Liberals do realize that Gore would have been worse, right?

Al B. Sure! · June 28, 2003, 21:08

Liberals always complain that Bush is being aggressive starting wars in the middle east and taking away people's rights here at home but they do realize that Gore would have put twice the effort in these two areas, right?

I mean first off, before the election (which seems real far off now as it was before sept. 11th), Gore had a history of censorship that Bush never had. I remember reading an article comparing the two and their ideas on the censorship of the music industry and Gore was in favour of it while Bush thought the gov't had no place in censorship but he urged the music industry itself to regulate itself. What it comes down to is Gore was pre-disposed towards censorship and reducing rights of expression...

secondly, who would Gore's vice-president have been? none other but the pro-Israeli and jewish Lieberman who no doubt would have urged Gore to do everything that Bush has done but probably also would have took action against the Palestinians.

and thirdly, Bush has surrounded himself with people who were involved in the first war in Iraq what with Cheney and Powell (and he could always talk with his dad), so the Bush administration has undoubtedly done better in Iraq than a Gore presidency would have done.

so there you go, liberals... your arguments against Bush are invalid as Gore would have done the same **** if not more and with less capability

thanks

JohnT · June 28, 2003, 21:09

No, they don't realize that at all, Albert.

Sava · June 28, 2003, 21:09

Quote:

your arguments against Bush are invalid

Amazing one Poly post put to rest that subject....

Kuciwalker · June 28, 2003, 21:10

For once, I agree with Speer.

EDIT: Sava - do you have any rebuttals?

Sava · June 28, 2003, 21:28

Quote:

Sava - do you have any rebuttals?

Stupid + Stupid = Stupid....

I'll save my time and not even bother.

Odin · June 28, 2003, 21:40

Speer: 0.0000000000000000000000001/10

STOP FEEDING THE TROLL SAVA!!!

Sava · June 28, 2003, 21:41

Quote:

STOP FEEDING THE TROLL SAVA!!!

I didn't respond to him. I just mocked him.

darkgrendel · June 28, 2003, 21:44

It's interesting that you seem to think you know exactly what would've happened based solely on past events. Logic dictates that someone with Bush's intellect couldn't possibly have become president, but somehow it's happened anyway. For all you, I, or anybody else knows, Gore might not've involved the country in any wars.

Al B. Sure! · June 28, 2003, 21:44

so yall deny that Gore/Lieberman would have waged war with Iraq?

Odin · June 28, 2003, 21:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
I didn't respond to him. I just mocked him.

Keep mocking him.

Speer's trolls are annoying.

Al B. Sure! · June 28, 2003, 21:45

Lieberman was all for war, i should add...

darkgrendel · June 28, 2003, 21:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Speer
so yall deny that Gore/Lieberman would have waged war with Iraq?

I deny that anybody can know for sure what would've happened.

And since when does the VP dictate foreign policy...?

Odin · June 28, 2003, 21:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Speer
so yall deny that Gore/Lieberman would have waged war with Iraq?

no, but at least Gore wouldn't f*ched the UN, He would of embarassd france by showing the UN Chirac's dealings with Saddam. France would of voted yes real quick. Gore also wouldn't be f*cking up the enviroment and he would of signed Kyoto. Gore also wouldn't of @ssed up the economy.

Sava · June 28, 2003, 21:53

Quote:

so yall deny that Gore/Lieberman would have waged war with Iraq?

it at least would have been based on FACT instead of FICTION... also, we would have had UN support and a world that doesn't think we're arrogant bast4rds.

MichaeltheGreat · June 28, 2003, 21:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Speer
so yall deny that Gore/Lieberman would have waged war with Iraq?

Speer, a little lesson on grammar, and argument structure, etc. You can't "deny" (or confirm) a hypothetical.

Nubclear · June 28, 2003, 21:55

Sava · June 28, 2003, 21:57

Quote:

Lieberman was all for war, i should add...

I don't like Lieberman one bit. Speer, you're making that whole "black/white" mistake again. The US isn't split between Democrats and Republicans, "us and them", etc. It's possible to hate both sides, but support one only because they won't **** us as hard.

Al B. Sure! · June 28, 2003, 21:58

alright... so people here have no problem with the war on iraq but were bothered by Bush's lack of respect for the UN? i dont know... how some of yall worded things, it made it seemed that war in iraq was never justified...

what about the capabilities in dealing with the middle east and fighting the war, however? would Gore have had as many people who had been involved in Iraq in 91?

Cruddy · June 28, 2003, 21:59

Maybe you are right in some of these Herr Speer... we'll never know for sure.

EVEN IF no war in Iraq - still would have been war in Afghanistan... so maybe situation not THAT different.

Inverse Icarus · June 28, 2003, 22:02

"leiberman is for those voters that want to vote for bush, but feel he's not jewish enough"-Jon Stuart

Sava · June 28, 2003, 22:06

Speer: to clarify my position on the war in Iraq.

1. I want Saddam dead.
2. I don't want the world to hate us.
3. I don't want corporations close to the president stealing my tax dollars.
4. I don't want the bad things in post-war Iraq to be blaimed entirely on America.
5. I don't want to be lied to.
6. I don't want to see people in our Armed Forces (which many of my friends serve in) die for political ends.

Bush's war only gave me Saddam's death. That's it. Well, maybe not confirmed death, but he's not in charge anymore. But those other 5 things (just 5 off the top of my head, there are more) didn't get taken care of. War in Iraq should have been postponed and happened when we had the following:

1. The rest of the free-world on our side.
2. The rest of the world helping us clean up the mess.
3. An anti-war-profiteering bill like we had in WW2
4. SOLID PROOF OF WHY WE SENT OUR TROOPS IN HARMS WAY

Q Classic · June 28, 2003, 22:43

Quote:

and thirdly, Bush has surrounded himself with people who were involved in the first war in Iraq what with Cheney and Powell (and he could always talk with his dad), so the Bush administration has undoubtedly done better in Iraq than a Gore presidency would have done.

i'm not convinced gore would have had a war in iraq...

GePap · June 29, 2003, 00:51

I doubt highly Gore would have gone to war with Iraq, given that his advisors would have not pushed that policy.

If Gore had followed his policy promises during rthe election the deficit would be much lower, and that is all we can safely bet on. With the reps in control, who knows what would have gotten done in the Congress. I can imagine some very harsh battles there, speically aftyer the whole election (the reps. would have been far far more bitter about defeat than dems, since it would just add +4 year more to the Dems. control of the WH).

As for his reaction to 9/11? No clue. One simply can not forsee how someone would act under such circumstances.

SlowwHand · June 29, 2003, 00:55

Gore would make an excellent comedian.
On SNL, he was outstanding.

To have him in the Oval Office during recent events would have been pathetic.

Urban Ranger · June 29, 2003, 01:01

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Gore would make an excellent comedian.
On SNL, he was outstanding.

To have him in the Oval Office during recent events would have been pathetic.

Even more so than Dubya's "choking on pretzel" incident? Or his refusal to immediately attend to the news of the 9-11 attack?

SlowwHand · June 29, 2003, 01:04

A) Choking on food isn't that unusual.
B) Unlike people here, he wanted to get all the facts, and make plans, before making a statement.

People here have no qualms about shooting from the lip.

darkgrendel · June 29, 2003, 01:07

What? Get facts? Like he did with Iraq, right..?

GePap · June 29, 2003, 01:09

Like you don't?

No one hear has a clue how anyone else as president would have reacted to 9/11, and no one here can make anything close to a quasi-intelliegent guess about it either.

We can;t even know that if Gore had become president, there would still have been 9/11 (not that the Bushies are at fault with it). We have no clue how the world could have been.

Q Classic · June 29, 2003, 01:11

a) most people are smart enough not to admit that they choked on a pretzel. come on, why not say he and rumsfeld tried boxing?

SlowwHand · June 29, 2003, 01:12

GePap, you're amazing.
You use the same facts to condemn Bush and at the same time prop up Gore.
Ever think of going into advertising?
You could probably sell crap to a chicken farmer.