Democrats & Liberals: Archives

Paul

It is not a smear to disagree with Gore’s conclusions. Even if you believe (as I do) that the preponderance of the evidence points to warming and the humans may have a role, his solutions do not follow, IMO, and some of his statements are hyperbole.

And some of his problems are of his own making. He did make a dubious comment re the Internet. “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.” It takes a few times reading it carefully to see what he “meant.” I also heard him give a speech talking about his hard work growing up on a farm in Tennessee. He may have visited the place, but he grew up in NW Washington DC, where I don’t think he did much plowin’ and cuttin’ wood.

Jack,

Comparing Gore to Hilter is not a smear? That’s more than just disagreeing on conclusions. Come on.

I also heard him give a speech talking about his hard work growing up on a farm in Tennessee. He may have visited the place, but he grew up in NW Washington DC, where I don’t think he did much plowin’ and cuttin’ wood.

During the school year, he lived in DC. However, he spent his summers in Tennessee doing just what he claimed he did.

Why are you so quick to call him a liar for something he knows a hell of a lot more about than you do?

Pick and choose, pick and choose.
Disagree with al gore and make Nazi comparisons and you are “smearing” him?
Disagree with President Bush and make Nazi comparisons and your only speaking the truth?
How about some Puff’s Plus.

Man, I sure hope you guys pick a Democrat to run in 08, because if al gore is the best you got, we got more of the same coming.

al gore? LMAO!

Lawnboy

I didn’t call him a liar re global warming. I just questioned his conclusions. Is that not allowed.

I would not have guessed they still used mules back in 1960, but maybe so.

There is a difference between doing it as the summer camp experience and doing it for real. I don’t mean to denigrate the work. I own a tree farm, but as in Gore’s case, it is not my primary income source. I make my kids stack rocks etc. It is hard work, but I don’t think they can really lay claim to knowing what it is like to depend on the sweat of their brows for their daily bread.

Where did mules enter the conversation? Did I miss it?

I didn’t call him a liar re global warming. I just questioned his conclusions. Is that not allowed.

Yes, it’s allowed, but it’s irrelevant to your criticism of Paul’s article. Paul quoted people who compared Gore to Hilter. You said “It is not a smear to disagree with Gore’s conclusions.” The smear is not the disagreement; the smear is the comparison to Hitler.

There is a difference between doing it as the summer camp experience and doing it for real.

Why do you assume he just came in for a “summer camp experience”? He lived on the farm for three months a year, working. How on earth do you get off denigrating that as you do?

He lived on a farm and did hard work in Tennessee while he was growing up. It takes quite a partisan spin to call him a liar for a speech about “his hard work growing up on a farm in Tennessee” when those are the facts.

Paul

Sorry for Righties smearing Gore…but he’s…gosh…just so smearable….. :)

I suppose we should be grateful Al Gore did not father a Black Baby, eh SE?

Lawnboy

He mentioned mules and a two headed ax that he used to clear land. I guess his pa couldn’t afford a chain saw or a tractor.

I get off denigrating it because I do the same sort of thing. It is kind of a hobby thing.

If my kids run for office they can talk about the hard time tossing rocks. I don’t have a two headed ax, but I have several ordinary ones. That can give my city kids the 19th century farm experience all right.

It is kind of a hobby thing.

For you it’s a hobby. Why do you assume it was the same for him?

I saw a speech on Cspan A while Back, where Al gore and Bob dole, were talking to the audience and a question was asked to mr Gore about the election, mr gore, gave a Quick and angry Answer, and was almost booed off the stage, then out of the blue, old broken down and mean ol’ Bob dole saved his bacon, then Al gore said thanks Bob. and then they had a wonderful time.

S.E.

Amen. Preach on, Bro’.

Paul,

While skimming through the Think Progress link I stumbled onto this:
The Halliburton SurvivaBall
http://www.halliburtoncontracts.com/

If you haven’t seen it take just a minute to do so. I laughed so hard I nearly cried.

KansasDem

Paul,
This does not suprise me that the controllers of the Republicans, the ultra right wing, are smeering V.P. Gore. It is what acting President Rove has determined would do. These people are unprincipled and many times just LIERS. There are enough people who will believe anyone when they have a post with something like the Heritage Foundation, etc.

Well written article, Paul.

An analogy is an argument from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects. That is what your examples are.
A smear is a lie intended to defame the character of or discredit a person or group. American Pundit’s blog “Republicans Dishonor Our Fallen Heroes” is an example of a smear.
While it can be argued that invoking the Nazis is disingenuous, the analogies have some validity.
Gore’s movie IS slickly produced propaganda and he DOES have a fanatical belief in his cause.
Bill Gray’s statement that global warming is a hoax is disagreement, and cause for reasoned argument, not condemnation.

“Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth�€™s temperature is rising due to human activity.”

Peer review concerning global warming is almost meaningless. Global warming has become a religion and any scientist who commits the heresy of challenging it will end his career.

Traveller,
So you would agree that since comparing Gore to Hitler is not a smear that it’s ALSO valid to compare Bush to Hitler? To compare Karl Rove to Joseph Goebbels? To compare Dick Cheney with Himmler? To compare Rumsfeld with Goering?

Man, I sure hope you guys pick a Democrat to run in 08, because if al gore is the best you got, we got more of the same coming.

al gore? LMAO!

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 05:11 PM

And this from one who supports Bush.

What brillance, ugh?

No wonder America has found the slippery slope that leads to fascism.

Lawnboy

Because it is a hobby thing. GW Bush does a lot more work around the farm and even RR chopped more wood. And both those guys actually lived on their land most of the time. I think you can safely call their forays into farming hobbies.

How much of Gore’s wealth or income was derived from all that farmin’?

Frankly, I don’t know why he even makes a big thing about it. It just does not fit in well with his personality. And I don’t know why you buy it. A guy who actually runs a farm cannot spend his time doing much else. It is a hobby for him.

“Sorry for Righties smearing Gore�€�but he�€™s�€�gosh�€�just so smearable�€�.. :)”

Only because you guys start believing your own BS and it snowballs from there.
Go google “al gore, internet” and you can read some testimonials by leading internet “creators” that say Gore’s comittee is largly responsible for the Internet becoming widely used and available to the general public.
Yet you guys can’t stop snearing long enough when his name is mentioned to actually read and consider facts.
PS, name one thing bush has ever done that has had a positive impact on large groups of people (hint: billionaires are not large groups)

Norby

name one thing bush has ever done that has had a positive impact on large groups of people

“Gore�€™s movie IS slickly produced propaganda and he DOES have a fanatical belief in his cause”

Propadanda implies something that isn’t true.
Fanatical implies devotion beyond reason.
How bout we switch that to “slickly produced scientific message” and “a inspired belief in his cause”?
If he’s wrong, no big harm, maybe we get off the mideast oil teat and become a strong independant nation again.
If he’s right, and we don’t act, mankind is in for some very dark times.

“Peer review concerning global warming is almost meaningless.” Global warming has become a religion and any scientist who commits the heresy of challenging it will end his career.”

OR, PERHAPS, every real scientist that explores the issue comes to similar conclusions? Ever give that half a seconds thought?

“It may not be a large group, but Bush certainly made it easier for Islamic extremists to recruit more people.”

I stand corrected (actually I’m sitting)

How much of GW’s wealth was derived from farmin’?

BTW Gore really said: I’ll be offering my vision when my campaign begins. And it will be comprehensive and sweeping. And I hope that it will be compelling enough to draw people toward it. I feel that it will be.
But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I’ve traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

Study on Gore and the creation of the internet here
Very interesting read

Global warming has become a religion and any scientist who commits the heresy of challenging it will end his career.

This betrays a complete misunderstanding of science. Science grows and develops by disproving old ideas. A scientist gains recognition, fame, and prestige by showing that commonly held beliefs are incorrect. If a scientist can prove that the conventional wisdom is wrong, that scientist becomes the top dog.

Your statement is an example of the same kind of conspiracy mongering that supports the laughable notion that Intelligent Design is just being kept down by the man, instead of the truth that Intelligent Design has been shown not to be valid or useful scientifically.

norby is right - when the world of science reaches a consensus, the best explanation is that the evidence is overwhelming.

Because it is a hobby thing.

And you know that the Gore family farm on which he worked in the 1950s and 60s was only a hobby farm? On what is this knowledge based? The fact that you have a hobby farm? The fact that another politician has a hobby farm?

How much more irrelevant can the basis of your argument be?

Here’s an excerpt from a Gore biography:

To make certain his son would be more than a product of Embassy Row, Al, Sr., insisted the boy spend a fair chunk of his childhood on the family�€™s 250-acre farm…Young Al would spend long weekends, summers, holidays, and his entire seventh year on the Carthage property. The senior Gore said it would build his character to live with the plain people who raised crops and livestock.

There’s absolutely nothing here that contradicts what Gore said in his speech:

My father taught me how to clear out hog waste with a shovel and a hoe. He taught me how to clear land with a double-headed axe. How to plow a steep hillside with a team of mules.

The only thing you have to contradict this is that his experience is different than yours and Mr. Bush’s. That’s so irrelevent it’s ridiculous.

Basically, you’ve said that Al Gore come across as dubious because of two things: his claim to have invented the internet, and his claim to have grown up on a family farm. In both, your ridicule parrots standard laugh lines for Jay Leno and standard insults from the GOP. In neither case was Gore actually lying; it’s just that people have gotten very good at lying about him.

And you use those lies about him as a basis for assuming the rest of his words are lies.

Frankly, I don�€™t know why he even makes a big thing about it. It just does not fit in well with his personality. And I don�€™t know why you buy it. A guy who actually runs a farm cannot spend his time doing much else. It is a hobby for him.

Because he’s talking about his past and how he learned his life (that’s a big deal in politics). He’s not talking about his present occupation. So, your distractions that he doesn’t make his money that way or that it’s a hobby for him now are irrelevant.

Face it, you have no logical reason not to believe that his words were completely true as they were spoken. The only thing you have is a willingness to accept misinterpretations that cast your political opposition in a negative light.

And then you use those willful misinterpretations as the basis for disbelieving him on other issues.

Right on, Norby. It’s always best to err on the side of safety. It won’t hurt to take the precautions now as opposed to waiting until we have a “Day After Tomorrow” type of situation. I know it’s a fictious film, but a dozen Katrinas slamming into our coastline is not out of the realm of possibility.

Paul:

There is no reason to smear Al Gore. He has no power. He is way far to the radical left, and no chance of running the country. He is a classic liberal that has to remake himself in order to appear what he is not, (moderate) in order to try to configure a scheme to get elected. Basically when he stands up and says exactly what he believes, very few in the country would support him.

One of the things that the democrats need to consider is that the same thing is true of Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean. Liberals have a hard time winning national elections. This election this fall, is a long way from over. I think Democrats have a huge problem in trying to nationalize the election because of the left wing speech of the last few years. They have spoken clearly of their opinions because they have been out of power. The Democrats best shot might be to not run at all.

If they stand up and fight with an agenda, they are likely to loose. If they say what they believe, the country wont back them. IF they say what the people want to hear they will come across like Al Gore and John Kerry, and be labeled as hypocrits and flip floppers.

It was Al Gores trying to be something he wasn’t that caused the smearing. The bottom line is that there just are not as many liberals in our country as conservatives.

I am not predicting victory in the fall for republicans, but I am saying it is going to be tough. Just remember Dukakis and how far ahead he was, and then look at the face of the Democratic party, (Pelosi and Dean). You have a northeastern liberal and a San Francisco Liberal leading the way. It’s going to be a barnburner, with Republican ineptness in governing, and Left wing liberals leading the democratic side. It will be like watching the two lowest ranking teams in the country competing for the championship. Whoever wins will probably win ugly.

Craig

my pet goat,

Try this one;

http://www.perkel.com/politics/gore/internet.htm

While it can be argued that invoking the Nazis is disingenuous, the analogies have some validity. Gore�€™s movie IS slickly produced propaganda and he DOES have a fanatical belief in his cause.

And Republicans want to kill all the gays, they’re killing our babies and grandparents, and they all badmouth the troops as well.

I suppose you could argue that those claims are disingenuous, but they have some validity.

Oh, and where’s bin Laden? Did Republicans ever get around to rebuilding New Orleans? Boy, I hope my town can count on foreign aid for help after a disaster or terrorist attack, ‘cause we sure won’t get squat in the way of help from our own Republican government.

BTW, after acknowledging that Americans have a dangerous addiction to oil (as if the complete lack of an energy policy had nothing to do with it), what did President Bush ever do about it?