Winning at Zen, since March of 2007.
He addresses two of my biggest concerns: the environment and the propaganda machine we call "the media".
the daily show
The Republicans would probably like Gore to run since he can't win. The reason he didn't win in 2000 was that he couldn't carry his own home state of Tenn. If he carried Tenn. he would have scored a clear win. Even the big losers in Presidential election history at least carried their home state. See Goldwater, McGovern, and Dukkakis.
Yeah, it's awful he couldn't pull Tennessee. And I recall after that election being so disgusted with him that I can't believe I'm hoping he runs now.But the thing is, the Democrats just proved how much they suck by backing down on that funding bill. I'd love to see a real third party develop, that'd be my first choice. But in reality, I don't see it happening. Gore is the only democrat speaking about real stuff. Hillary and Obama speak in platitudes and generalities. I feel Gore has changed in a good way. I didn't even vote for him in 2000, but I could vote for him now if the election was tomorrow.We'll see. It should be an interesting year for politics.-DT
Dino, I hate Al Gore. Is he even relevant? NO, imo. And I voted for him, back then.Gore is now as much a part of the media spin machine as any other politician. I seem him now as the arm-chair quarterback, for the team Oval Office.In my opinion, he is doing damage to the global warming agenda, which was legitimizing itself through sound science and patience, before he single-handedly came along and made the whole issue the laughingstock of anyone who has ever had a single individual thought. There is so little that we truly understand about global warming, and since Gore came on the scene, trying to get a reasonable, insightful, scientific, unbiased opinion on the whole issue is damn near impossible. Every single news outlet is carrying him. Have you actually listened to the guy? He sounds like he just took a goofy pill and put the six-foot bong away just before going on camera.The sickest part of the whole thing is that Gore proves that anyone who is liberal and has enough money can get his or her agenda front and center in the media. It is not facts that drive news, but politics and greenbacks.What if the Republicans and the scientists who are not part of the liberal spin machine are right about us not having enough data to truly judge whether global warming is a threat? Do you think that information will ever make it out to the public?Finally, google search the amount of energy it takes to run Al Gore's mansion in Tn. vs. Bush's house in Texas. You'll find it if you look for it. I think the facts will blow your mind. The guy is a joke.
Woodshedder,Clearly we have a difference of opinion.If you think the news has a liberal bias, then you yourself have been the victim of some spin. Just replay all the news coverage of the leadup to the Iraq war. The entire news media cheerleaded that war. No liberal bias there...As for agendas and money, I agree, but it's not only rich liberals whose agendas are paraded. And check this link to see how Exxon has paid millions to discredit the science behind global warming.http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/01/06/exxonmobil-paid-for-propaganda-to-discredit-global-warming/I don't think you'd find any global warming scientists who think Gore has made the science behind global warming a laughingstock. Perhaps the talking heads on Fox think so, but really, they're obviously propagandaists so you can't take anything they say seriously.But anyway... back to stocks!-DT
Post a Comment