"Maxprop" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
news

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
...

"Lloyd Bonafide" wrote in message
...
Even kids know better:

http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?id=15357



I guess that means even kids are smarter than Al Gore. And to think,
that fat elitist fool was a heartbeat from the Presidency. Scary very
scary!

Even scarier is the thought that he could have been *elected*
President. I don't even want to imagine what this country would be
like with him at the helm.

Max

Yeah, not fighting in a civil war, Afganistan in good shape, perhaps no
9/11 at all, prosperity, etc.

Right. Dream on, Bay Area boy.

Max

I notice that you don't dispute any of it.

I'm disputing all of it. First: Al Gore, if President, would have been
forced to take some sort of action after 9/11 (despite the totally wacko

This assumes there would have been a 9/11, which is not a good assumption
since the handoff from one administration to the next would have actually
worked. And, if there had been he wouldn't have been looking stupid reading
My Pet Goat.

version of that day circulating among the reaaaaaaallly far-left
currently--which I won't even address, it's so ludicrous). He'd likely
have followed the intel the spooks were putting forth, meaning he'd
probably have retaliated by doing the same thing in Afghanistan that Bush
did. If you

In Afganistan, yes, EXCEPT, he would have actually used enough military to
get the job done UNLIKE Bush who was really just interested in Saddam...
which is a documented fact.

recall, Congress was solidly behind that. As for Iraq, things with that
country were coming to a head sooner or later. Al probably would have
given the UN inspectors more time. Maybe not. We'll never know, but I
think

Sooner or later? You have a wonderful crystal ball. He would not have rushed
to war, a war of choice.

Saddam would have been emboldened by bamboozling the UN for so long, and
he'd likely have made overtures to al Qaeda or some other jihadist group,
forcing us (primarily) along with a loose coalition to do something about
him. Of course we'll never know about that either, but that's what some
of the most outspoken university political scientists have been saying for
a while: taking Saddam out was inevitable. As for prosperity, I'm sorry
if you're suffering. Everyone I know is flourishing. You Democrats can
spin

You really don't know much about the economy do you. It's lagging, the
housing market is failing... many more poor and malnourished in the country.

our economy into the toilet all day, Jon, but you can't make it
believable. The economy is fine, real estate is doing well--better than
the doomspeakers have been predicting--and the stock market is reaching
all-time highs again, if fluctuating a bit, which is what it typically did
before the craziness of the dot.com era anyway.

So, you don't read the newspaper or watch TV. Get all your news from the
Drudge report?


Al Gore is, like his President, a flag blowing in the wind of public
opinion. No morality, no backbone, few core beliefs, no real identity

Compared to who? Bush??? Haha... sure.

beyond what his handlers created for him. The only firm stance he's taken
on any front is his global warming position, for which many believe him to
be an alarmist and a liar, fabricating "facts" that go well beyond what
scientists are saying or predicting. And lately he's one big fat momma,
leading to the conclusion that he's depressed. Not exactly presidential
material.

Compared to Bush, he's perfect, but that's not saying much.

Bush is no prize....

You get the prize for the understatement of the decade.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com