Well that was basically what she was getting at in that CNN Faith/Compassion Forum tonight:

Obama responded by saying Gore actually won in 2000!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/13/c...we_n_96452.html

I also believe Al Gore won the election and that he's been doing terrific work since the year 2000. That must mean we agree with Barack Obama :Y:

I see there already is a thread

HILLARY IS SMEARING GORE/OBAMA/KERRY and saying Gore is a Dukakis

Don't you see what she is doing

She is saying she hears the talk of Gore Obama (or Obama Gore) and she now is putting Al Gore down like the others because she is DAMNED AFRAID OF GORE OBAMA KERRY RICHARDSON etc.

She realizes Hillary won't be the candidate and someone else is waiting in the wings in the most unlikely event of Obama falling (though polls say otherwise anyhow)
So she wants to make sure only she survives

She also is saying Al Gore is NOT someone she likes nor will she listen to Gore if Gore comes to her and says he is an elder statesman
She is calling Al Gore trash

Isn't it time everyone here realize Hillary despises Gore as much as she hates Obama and she is NOT a democrat, but is indeed tearing the party down?

Put aside your squabbles against me and some other posters and think about what Hillary is now doing trying to damage the good name of all these democrats
by linking them together

Remember how Bush41 mocked the ACLU when running against Dukakis, yet the ACLU is the one that got Oliver North out of the Iran/Contra trials, and saved Bush41 from being tried for impeachment and allowed W to win later on.

Hillary is running with the Bush41 playbook, helped by Rove.

Do people here not see this? It is plain as the nose on my face, and my nose smells a rat in Hillary...wake up folks before it's too late

This is not about Al winnning or not in 2000, it is Hillary combining Al's name as if it were dirt with our other heroes in the party past.

Hillary- you are either with her or you are dirt in Hillary & Bill's eyes.
Time to end the primary season.

"You don't have to think back too far to remember that good men running for president were viewed as being elitist and out of touch with the values and lives of millions of Americans," she said.


I think this will backfire on HRC if the media wants it to and the Obama campaign is smart. Al Gore won the popular vote (The PEOPLE) by a huge margin. Bush stole that election with the help of a Supreme Court that, in another day, might have faced impeachment. Even the media had to concede later, quietly, that had the recount happened as it should have, Gore was the winner.

Kerry is harder to stand up for. No one wanted Bush in 2004 that badly but Kerry told his lawyers to stand down when election chicanery popped up. (Think Ohio, for starters and if you don't believe that, spend some time at Votersunite.org, BradBlog, etc)

The only one out of touch is the candidate who can't do the math, didn't want to release tax returns and still won't release other financial information that shows she's not one of "millions of Americans," and is so out of touch she imagined dodging bullets- with her daughter- in Bosnia. HRC just gave the GOP a magic bullet.

I'll vote for her if I have to but I'd much prefer someone smarter. If she wants to do the GOP's work for them just get out of the Democratic party and be done with it.

Out of touch + Bosnia......like I said, it's hard to support a candidate that is putting gems in the GOP's propaganda basket.

I am tired of Obama and Hillary. All they do is go back and forth, and they say nothing but just attack each other. We as Amereicans need more than this from candidates and that includes McCain. I don't want any of them.

Re-elect, I agree entirely that what Hillary said on CNN last night was a calculated move. It was Hillary to Gore saying, 'I know you are coming.'

Obama said. "By the way, I have to say, I think Al Gore won."

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/080

You know what I don't get?

It's that Hillary needs the super delegates, and yet she is pissing off almost 2/3 of them

First she is pissing off Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Teddy, etc.
They are the leaders of the party

Let alone Dean (who picks at least 25 extra delegates if it is needed)

Then she pisses off the small states, the black people, etc.


Message to Hillary-
We can now see you know you won't be the nominee

Because, dear Hillary you would need these people YOU HILLARY are pissing off

Don't you get it?

Hillary is now admitting she won't win, and telling the democrats to go f--- themselves in 2008

Thing with rightwing radio I don't get is
Wouldn't you think they want to use this stuff in Oct. and Nov?

it makes NO sense to me (just like some of the so called "terror " moves

It is now the republicans if things were what they say, would shut up and let
Obama inflict it, but they are riding right along

Because to me, it is prooving Hillary and Bush are in cahoots and running this show
Not regular republicans or any democrat not with AHillary

Unfortunately Patsy, I think there are a lot of people who are starting to share your feelings. They are becoming disgusted with both sides in this and I can't really blame them. When you have people like Clay and Questions who are so blinded by their pathalogical hatreds that they are willing to twist any truth or tell any lie while assigning the worst possible motives to the other side, then all is lost. Any semblance of fairness or propriety or respect for the truth have gone out the window in an effort to smear the other side at all costs. At this point I'm beginning to think that whomever is the nominee will be so damaged that they don't stand a chance against McCain. I hope I'm wrong.

The really comic thing is that what both Obama and Clinton said have elements of truth in them. There are people in small town america that have slipped through the cracks and are frustrated & bitter because of it. The GOP has been expert in using wedge issues like guns, religion and immigration to exploit their bitterness. And both Gore & Kerry were protrayed a elitists by both people in the MSM like Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, Chris Matthews, etc., and by Nader supporters in 2000 & Dean supporters in 2004. But instead of taking a measured and mature view of what each said it is twisted in an effort to smear them. Both sides should be ashamed of themselves.

"At this point I'm beginning to think that whomever is the nominee will be so damaged that they don't stand a chance against McCain. I hope I'm wrong."

I'm concerned about that too. I think that could offer a good opening for Gore, though, should it become brokered. The other thing is that while McCain is sitting pretty right now doesn't mean it'll stay that way. Once we have a nominee on our side, hopefully, that person can show why they would be better than McCain as President.

Hillary is nuts. :angry:

Barack Obama has run a positive, uplifting, and grassroots based campaign. There is astronomical difference between his campaign and that of Clintons. They are not comparable. I hope someone runs against Clinton's in New York for senate when her term is over. To say Al Gore lost elections in 2000 is beyond imagination.

I'm just wondering since Hillary implied that Gore lost if she isn't trying to position herself as a possible VP to McCain should she not win the nomination. Why is she even pointing fingers at past Democrats?? By doing so, she is putting down her own party. This would leave a good opening for her to say she is ready to join a Republican ticket, taking her supporters with her and having a better chance of a McCain/Clinton winning the White House.

That idea may sound preposterous but I think it was hitting below the belt for her to even imply that Gore lost and was part of the elitism. It just seems like she must have a plan B if she is risking making these kind of statements. <_<

Maybe the three of them should have a shot drinking contest to see who can be the last one standing! It would be less ugly than the torturous campaign rhetoric we have been subjected to. :clap:

I just sent Hillary an email telling her how displeased that I was about her comment on VP Gore. I will not vote for her.

This is the exact type of bullshit that's going to hand the election to McCain in november. Hillary as McCain's VP!?!?!?! Are you totally delusional????

The is the same type of crap that hurt Gore and Kerry. Twisting every little statement and assigning the worst possible motives.

This was the exact same thing that was done to Gore over his internet statement. This was the same thing that was done to Kerry over his alleged 'crying in our teacups' statement about the 2000 election. You would think he accused Gore of genocide.

Both Obama and Hillary made fairly innocuous statements that had an element of truth in them. People in small towns are bitter because their economic prospects. Kerry & Gore were cast as elitists and it did cost them states like Ohio and West Virginia and in Gore's case Tennessee. Winning any of which would have made Florida irrelevant.

Now Obama did say that being bitter made them bad people. In fact he said it was understandable why they were bitter. And Hillary didn't say Gore and Kerry being viewed as elitists was justified.

This country, this planet is facing real problems. A terrible occupation of Iraq that John McCain wants to go on for 100 years. A housing crisis that is decimating the middle class. A bankrupt treasury. Global warming. These are the real issues that need to be solved. And both Obama and Hillary will be better as addressing these problems than any Republican. The rest is just bullshit.

Getting on our high horses and then spewing out whatever ridiculous delusional thought to smear the candidate we don't support in an orgy of verbal diarrhea is not going to solve these serious problems. All the finger pointing and attacks only benefit McCain, the same way it benefited Bush in 2000 and 2004. It's just part of the problem, not helping bring about a solution.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Well, nice to see James appointed himself judge, jury, and executioner again.

Had enough of that with the Supreme Court in 2000, didn't we?

You know, you really do go out of your way to pick on a few people. Others have expressed as much distaste for HRC's ways and said so. But no, you are quite selective in your own hatred.

Look in the mirror James.

We express opinions and post news stories.

When did I tell a lie? And no, not because you said so, back it up with sources not of your own making.

Don't practice the defamation you assign to others.

James, I don't need to spew this "bullshit" nor am I trying to in an attempt to smear anybody. The candidates are doing that all on their own and the media plays it up for them. I was simply questioning why Hillary was putting her own party down, especially the former VP for her husband. :?:

There is a reason that supporters are displeased with the opposite sides. They don't like how the other is behaving. Is there something wrong with voicing our dissatisfaction with their behaviors? While it may be true that I don't like Hillary, it isn't just because I don't like her. I do have REASONS for disliking her - based on things she has said and done. But I seriously doubt that my few posts here and there are going to pull people to one side or the other, nor am I trying to. I have already said I would vote for Hillary if it comes down to it. You don't give people enough credit for seeing things on their own. People have heard remarks that both Obama and Hillary have made and do have reasons for their dislikes. The problem is not comments we make. It's the candidates' mudslinging and not addressing the very important issues that you mentioned. I guess its easier to blame us versus blaming the candidates. :!:

I don't think the McCain/Clinton idea is that far out - not with her defending McCain and saying deragotary things about her Democratic counterparts. Call it or me delusional all you want. Maybe you need to question what effect each candidate's comments and tactics are having on their campaign. I'm just calling it the way it appears to me. Sure, Obama is not perfect and has said some things that probably weren't the best thing to say, but I think he has handled his campaign with more dignity than Hillary. Just my two cents and nothing more.

Btw, I'm just curious. Why do you always resort to name calling? Can you not argue a point without doing so??

Wow you really don't like it when someone calls you on your BS!

My disgust is not selective. I'm disgusted at both sides for all this trivial crap that is driving the party apart. Both sides are doing it and it is fair to call them on it. All that this is doing is helping McCain.

A well informed opinion is one thing. But an opinion based on spin, distortions, half-truths and out-right lies is something else.

And cut & pasting cherry-picked articles that smear only one side is distorting the truth. Unfortunately you are too blinded by your own bias to see that.

I could do so if the argument was based on some reasonable fact or logic. But something as ridiculous and delusional as accussing Hilary Clinton of try to be McCain's VP is just so beyond any kind of reason; there is no way to argue it but to call it out for what it is. And it is total bullshit!

Sure there are good reasons for not liking either Clinton or Obama. But I have yet to hear any here. Very little of what's posted is based on their policies or records. Differences on legitimate issues such as heathcare policy or the war in Iraq can be intellegently and reasonably debated.

But instead all I'm seeing is vitriol based on spin and distortions of trivial comments. As well as assiging sinsiter motives. The fact that you can say that you don't think a McCain/Hillary ticket is not that far out (which you've totally pulled out of your own imagination), just demonstrats how blind to your own bias you've become.

How I wish Al Gore had run for the Democratic nomination :!:

Gore is the one who could have wrapped up the nomination by Super Tuesday if not before and united the Democratic party.

Alas, I just don't think Al is going to be able to save us on this one. There hasn't been this kind of primary before and the timing of the primaries hasn't been designed to find a timely resolution. I think there was too much front loading of the primaries and when the results were not plainly decisive, there is now too much time between states. I really was hoping the fight between Obama and Clinton would have been over by March 5th. Now I am hoping that it will be over next week. Odds are, it will go on a bit longer, but I'd love to be pleasantly surprised.

Many people passionate about this primary have said things in anger that they might want to take back, including at times myself. I trust that most Democrats will move towards Operation Unity when the primary is over. When all is said and done, a lot more will be said than done. ;)

Al Gore says
Cooler heads will prevail

Sometimes Texan (like this post) you break through and see the light so perfectly.

EXACTLY

I am seeing in Hillary what I saw happen to Joe Lieberman after he LOST to Ned Lamont

I am thinking HIllary is either going to team up with McCain, OR, she might be going to do what Joe did-

she herself might just pick up her bat and ball and go run 3rd party
MAYBE WITH JOE LIEBERMAN OR JEB BUSH ON THE TICKET

and run against Obama AND McCain

Now, with 3 major candidates, one only has to get 34% to win

It is NOT outrageous to think it could happen

Which is why I so would have liked to see Gore run 3rd party with say Bloomberg, OR Gore and Obama run if Hillary steals it.

forget what James says, he just won't seem to say anything bad about the Clinton's.While you guys sometimes :laugh: accuse me of things, we should be careful of those that seem to 100% of the time side with Hillary and Bill, sometimes it seems those people have more say on this board.

What would happen to this nation if the above scenerio comes true?
After all, we here on this board are always contemplating a different scenerio aren't we than Obama/Hillary/McCain?
What makes you think other people are not doing the same outside of this little family (and we are all family here, disfunction maybe, but we are all family here).

Beware of unexpected consequences.
Because I don't see Hillary stopping at all.
(Isn't Hillary in a way now sort of like the Ron Paul just with a few more votes, and how many people called on Ron Paul to step out of his box and run alternate ways?)

Ah Wayne, you are always the voice of reason. :D I really appreciate and admire that in you - and I try my darndest to live up to those standards but I sometimes fail. :!: There are definitely a lot of people on this board who are passionate about the election which I think is a good thing.

Now James, I know you can be nice when you want to be. Just because you think my thoughts are ridiculous and delusional doesn't make it so. I always try to explain my reason for a particular idea. The question of Hillary going Republican was based on comments she's made about McCain and about past democratic candidates, particularly Al Gore. Now if being irked that Hillary implied that Gore lost and that he was a part of the elitism was biased on my part, then that's your opinion and so be it. It doesn't mean my ideas are right but her attitude sure makes me wonder sometimes. :?:

Tell me, what makes one biased? Late last year, when it became evident that Al wasn't going to run, I began looking at the other candidates. Now I came to the table with an open mind. Granted, I was aware of the talk about Hillary and Gore not getting along and how she tried to do his job as VP, so I didn't particularly like that about her. But I did listen to what the candidates had to say. I do admit that most of my perceptions since then have been based on actions and comments by the candidates themselves and not on their policy or stances on the issues. A lot of that has to do with the fact that they spend more of their time mudslinging than they do on these crucial issues. Can you say major distraction??

Like you said, their policies are similar other than the fact that Obama voted against the war - and I like that about him. But I guess what disturbs me about Hillary is (the way I perceive it) the way she operates. She lied about the Bosnia trip when there was no need to. I don't want a President that I perceive to be dishonest. We had enough of that in Bush. I could point out all these issues that have come up in the past few months and while you may say that these are not the important things, to me, character does matter.

I am not trying to smear anybody. After reading Assault on Reason, I would think that Al would want us to call people out on their behavior. He has mentioned on several occasions that he was surprised that more people were not outraged that the war was initiated on false pretenses and did not speak out. Well, I am speaking out on the things I disapprove of.

The name calling is not justified. Can we say politics of intimidation?

I do try to keep my criticism of Hillary to a minimum. But when she said these things about Gore, she ruffled my feathers. I did not think it was appropriate or very "democratic" of her to do so.

And ReElect, I'm not the kind of person to hold grudges. I do consider this board a family, despite us being dysfunctional at times. :!: We're all going to have different thoughts and ideas. We agree on some things and disagree on others. Yes, I think other people are questioning Hillary on things she says. Just as other people question Obama. I just want the best person I know to be President and I just happen to think that is Gore. That may not happen but I can still hope for it. I am not focused on whether we get our first female President or our first black President. Maybe if our country wasn't in such a mess I could think in those terms. But I am more concerned about getting the person who I think could bring this country together. So I guess we'll continue to toss around ideas until this election is over... :!:

I am very displeased with her comment, too. Good idea about the e-mail. I think I'll send one off to her, too. Since the choice is Hill or Barack, I'll still vote for Hill...wait a minute, I already did...not that it will probably count, but ANYWAY, moving on to the general: I will DEFINITELY vote for her in the general if she is the nominee. That said, her little comment dissing Al Gore was VERY MUCH not appreciated by moi. Worse, she appeared to be comparing Al Gore to Barack Obama in terms of their respective levels of being condescending and out of touch. NO! REJECTED! Al Gore is NOTHING like Barack Obama! All Gore is a leader, Obama is a politician. Al Gore fights for what he believes in, Obama says whatever will advance his agenda. Al Gore is passionate and dedicated to issues of importance to him. Obama is passionately dedicated to Obama. Al Gore is the opposite of condescending, he is a great teacher, a great mediator, a great leader, a great diplomat. Obama is a condescending, dismissive, sneary little lightweight who is riding a wave of deep momentum for change following seven loooooooooooong years of shrub.

So, shut up, Hillary.

:bad:

Nice sentiments Wayne. The problem is that neither side will listen. Both sides are at fault and will continue tearing each other apart. What's worse is that people are now making crap up to smear the other side. When we start doing that we are no better than the Republicans and Neocons we profess to be against.

Hillary's comment shows me that she knows that Gore will be the nominee at the convention. She had to get her digs in now because the dems will not let her do it after the convention. Also, she doesn't want Obama to be VP, and that is why she is attaching him in an ungodly way. I truly believe that she would do anything to be elected or destroy anyone that stands in her way. I, more and more understand Bill's desire sto find comfort outside of marriage. How much can one person stand? Have you noticed how close the daughter is to Bill?

Real good James. Do you even know the difference between "making up crap" and someone expressing thoughts on an issue?? :blink:

I could see if I said "Psst, did you know that Hillary is thinking about switching to Republican and being McCain's running mate....yada, yada." I simply expressed an IDEA - based on the crap she is spewing.

It's you that likes to twist other's people words. I wish you would get off your high horse.

I am not making anything up

HIllary on the other hand is james.

Get off your steadfastness on defending the Clintons. They are not worthy of your devotion

Want something better than the 90s or 80s.


And in all respect to Al Gore, it took Al Gore to reach his 50s and 60s to "get it"

hanging chad, some of the nasty things you think about Obama are uncalled for
but the Al Gore of the 1980s is not the Al Gore of the 2000s IMHO
I like the Al Gore of the 2000s.

I like the Al Gore who on his own denounced Clinton and ran without Clinton's help, the #1 best move he could have made
I LOVE the Al Gore that spoke out early FOR the great Howard Dean
That took Guts and Al Gore has Guts
(or as Lou Grant used to say, MOXIE) (YEA! ED ASNER!!!One of the true greats!)

But it took getting f---ed and stabbed in the back in 2000 to help crystalize the visions into thoughts too

The latest gallop daily shows NO change now 3 days after, so even a small bump
still will not have changed anything
And Hillary is finding a major backlash on her

Obama tomorrow in the debate should tell her to go shove it

at this point, Hllary is going to run 3rd party with Lieberman/Bayh or Jeb.

Like Joe did to Ned.

They are ridiculous and delusional. You're just so blinded by you're own bias you can't that they are.

Saying that Hillary is pitching to be McCain's VP is not a reasonable assesment. It is just making crap up to smear someone you don't like. What are we now FAUX News just making up whatever crazy lie we can get away with?

When you start making crap up about one candidate to smear them, that is a pretty good indication of bias. When you take whatever innocuous and twist it in the worst possible way assigning sinister motives, that is bias.

Most of the so-called friction has been hyped by the media. Just look at this entry of The Daily Howler from when Gore testified before the Senate last year: http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh032607.shtml

And the problem both side are doing it. To blame one side while giving the other side a pass is unfair.

Obama never voted against the war. He wasn't in the Senate at the time. To his credit he did make a speech against the war, like Al Gore did. But since coming to the Senate his voting record on the war has been exactly the same as Hillary's.

Well that's the pot calling the kettle black. You make up a lie that Hillary is trying to be McCain's VP out of whole cloth and then accuse her of being unfit for President because she lied about Bosnia. At least there were some elements of truth in her story. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/opinion/...r=1&oref=slogin There are none in yours. So by your own criteria you are unfit and your character deeply flawed.

Bull that is exactly what you were trying to do. So you compound your first lie with a second one.

Which is exactly what I'm doing. Calling you out on your behaivor. You made something up and posted it here as if it were the truth. As they say what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Well then those in glass house should not throw stones.

No need to. Just as long as it is fair and based on facts, not something you made up out of thin air.

I did not twist your words. You clearly stated that you think Hillary is trying to be McCain's VP. And that is making crap up whether you want to admit is or not.

To say you were just expressing thoughts on an issue is disingenous and intellectually dishonest. It would be like saying just because someone is a practicing Catholic that they support child molestation and might be a child molester themselves.

Here is a transcript of what Hillary Clinton said on Sunday night:

Now can someone tell me exactly where she says Gore lost in 2000?

Can someone tell me that where she called Gore an elitist?

Can someone tell me where she said the public perception of Gore as an elitist was justified?

Can someone tell me where she characterized Gore as anything but a good man and man of faith?

put 1 and 1 together and look at the answer

Why defend Hillary

She is using the old guilt by association crap

Hillary=crap

Just because you say they are delusional and ridiculous doesn't make it so. And no, YOU are the one who is blinded by your own bias toward Hillary that you can't see any of her faults.

And again, just because YOU say something is not a reasonable assessment does not make it so. You can go look on plenty of post responses to articles and see that the feeling is out there that Hillary is pitching to the Republican side. Where do you get off accusing me of making up lies? Never mind. It doesn't even matter. I have said over and over that I was simply stating a thought of my OWN -nobody else's and I'm not reporting it as fact like FAUX news. Why do you feel so threatened about ideas being expressed?

Sure, the media hypes up a lot of stuff but when they show a candidate on film, SAYING exactly what they say he or she has been saying, that is not hyping up.

The reason I blame Hillary more is because I see more dirty tactics on her side - the fake tears, the saying he would not "be my pastor" when she did not shun Ferraro in the same manner, when she makes a flap and then goes on Jay Leno and makes jokes about it, when she plays the race card, when she doesn't play by the rules in FL and MI, etc. Sure, maybe I'm basing my opinion of her on these things rather than the important issues, but I think everyone partly makes their decision on who to vote for based on what kind of person they portray themselves to be.

Actually, I didn't mean to say that Obama voted against the war. I just meant to say that he was against it.

Calling the kettle black, huh? Nowhere in my post did I claim to be making a statement about Hillary and did not state she was unfit for President. I expressed an idea and I stated that I consider character in regards to a potential President. BIG difference. Elements of truth to her story?? Sure, there can be elements of truth in any story, but that she was under sniper fire?? Who can forget whether that happened or not?? Now your bias is showing.

Calling me out on my behavior of expressing an idea? Sounds like you're the storyteller yourself.

"Well then those in glass house should not throw stones."

I don't understand how expressing an idea shows that I live in a glass house or that you're justified in name calling. :!: Perhaps that's the only way you know how to debate.

"No need to. Just as long as it is fair and based on facts, not something you made up out of thin air."

I made my assessment based on what she said about Gore. Are you denying that she made those statements??

Bullcrap! This is what I said:

I'm just wondering since Hillary implied that Gore lost if she isn't trying to position herself as a possible VP to McCain should she not win the nomination. Why is she even pointing fingers at past Democrats?? By doing so, she is putting down her own party. This would leave a good opening for her to say she is ready to join a Republican ticket, taking her supporters with her and having a better chance of a McCain/Clinton winning the White House.

That idea may sound preposterous but I think it was hitting below the belt for her to even imply that Gore lost and was part of the elitism. It just seems like she must have a plan B if she is risking making these kind of statements.

Everything I state, I do it by stating as an opinion. I highlighted the words I use to indicate this.

You can spew your "disingenious and intellectually dishonest" crap all you want. I know what my intentions were. Evidently, you do not.

The part you highlighted is where she made the implication. Granted, she very carefully worded her statement by saying "Large segments of the electorate concluded that..." to indicate that the idea didn't come from her, but wasn't she being "intellectually dishonest?" Do you not think it was her intent to plants seeds of doubt about Gore and Kerry? Perhaps it's a bit of parsing words but it seems a lot of people got the same impression by her statement. That's how they play dirty politics - by planting seeds without making it actually look like they believed the statement themselves.

And just because you say it is doesn't make it so either. You may think it is a reasonable assesment to accuse someone of murder or rape with no facts to back it up; but it still doesn't make it so.

I've denounced both sides for their tactics. Both are equally at fault. I don't engage in a double standard of criticizing one side while turning a blind eye to the other side.

So just because a lot of people have the same opinion that makes it the truth? For centuries most people believed the earth was flat or the slavery was ok. That didn't make it so.

Because it is a lie. An outrageous baldfaced lie. And you're using the exact same excuse Rush, O'Rielly and Hannity use all the time. That they are just expressing their opinion when they imply something that is a lie is the truth.

I do have a problem when it is a totally unjustified smear.

I posted a transcript of what exactly what she said on Sunday and no where does she say anything about Gore other than that he was a good man and a man of faith?

Fake tears??? How the hell do you know whether her tears were fake or not? Do you have some Vulcan Mind Meld abilities to make the determination? No. You have your preconcieved bias and you filter everything through that prism. That is the very definition of unfairness.

How did she not play by the rules? She didn't campaign there like everyone else. How is that not playing by the rules? Again you are filtering everything based on your preconcieved bias.

Sounds more like you're starting out with a premise and then interpeting any and all actions based on that premise.

You said "I don't want a President that I perceive to be dishonest." Seems to imply that you find her unfit.

When the accusation is as unfair, as untrue, as outrageous and as irrational as what you posted than that is the only way to debate it. To call it as the unjustified smear that it is. And just to be clear here we are talking about your accusation that Hillary was positioning herself to be McCain's VP.

I posted the transcript. What did she say about Gore other than he was a good man and a man of faith?

Plant seeds of doubt about Gore and Kerry??? They are not running. This is exactly what I'm talking about, you're twisting what she said based on your bias against her. She is saying that they were good men and men of faith. What she is implying is that the perception of them as elitists by some people was not justified.

Sounds like the only parsing that is going on is by people who are looking for an excuse to attack her.

James

If I were rude like you I would go

blather blather blather I LOVE HILLARY AND BILL blather blather blather
BUT ALSO AL GORE IS BETTER BLATHER BLATHER BLATHER
no conspiracies ever happened...blather blather blather

but I am not rude so I won't resort to your tactics, okay!

:D :clap: :dripple:


no Gore is not now running James, but ahem, some people here wish he did run from the start (BEFORE OBAMA GOT IN THE RACE)
there never would have been a race then