Thread: Do You Think GWB Hates Al Gore?

I cannot speak for W, but I find Gore acutely annoying! And it is not the smarmy, smug sense of superiority and satisfaction he exudes. Dubious environmental issues not withstanding, the man doesn't even pretend to practice what he preaches. What should I expect? The Cabernet Communists want to tell us how to live our lives, not to lead by example. Let them drink Gallo!

Originally Posted by ProfessorChaos!

I cannot speak for W, but I find Gore acutely annoying! And it is not the smarmy, smug sense of superiority and satisfaction he exudes. Dubious environmental issues not withstanding, the man doesn't even pretend to practice what he preaches. What should I expect? The Cabernet Communists want to tell us how to live our lives, not to lead by example. Let them drink Gallo!

I'm not a particular fan of Gore either, but I have enough on my hands disliking people who actually drive policy to spend time worrying about him.

I pee in the ocean too.

I've met plenty of politicians in my life, on both sides of the aisle, and I'm afraid they're universally (or nearly so) a bad lot. With very rare exceptions, their sole interest is their own advancement. The fact that it's the voters' fault for demanding that a person be that sort of bird doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

Unfortunately, for all their flaws, they're the instruments we must use to manage our world.

Gore certainly isn't the worst, but he is a politician, which means he likes being the center of attention and believes in his own actions. A lot of his negative image, frankly, is the result of some very effective swiftboating that the repugs did before and during the 2000 election cycle. For example, he never said that he "invented" the internet. That was spin that came from Dick Armey's office which the right wing media, naturally, scarfed up without question.

But he is, after all, a politician, so I can't get too choked up about him. He's merely the agent who happens to be pursuing a course that I want to see pursued right now.

j

PS: Cabernet Communist? What should we call the other side? I can think of a few.

j

Very well worded! Great post! Its just so hard for me to get behind a politician no matter what the stance, I know I will be the one he craps on. But if any thing meaningful is going to be done it is we the people who will have to do it, each of us in our own way to the best of our ability, wether it be energy, the environment or anything else, giving politicians power/authority is like giving a drunken juvenile a loaded gun. As for those of you who pee in the ocean, my God what has the world come to.

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

PS: Cabernet Communist? What should we call the other side? I can think of a few.

j

Conservative?

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Conservative?

My point is that "Cabernet Communists" is a bit shrill. How would you feel if that sort of language was turned on you? Would that be "gentlemanly?" "Communist" is such a byword among some people; should we respond by calling them "Nazis?" Is either really accurate?

Besides, I see nothing "conservative" about the current crop of Republicans, climate change nay-sayers, and religious social engineers.

j

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

How would you feel if that sort of language was turned on you?

I'd feel pretty, oh so pretty, I'd feel pretty and witty and bright!

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

Besides, I see nothing "conservative" about the current crop of Republicans, climate change nay-sayers, and religious social engineers.

j

I don't either. Well I see it in some of the local Republicans here at home and among several religious social engineers (assuming I know what those are), but not generally among Republicans. I don't see it in many Democrats either. I guess those conservatives (me) just aren't very well-represented this time around

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

My point is that "Cabernet Communists" is a bit shrill. How would you feel if that sort of language was turned on you? Would that be "gentlemanly?" "Communist" is such a byword among some people; should we respond by calling them "Nazis?" Is either really accurate?

Besides, I see nothing "conservative" about the current crop of Republicans, climate change nay-sayers, and religious social engineers.

j

You don't identify with Hoglahoo's statement, do you Jim?

My mother used to say that if a particular comment or description doesn't fit you, then there is no need to get offended!

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

My point is that "Cabernet Communists" is a bit shrill. How would you feel if that sort of language was turned on you? Would that be "gentlemanly?" "Communist" is such a byword among some people; should we respond by calling them "Nazis?" Is either really accurate?

Besides, I see nothing "conservative" about the current crop of Republicans, climate change nay-sayers, and religious social engineers.

j

Methinks you doth protest too much...

Perhaps Syrah Socialists would be preferred since it is arguably less offensive? And let there be no doubt, socialism is what many mainstream Democrats advocate as a cure for all of America’s ills. Labeling a socialist a communist for the sake of highlighting their common traits is neither inaccurate nor unfair, merely an exaggeration. Socialism and communism spring from a common ancestor, Marxism; the latter is simply the former taken to the extreme.

Additionally, calling conservatives Nazis is not the same thing as calling liberals communists. The Nazis implemented a form of fascism which became known as National Socialism just as the Soviets implemented a flavor of Marxism which became known as Communism. Therefore, while few conservatives wish to impose anything approaching true fascism, the appropriate in-kind response to being called a communist would be to call your accuser a fascist. Thus had I said Sauvignon Soviets, a retort of … Nazi becomes logical. Sort of.