The issue we were discussing is who won the debates and who should have won the 2000 election on issues. It has absolutely nothing to do with your personal attack on Gore and his judgement, let alone the fact that Clinton was not nearly as popular in 2000 as you and right wing smear machine are trying to paint today. The country was suffering from a bad case of Clinton fatigue, MonicaGate was still fresh on everyone's mind and while more popular than Bush today Clinton was politically just as radioactive. Not just Gore, no democratic politician wanted to be seen anywhere near Clinton.
OK, Now I Understand How Republicans Were Supposed To Handle Foley
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
I think Gore cost himself by trying to be on both sides of the Clinton issue. He famously stood by Clinton when the monica issue looked likely to force his resignation. I can still remember him standing by Clinton saying what a great president he was. Then he stiff-armed Clinton during his own campaign. So either he was lying when he said how great Clinton was or he was a moron to forgo Clinton's help.
This episode mirrored the many flip flops in Gore's career. He started out as a fairly rational, middle of the road to conservative Representative, then over time ,morphed into a flaming liberal when it became convenient to do so. I think voters sensed that while he was articulate, he had little in the way of principle. He was the consummate opportunist, ready to change his core positions in the blink of an eye if it advanced his position. Now he has gone even further left, determined to outflank Hillary and get the crucial moonbat vote, which decides Democrat primaries.
The thing that must gnaw at him is he probably would be president right now if he had done the right thing and called for the disgraced Clinton to resign. Tragically for the Democrats, their leaders were more interested in partisan warfare than the good of the country. They won that battle but they lost the war.
OK! He lost the debate then. You wanna know why? Because Al was supposed to be the intellectual and Bush the moron. Under those assumptions Al should have wiped the floor with Georgie. Instead, the best he could do was a draw, which made him a loser in the eye of the general public.
When you go around bragging about how your cock is so much bigger than the other guy, it damn well better be bigger. Al are George are same sized dicks. I'm a Democrat that can accept the truth. You are one that makes excuses.
Foley=Leader?
Sure he is. Florida republicans elected HIM to represent THEM. Who do you htink he is, his is their leader.
Did you even know who Mark Foley was until two weeks ago?
Sure, he was one of the biggest bush supporters defending him and his policies on every cable channel. Hmm, as an old adage says, Tell me who your friends are, and I'll know who you are.
Immigration. Honestly doodoo. Go eat a peach. The Democrat minority has voted virtually unanimously against BOTH House bills in the past several months that enact tougher borders.
I never said that the dems are better on immigration but again they don't pretend to be. Republicans as always are talking the talk and not walking the walk, while the issue did exist and was not addressed when Clinton was president, it became a complete and
unmitigated disaster after Bush and republican came to power. And guess what, that was six years ago and nothing at all has been done. Moreover Bush supports amnesty (whatever he calls it) and your hero Reagan granted amnesty.
I agree, "personal hero" is a bit of an exaggeration. But the second half of the sentence "that he believes Hitler was a genius and that history has given him a bad rap" is factually accurate.
You should be proud that Bush was compared to Hitler.
Very few people seem to be aware that in fact Foley was House Majority Deputy Whip before he resigned. That makes Foley one of the leaders of the leaders.
The right wingers have a serious problem with reality.
OK! He lost the debate then. You wanna know why? Because Al was supposed to be the intellectual and Bush the moron. Under those assumptions Al should have wiped the floor with Georgie. Instead, the best he could do was a draw, which made him a loser in the eye of the general public.
That's not losing the debate on issues (the topic of this discussion), that's losing the post-debate spin - exactly what I was talking about - we have a dumbed down gullible electorate who does not understand issues and compares cock sizes instead. Republicans who created this electorate should not act offended when it backfires, like in Foley's case.
I'm a Democrat
Right, and Foxnews is fair and balanced and Bush is a compassionate conservative... I've read a couple of your posts and you did not miss a single republican talking point. Sorry but you do sound like Bill O'Reily, Mort Kondracke or Dick Morris. I personally don't care if you call yourself a republican, a democrat or a communist but I just want you to know that you're not fooling anybody. (no offense meant).
You have the problem with reality. "Deputy Whip''? Sounds impressive. How many are there? Try 17 of them. And 49 Assistant Whips. The Democrat's have 104 Members with Whip status! Being anything less than THE WHIP is akin to being a VP at a bank. Even tellers can get that status.........
I agree, "personal hero" is a bit of an exaggeration. But the second half of the sentence "that he believes Hitler was a genius and that history has given him a bad rap" is factually accurate.
You should be proud that Bush was compared to Hitler. [/QUOTE]
I wouldn't go so far as to say "bad rap" is undeserved but to the victor goes the spoils. Losing hurt Hitler's cred. You don't hear people described as "bad as Stalin......"
Bush is a wussie compared to Hitler. Baghdad would be a dust dump by now and Mike Moore would be the world's biggest lampshade.