Skip to comments.
Ten Reasons to be Glad Al Gore Isn’t President
Front Page Magazine ^
| 9/25/2002
| Chris Weinkopf
Posted on 09/25/2002 6:17:06 AM PDT by Another Galt
ELECTION 2000 may now seem long ago, but it's worth taking a moment to recall with joyful relief the butterfly ballot, the Electoral College, and the landmark Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. For without these godsends, would-be president Al Gore wouldn't merely be delivering asinine speeches to the Commonwealth Club of California, he would be making asinine policy in the White House.
Lest anyone forget how tremendously fortunate we are that the election turned out exactly the way it did, Gore inadvertently provided (at least) ten examples in Monday's address. In chronological order, they are:
1. "To begin with, I believe we should focus our efforts first and foremost against those who attacked us on September 11th and have thus far gotten away with it.
I do not believe that we should allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent task [by a war on Iraq] simply because it is proving to be more difficult and lengthy than predicted. Great nations persevere and then prevail. They do not jump from one unfinished task to another." Actually, great nations are capable of tending to more than one task at a time, especially when those two tasks are intimately related. Gore's presumption that the U.S. cannot simultaneously hunt down what's left of al Qaeda and dismantle the Iraqi threat is simplistic nonsense. Al Qaeda is a single, far-flung outfit operating in dozens of countries. Capturing and/or killing each and every one of its members will be a long-term project, the completion of which shouldn't forestall other, pressing national concerns like thwarting Saddam Hussein's nuclear program.
(click on the link for the rest)
TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: forrestgore
He says it all. Where would we be with Forrest Gore as president? Up feces creek without a paddle.
To: Another Galt
That's-- Shix's creek,in a lead boat, with a paper paddle!
2
posted on
09/25/2002 6:25:31 AM PDT
by
litehaus
To: Another Galt
Only ten reasons? OK, so the ten relate just to the state of affairs with Iraq. Outside of these, there are hundreds of reasons we all should be glad the goron isn't the POTUS.
BTW Galt, Forrest Gump would be a better President than the former VP.
3
posted on
09/25/2002 6:30:27 AM PDT
by
Fudd
To: Another Galt
#11. Laura Bush
To: litehaus
That's-- Shix's creek,in a lead boat, with a paper paddle!
Actually we wouldn't even have the boat! We'd just be floating in it!
To: Another Galt
#11) Gore has more time to invent things, like the Internet.
To: Another Galt
#1 reason...Gore makes some of us sick...and those people had 8 years of being sick with Clinton/Gore...thats enough
7
posted on
09/25/2002 7:08:18 AM PDT
by
woofie
To: Another Galt
And people wonder why Al Gore III has a death wish?
To: SpinyNorman
He's still morphing.
To: litehaus
Ten???
Only ten?
I have thousands at least.
To: litehaus
Deterrence works fine with a rational nation where the leaders value the lives of their citizens, This relegates Iraq to the small group of nations for whom pre-emptive strikes are necessary.
11
posted on
09/25/2002 7:40:25 AM PDT
by
JimSEA
To: stainlessbanner
If Algore were president, we would all be speaking arabic now.
And speaking of inventing things, in his bile filled speech, Algore totally contradicted numerous statements he made during the 2000 campaign, his 8 years as VP, and during the Gulf War dating back to 1991. The All Stars on FOX News cound'nt believe Algore could be so stupid to say things that were so easily checked against his past. The best part was when Charles Krauthammer looked at Brit Hume with a condescending face and said "He never learns".
To: Another Galt
Reason number one should be: He's AlGore.
What other reason than that is needed?
Oh yeah, I forgot the LA and soccie mommie crowds.....
To: Another Galt
Seems to me that Gore is believing the BS about his brilliance that the Dems tried to foist on us during the campaign.
Any other poitician would never have gone to the extents he did in this speech. But old Al, believing that the public believes in his genius and he is therefore immune from criticism, prattles on.
14
posted on
09/25/2002 8:13:31 AM PDT
by
CaptRon
To: wallcrawlr
#11. Laura Bush So true.
How refreshing to have a First Lady of whom that you can actually be proud.
15
posted on
09/25/2002 8:47:51 AM PDT
by
evad
To: Another Galt
the MAIN reason is that presidents of the USA are required to be PERSONS!
for a free dixie,sw
To: stainlessbanner
and INVENT..the truth?
AL GORE. LIAR THEN? OR LIAR NOW?
Since you are informed talk radio listeners, you already know about Al Gores strange speech two days ago. You remember, the speech in which Al Gore tried to convince the American people that the Islamic terrorists who attacked America on September 11th got away with it.
Gores goal, of course, it to try to create an aura of failure around Bushs efforts in the war on terror. If he has to lie to do it, what the hell. After all, hes a Democrat
AND he learned from the best, Bill Clinton.
Simply put, Al Gore is a liar. He will say whatever he needs to say, be it the truth or not, to further his political ambitions.
We use the Lexus-Nexus wayback machine to check out what Gore was saying about Saddam Hussein and the first Gulf War back in 1991. Here you go
read and comprehend:
I want to state this clearly, President Bush should not be blamed for Saddam Husseins survival to this point. There was throughout the war a clear consensus that the United States should not include the conquest of Iraq among its objectives. On the contrary, it was universally accepted that out objective was to push Iraq out of Kuwait, and it was further understood that when this was accomplished, combat should stop.
That was how Al Gore said he felt about the Gulf War in 1991. Now, 11 years later, this is how Al Gore has a different version of his own feelings:
Back in 1991 I was one of a handful of Democrats in the United States Senate to vote in favor of the resolution endorsing the Persian Gulf War. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administrations departure from the battlefield.
OK. One of those statements is a lie. Was he lying in 1991 when he said that it was understood that the battle would stop after Iraq was pushed from Kuwait? Or was Gore lying in 2002 when he said he felt betrayed by our departure from the battlefield?
You dont really have to go all the way back to 1991 to find Gore at variance with his statements this week. Just go back about seven months. In February of this year Gore spoke to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. The following excerpt appears in the New York Times article about that speech:
Al Gore said last night that the time had come for a "final reckoning" with Iraq, describing the country as a "virulent threat in a class by itself" and suggesting that the United States should consider ways to oust President Saddam Hussein.
Again
lying then? Or lying now?
http://www.boortz.com/nealznuz.htm
To: Another Galt
What is so interesting to me,is that I have to figure that all of the Alphabet Channels (which I refuse to watch anymore) and their nightly news at 6:30 p.m.,are most likely reporting these speeches as 'Positives'.I expect nothing less. Thank god for DARPA for creating and giving us the Internet.
18
posted on
09/25/2002 11:19:47 AM PDT
by
Pagey
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson