of illegals in-state tuition, that he had spoken kindly of mexico, that he had tried to mandate Gardacil, and all those other things people are pointing to from his past. I am inclined to follow her lead until I know more; he certainly is saying the right things now, and I’ll be darned if I’m going to believe that Palin would have endorsed a bald-faced liar as some people claim, even for a governor’s position.
Other than John McCain, can anybody point to another lying-weasel-RINO that Sarah has endorsed?
On immigration, I believe his states-rights stand will help, and I see no indication he is “pushing amnesty”, or that he will reward them at a federal level.
This is the sentence that people claim is false: "this was Al Gore before he invented the Internet and got to be Mr. Global Warming.”
I've presented evidence that what he said was both literally true for those seeking a literal interpretation, and was rhetorically true for those who understand that he was doing a sound bite in a campaign speech.
Literally, the two claims Perry made were true -- Al Gore didn't claim to invent the internet until a decade later, and Al Gore was not the face of global warming until much later. Being involved in global warming, and making it a part of your campaign, is not the same as being the guru, fact, pied-piper of the movement as he is today.
Rhetorically, Perry is right that the image of Al Gore in 1988 was NOTHING like the image of Al Gore today. It is appropriate to judge Perry on being a democrat and working for Al Gore. It is inappropriate to judge his work for Al Gore based on our image of Al Gore today, because we all know that Al Gore in 1988 was NOT perceived as a nutcase like he is today.
And anecdotally, we know Perry's claim to be true, because until specific pieces of information were provided in this article and others, MOST people did just assume Al Gore of then wasn't nearly as bad. Look at the number of people here who say they are shocked to find out about Gore in the 1980s. That is a clear factual indication that the PERCEPTION of Al Gore in the 1980s was notihng like the perception of Al Gore today.
I've made my argument, I have no ignored that Gore was involved in global warming, Perry's campaign has said Gore WAS involved in global warming and Perry disagreed with him at the time on that issue. People do chair campaigns while disagreeing on an issue.
Perry has been a solid voice against global warming -- nobody is claiming he isn't, but here we are arguing about how big a deal global warming was, not to Perry, but to Al Gore.
Literally, rhetorically, and anecdotally, the statement Perry made is true. Was Al Gore a liberal when Perry was working for him? His ACU rating indicates yes. But was he the fire-breathing lunatic global warming prophet he is today? Certainly not. And that is what Perry said in the soundbite. "this was Al Gore before he invented the Internet and got to be Mr. Global Warming.”
Me, either. All anyone has to do is go find my comments about Mitt. He is no conservative.
Me, either. All anyone has to do is go find my comments about Mitt. He is no conservative.
Me, either. All anyone has to do is go find my comments about Mitt. He is no conservative.
Perry is a Johnny Come Lately, he is married emotionally to his MEHICANO neighbors, panders to a racist organization, uses govt mandate to force questionable inoculations on females, almost doubles state debt ratio since he’s been office, and a former campaign chairman for Algore. Totally amazed how little it takes to sucker in so many people, maybe I shouldn’t surprised considering what happened in 2008.
Yeah, he held global warning sessions in 1976 after his election.
Perry is a ‘fake’ conservative , he’s as plastic as they come. He is the announced “conservative” version of Mitt Romney. A guy who plays the insider’s game, corporate interests first, before the people’s interests. Sorry, I’m not buying his snake oil!
I agree. I was excited when he decided to run. The more I find out about him, though, the more I think he is not “the one”. I guess I’ll keep holding out for Sarah. Sigh...
You're absolutely right in that regard about Aggieland. Even though it's a state-run school, true American Patriots and Christian Conservatives are there in abundance unlike liberal cesspools of socialist indoctrination such as Cal/Berkeley and the University of Michigan. Texas Tech is another university where Conservatism is found.
I'll add that I did an informal bumper sticker survey during a prolonged vacation/road trip back in late summer 2008 when the election was in full force. I had the opportunity to stop by various congregations of the church of Christ (where I've long been a member) for Wednesday and Sunday services. My travels took me to Odessa (where I saw the Permian football stadium, by the way), Lubbock, Abilene, Tyler and then into Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois and Missouri. I was pleased to find NOT ONE bumper sticker on a vehicle in any parking lot for Obama at even a single one of those coC locations. There were many for Palin and her lil' running mate, whose name I've since forgotten. :-)
That’s two apologies and walk backs in two days. Yeah, he’s a conservative, sure. What will it be tomorrow?
Today algore is permanently linked to environmental extremism.
That was not the case back then.
It isn’t surprising that he had an interest and even (OMG!) wrote an editorial! (Sheesh, I’ve had editorials printed!)
Gore’s reputation before his White House time wasn’t as a tree hugger.
Funny thing was that I was living in Kentucky, worked in Tennessee, and had a Little Rock newspaper delivered to the house, courtesy of the former owner. I knew Clinton was a crook before he was nominated and al gore was NOT widely considered an environmental extremist.
Southern democrats were a whole different breed just a couple decades ago and Gore wasn’t doing anything to alienate them.
I know you’re desperate to smear Perry in any way you can, I think you’ll have to work a lot harder than this to get some mud to stick.
Algore was a thru and thru pro abort liberal when he was in the Senate starting in 1985.
There wasn't an internet in 1988, so Perry's statement that he supported Algore before the internet really doesn't address the fact that Perry did indeed support an across the board liberal at that time.
Perry really needs to come clean on this.
Yeah, and AlGore was against tobacco and smoking too, that is only after his family made MILLIONS off of it..
OOPS! Hypocrisy is a bitch ain't it?
I don't trust Rick Perry as far as I can throw him. There's just something too ... "slick" about him.
FreeReign, you are totally wrong!
http://www.nrlc.org/news/2000/NRL04/carol.html
Al Gore's Relentless Promotion of Abortion
By Carol Tobias, NRL PAC Director
Although there are many pro-life Democrats, the national Democratic Party has once again selected a presidential candidate who believes there should be absolutely no restrictions on abortion and would offer no protection for unborn children who are deemed "unwanted."
In the case of Vice President Al Gore, compounding this unfortunate reality is that early in his career Gore voted much differently. As a member of the United State House of Representatives from 1977 to 1984, Gore compiled an 84% pro-life voting record. He also responded to many constituents with letters that appeared to be pro-life.
However, after being elected to the Senate in 1984, Gore switched his position. He quickly began to assemble a strongly pro-abortion voting record.
Google it.
Read what you just posted.
Your post supports my point.
As I said, Algore was a thru and thru pro abort liberal when he was in the Senate starting in 1985.
Anyone who didn’t feel Algore was a tree-hugger in the 1980s wasn’t paying attention. Gore was one of the first Dems to sound the “global warming” alarm and was holding hearings about “climate change” as early as 1976. In the 1980s, Gore was well known by the national media as the go-to guy for “the sky is falling!” enviromental talks. Here’s clip of then Congresssman Al Gore discussing the issue on a “Climate Crisis” news special in 1983:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8JlBkOe6HU
Your dates and assumptions are wrong.
Gore was pro life until becoming VP. That is the fact, not my opinion.
Gore and Tipper were also an early Family Values model.
Gore was more conservative that you and others on this thread want to admit because it weakens your case against Perry.
You still didn't read your own posted article.
From your article: However, after being elected to the Senate in 1984, Gore switched his position. He quickly began to assemble a strongly pro-abortion voting record.
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.