It must be out of vengeance.
I can think of no other explanation to account for Al Gore's behavior. His speech on Monday was positively disgusting.
How could a former Vice President of the United States act so nuts?
I've said this about other idiotic remarks uttered by the Dems:
Their statements are not made in a vacuum.
Our troops and their families heard Gore. Our allies heard his insanity. Worst of all, our enemies, the ones intent on killing any American --man, woman, or child -- were listening.
What could be more irresponsible than to call the President a criminal?
This is not about squelching dissent, not at all. It's about expressing that dissent in an appropriate fashion.
I'm not suggesting that Americans must accept the policies of the Bush Administration. I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't hold the Administration accountable. Far from it. It's not only appropriate to carefully monitor the actions of the government, but I see it as fundamental to democracy.
That said, what Gore did on Monday was scary.
His speech was not the deep thoughts of an elder statesman. It was the ranting of someone with a score to settle. It was so over the top that it had to be rooted in some intense emotional turmoil.
I think the guy has not come to terms with the fact that he lost the 2000 election. I think Gore's not the only one with that problem. A seething hatred for George W. Bush has driven the Dems and their lib media mouthpieces ever since Gore's defeat.
As far as former Congressman Bob Barr goes, I don't get it. He must have issues as well. Does Barr really believe that "America's Constitution is in grave danger"?
The only grave danger we're facing is al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations bent on murdering Americans.
Do people like Gore and Barr and those in the adoring crowd at Constitution Hall care about the country?
Of course, they do.
Still, sometimes I think these fringe Dems and the other stragglers must hate Bush more than they love America.Transcript
Some "highlights":
At present, we still have much to learn about the NSA's domestic surveillance. What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels the conclusion that the President of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and persistently.
A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government.
__________________________
An executive who arrogates to himself the power to ignore the legitimate legislative directives of the Congress or to act free of the check of the judiciary becomes the central threat that the Founders sought to nullify in the Constitution - an all-powerful executive too reminiscent of the King from whom they had broken free. In the words of James Madison, "the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
__________________________
The President and I agree on one thing. The threat from terrorism is all too real. There is simply no question that we continue to face new challenges in the wake of the attack on September 11th and that we must be ever-vigilant in protecting our citizens from harm.
Where we disagree is that we have to break the law or sacrifice our system of government to protect Americans from terrorism. In fact, doing so makes us weaker and more vulnerable.
Once violated, the rule of law is in danger. Unless stopped, lawlessness grows. The greater the power of the executive grows, the more difficult it becomes for the other branches to perform their constitutional roles. As the executive acts outside its constitutionally prescribed role and is able to control access to information that would expose its actions, it becomes increasingly difficult for the other branches to police it. Once that ability is lost, democracy itself is threatened and we become a government of men and not laws.
___________________________
It is this same disrespect for America's Constitution which has now brought our republic to the brink of a dangerous breach in the fabric of the Constitution. And the disrespect embodied in these apparent mass violations of the law is part of a larger pattern of seeming indifference to the Constitution that is deeply troubling to millions of Americans in both political parties.
____________________________
It is the pitiful state of our legislative branch which primarily explains the failure of our vaunted checks and balances to prevent the dangerous overreach by our Executive Branch which now threatens a radical transformation of the American system.
I call upon Democratic and Republican members of Congress today to uphold your oath of office and defend the Constitution. Stop going along to get along. Start acting like the independent and co-equal branch of government you're supposed to be.
But there is yet another Constitutional player whose pulse must be taken and whose role must be examined in order to understand the dangerous imbalance that has emerged with the efforts by the Executive Branch to dominate our constitutional system.
We the people are-collectively-still the key to the survival of America's democracy. We-as Lincoln put it, "[e]ven we here"-must examine our own role as citizens in allowing and not preventing the shocking decay and degradation of our democracy.
Is it vengeance that drives Gore to make such reckless comments?
Is he blinded by hate?
I don't know what motivates him. I suspect Gore doesn't really know either.
Maybe it's not vengeance. Maybe he doesn't suffer from "Presidency Envy." Maybe Gore just can't deal with his own irrelevance. Maybe he needs to find approval and he knows it's easily found among the ranks of the radical Left.
Whatever the case may be, I do know that his fiery rhetoric on Monday should be chalked up as just another irresponsible address to add to the ever-growing file of his nutcase post-Veep outbursts.
Many conservatives enjoy it when he goes off the deep end like that because he serves to drive more and more people away from the Democratic Party. Gore shows them to be so out of the mainstream, so crazy.
That may be true, but I don't like it when he loses touch with reality and foams at the mouth that way. It makes me really uncomfortable.
He's an embarrassment as a former Vice President. He disgraces himself and his family. Far more importantly, he endangers all Americans when he speaks so carelessly, distorting reality and adulterating the Constitution.
Again and again, the Dems and RINOs show that they are living in a September 10th world.
While we need to be assured that our civil liberties are safeguarded, we also need to know that the government is protecting us from terrorists, people that want us dead.
Gore and those of his ilk cloud the issue when they claim that we have lost our freedoms. They are fear-mongers, charging that the privacy of ALL Americans has come under attack by the Great Satan Bush. That's false. Only terrorists or those with terrorist connections need to be concerned about the government listening to their conversations or gathering information on them.
It's very simple. The government is protecting the freedom of innocents by fighting the enemies of freedom. It's not out to destroy our liberties or abuse our rights. There is no malice involved, no power grab, no tyranny.
The ones that do want to take away our rights and our lives, the terrorists, are the government's targets. There is no wholesale "spying" happening, no random wiretapping of Americans.
We are at war.
Three thousand people were slaughtered right here -- in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania.
Remember?
Gore and the Dems don't.
They really don't understand that we are at war.
That's scary.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
VENGEANCE, THY NAME IS GORE!
Posted by Mary at 1/17/2006 02:46:00 AM
Labels: Al Gore
SHARE:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
What's scary is this clown was a few electoral votes away from the presidency.
And he wouldn't have used every means at his disposal to keep America safe!!
Or would he have?? Clinton did everything he's bashing Bush for doing right now........Wiretaps without judicial orders.
Maybe Al would have as well.......Which makes him a duplicitous jackass.
Which of course he is.
---------------
As far as Tim's comments, Clinton would have never went into Iraq......No doubt about it.
He would have been too busy attacking Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, etc.........All the countries most dangerous to America's national security.
And Clinton did use the same wiretaps!!! And he should have. Just as Bush should in this instance.
What does drive me crazy is this notion that this war in Iraq has anyting to do with 9/11.
That's funny how this keeps getting peddled around. I think it's largely a perception pushed by the media, to the point where it becomes a truth.
I supported the war, but never found myself led to believe that Iraq was connected to 9/11 in the sense that it had anything to do with the events of 9/11. Thanks because the President didn't push for an argument to be made that Iraq had a hand in 9/11. Go to Factcheck.org, if you want an "even-handed" interpretation of what was said and what has been interpreted and misinterpreted.
There were also several points made for the case to go to war, other than WMDs.
Oh sure, there may be an element of terrorism in Iraq. But my question is this, When do we win the war on terrorism? Obviously "The War on Terrorism" isn't confined to the country of Iraq. There are many many countries who hate us.
They've hated us long before President Bush stepped into office. Go read Jean Francois Revell's "Anti-Americanism". Those "many countries" have failed in our collective global security, which is why the U.S. is thrust into the role of leading this war on terrorism.
So when we're done with Iraq, who do we attack next? This will never end. Bush says he will not stop until he's "won the war on terrorism" as if winning in Iraq has anything to do with ending terrorism.
I'm sorry you can't see the connection between what's going on in Iraq, and the Greater War on Terrorism. The world is safer without Saddam and his sons. What do you suppose terrorists like Zarqawi would be doing, if they didn't come to fight in Iraq? Selling falafels in a little shop? Living peaceful lives? The U.S. didn't start this war. Thanks to weak responses in the past, as well as our cutting out of Vietnam, Osama considered the U.S. a "paper tiger". He doesn't think so, now, does he?
Here's a news flash for you, Tim.
I'm also tired of being told by the right that being a liberal is a bad thing.
Why do you care what those on the right think? Don't let it bother you.
Bush and the right showed us during hurricane Katriina how little they think of poor people.
You have got to be kidding me?! You're going to blame President Bush specifically and "the right"?! Katrina is an unfortunate tragedy, largely exaggerated in scope and hysteria by the media. How many died due to the hurricane? a thousand? And how many died during the tsunami? a hundred thousand or so? And the fatalities of Katrina is not made up of a disproportionate number of blacks and poor folk.
The poverty of New Orleans you can chalk up to decades of Democratic control. It is the Democratic leadership of state and local that failed the people of New Orleans. The role of FEMA is not that of first responder. You can say, we can do better...but to think things would have gone down any differently is easy to do when you put on your 20/20 hindsight glasses on. More people were successfully evacuated in this hurricane than any others in past New Orleans hurricanes.
The right has long been racist, pushing to prevent rights for blacks, women, gays etc.
Good God, man......that is utter delusional nonsense. Start doing some research. You can begin with examining the number of Republicans and the number of Democrats in the House and the Senate who pushed the Civil Rights Act through Congress.
The racists today are the race profiteers on the Left: the Democratic Party has you guys enslaved with the notion that they are the Party of "the little guy". They are not. Race profiteers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson rely on that lie. It's how they make a living.
Oh...and to the point of this post: Gore sucks!
One more thing to thank this President for: preventing Al Gore from being a judicially selected leader.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting, Tim.
Now, I am going to pick apart everything you wrote. :)
Actually, I think Pero and WS beat me to it.
Regarding Whit's comment--
The fact that the Dems look to elder statesman Gore for "gravitas" shows just how hollow the Party has become.
Post a Comment