"Jim -" wrote in message
news:%Mr8b.426340$o%2.193578@sccrnsc02...
It seems to me that things would be about the same, perhaps even worse right now even
if Al Gore were POTUS.

Yet the Dems/Libs continue to blame GWB for everything under the sun, including the
recession of 1999-2003 and the fact that bin Laden has not been caught yet.

So how would things have been different if Al Gore were in office? Exactly what
would
he have done differently to make things better or worse? Do you really think that
9-11
would not have happened under his watch, and if so, why? Would the economy have
rebounded in 2001 under his leadership, and if so, why?

On the reverse, what did GWB do to precipitate the 9-11 attack? What did he do to
cause the 1999-2003 recession?

This is your time to explain how things....time to speak up or shut up.

Operators are standing by.


Silence...as expected.

Silence...as expected.


Stuff the hook a little deeper into the bait.

Nobody *knows* how or what Al Gore would have done. Why argue about it?

Did we know, in advance, what GWB was going to do? How he would respond to
challenges that nobody had even imagined yet? That's what you're asking people
to advance on Gore's behalf, and whatever anybody conjectures will be turned
into fodder for an argument. We can't agree on what's actually going on in the
world right this minute. How could we possibly agree on what would have, could
have, might have, should have? No wonder most people are taking a pass.
Changing your screen name again might help -for a while.

Good technique though: (shift the focus almost anywhere else except where it
belongs. The guy who lost the last election is as good a stalking horse as
any).

Whether or not Gore would have done a miserable job as POTUS has no bearing on
the responsibility of the guy currently in office to perform capably. "What
Gore would have done....." is not relevant.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Silence...as expected.


Stuff the hook a little deeper into the bait.

Nobody *knows* how or what Al Gore would have done. Why argue about it?



Duh, my point exactly. So why place the blame on GBW unless you can definitively state
what things Al Gore would have done differently.

For all we know things would have been much worse under his *leadership*.

Jim - wrote:

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Silence...as expected.


Stuff the hook a little deeper into the bait.

Nobody *knows* how or what Al Gore would have done. Why argue about it?



Duh, my point exactly. So why place the blame on GBW unless you can definitively state
what things Al Gore would have done differently.


There is a theory around that states 9-11, while planned for some time,
was actually launched as payback on Bush for at least two reasons:

1. He is the son of Bush I, who "besmirched" Saudi Arabia by placing
U.S. troops on "holy" Saudi soil, and,

2. Bush II stated he was not going to "engage" in the Israeli/so-called
Palestinian peace talks and, in fact, he did nothing for more than a
year into his reign to get engaged. This absolutely infuriated many in
the Arab/Moslem world, who were hoping a U.S. president would continued
to press concessions upon the Israelis as the price for peace.

You may not like this theory, but there may well be some merit to it.

There also is some conjecture Bush knew 9-11 was coming, and did
virtually nothing to stop it.

Bush certainly turned the events into political hay for his failing
administration.


* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Maybe it was the unions who staged 9-11.
Sure they had to sacrifice a few hundred police and firefighters, but then
they tend to vote conservative anyway.

"Gary Warner" wrote in message
...

Ok, I'll play, but first...

You make the post at 6:29pm and then at 6:57pm you say "Silence...as
expected." (At least that's
how my newsreader shows it.) Why not wait a day or two, or at least an
hour, before you get all
huffy and stuffy?



Guilty of being impatient.

Not guilty of being huffy and stuffy.

Peace brother. I only asked some legitimate questions.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

There also is some conjecture Bush knew 9-11 was coming,


Not among those with more than a two-digit IQ.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 01:36:37 GMT, "John Gaquin"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message

There also is some conjecture Bush knew 9-11 was coming,


Not among those with more than a two-digit IQ.


Did you hear the one about the altar boy and the candlestick?
Ooops, sorry.

noah

Subject: Seems to me......
From: "Jim -"

Duh, my point exactly. So why place the blame on GBW unless you can
definitively state
what things Al Gore would have done differently.


Duh, that is just a stupid statement.

For all we know things would have been much worse under his *leadership*.

Duh, for all we know they could be better.
Duh, we'll never know.
Duh, it doesn't really matter because we have to deal with what is, not with
what may have been.


Capt. Bill

Where is Gary H when you need him!!??

"Jim -" wrote in message
t...

"Jim -" wrote in message
news:%Mr8b.426340$o%2.193578@sccrnsc02...
It seems to me that things would be about the same, perhaps even worse
right now even
if Al Gore were POTUS.

Yet the Dems/Libs continue to blame GWB for everything under the sun,
including the
recession of 1999-2003 and the fact that bin Laden has not been caught
yet.

So how would things have been different if Al Gore were in office?
Exactly what
would
he have done differently to make things better or worse? Do you really
think that
9-11
would not have happened under his watch, and if so, why? Would the
economy have
rebounded in 2001 under his leadership, and if so, why?

On the reverse, what did GWB do to precipitate the 9-11 attack? What
did he do to
cause the 1999-2003 recession?

This is your time to explain how things....time to speak up or shut up.

Operators are standing by.


Silence...as expected.