Decision ‘08

Al Gore: Cassandra of the Left

Sayeth the failed presidential candidate:

“I truly believe that American democracy faces a time of challenge and trials that are more serious than we have ever faced,” Gore said.

Wow - really?

More serious than the Civil War?

More serious than the Revolutionary War?

More serious than Watergate?

Etc., etc…

10 Responses to “Al Gore: Cassandra of the Left”

1 Simeet Gandhi Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 6:26 pm
Global warming is a more serious threat than the Civil War or Revolutionary War, those wars did not threaten the future of mankind.

The abuse of presidential power of the Bush administration is worse than or at least equal to Watergate.

The war on terror has the potential to create a more volatile and destructivie global political and social crisis.

The Bush administration indeed has presented a serious threat to the future. Study the issues first before making saracstic comments, buddy!
2 Aaron Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
Yeah, assuming global warming theories are accurate, the average overall temperature of the earth might rise by slightly less than 6 degrees, at worst, over the course of the next century.
(http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/339.htm)

Run for the hills! It’s the end of the world! In 2100, it might be a full five degrees warmer outside!

And yes, such abuses of power like listening to al Qaeda operatives when they talk on the phone or removing a dictator who had consistently shown himself to be an enemy of the US and the UK, not to mention the human rights, over the course of 12 years. That’s much worse than hiring thugs to break into the opposing party’s HQ (not that Watergate was a really significant threat to US Democracy anyway).

And of course, what could be worse than attempting to wipe out global terrorism? The world would be sooooo much better if the US had just responded to 9-11 by trying to negotiate with bin-Laden.

But you’re right that the Bush administration has presented a serious threat to the future . . .

. . . of Islamafascists the world over.
3 Simeet Gandhi Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 7:32 pm
Sarcasm, no. The increase in global mean temperature, even by five degrees, would have catastrophic consequences. Flooding of coastal areas. Droughts. Increase in the frequency and magnititude of hurricanes. Al la Katrina. Increased rates of diseases. The danger or runaway global warming is there as well.

Watergate and other abuses of consitutuional power are not a direct threat to US democracy. But they imply a unconstitutional power grab, and that represents a tilt in the important balance of power. That is a threat to democracy. If unchecked, the US would have a power structure tilted towards right-wing neocons and their defense contractor buddies. They would formulate policy and their own “reality,” as described by Ron Ruskin.

Saddam Hussein was an evil guy. But there are dozens of countries that presneted a more serious threat to the US at the time of the invasion. It has been established that the Bush administration falsified intelligence and misled the American people to go to war in Iraq. The war in Iraq was unnessecasry and thousands of American soldiers are gone for no good reason. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children dead. For what? A shaky Iraqi democracy and more hatred and violence for the future?

Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaida should have been wiped out before 9-11, this is a failure of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. But Clinton at least tried, Bush, even after being warned by the intelligence community of a terrorists threat before 9-11, did absolutely nothing to go after Bin Laden and the cells operating in the US.

Terrorism is not unique to the Middle East. To creat a more just and peaceful world, policymakers have to graduate from simplisitc declarations of good and evil. The terrorists come from socieites that are ignorant and poor and backwards largely because of the corrupt and fascist leaders the wesern installed to serve their “oil” interests. Iraq was created by the British in the middle of the 20th century, and Saddam Hussein was installed by the CIA because he was believed to be friendly to the west.

Just as Bush did not heed warnins about the levees breaking in New Orleans, or is ignoring the threat of global warming, and is ignoring the threat of what a misguided “war on terror” will do to the world. Bush ignores the promise of embyonic stem cell research, and he ignores the dangers of massive deficit spending and huge federal debts. Instead of promoting the national economy and middle class and domestic tranquiliy, he outsources jobs to other countries and gives tax cuts the benefit the richest people, and cuts spending to education and health care.

The George W. Bush presidency will go down as the worst American presidency ever. Eventually, it will be seen as lacking in vision, values, honesty, and competence. It is a serious threat to the American republic because if unchallenged it would lead to a very different republic than what the Founding Fathers intended.

When there is no vision, the people perish. Al Gore in 2008 can lead the United States back to a better place.
4 Aaron Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Any scientific proof that global warming is connected to the frequency and magnitude of hurricanes? Don’t asnswer that; I know there is none. Furthermore, the US has done better at decreasing its emissions than any of the countries that did sign the Kyoto Protocol.

In A Long Short War, Christopher Hitchens makes clear that Sadam was not just another dictator, for a number of reasons, like consistently firing upon US and UK fighters that kept him from further acts of genocide — clearly a violation of the ‘91 peace treaty. If he hadn’t been toppled from power, we would have had to drop the sanctions and end the UN investigations, allowing him to restore his WMD program. I suppose we should have waited and let the Hussein regime become a threat to US security again and rebuild a massive army, so that removing him would have cost much more — in human lives and financially.

Clinton tried to do something about bin-Laden: he shot a cruise missile into an aspirin factory. What an impressive record on fighting terrorism. Speaking of which, there is something I don’t quite understand: you credit Clinton for doing something he didn’t really do — fight terrorism — and then criticize Bush for doing the same. But not doing much about Al Qaead prior to 9-11 is quite understandable. If, on September 10th, 2001, someone had told you that people were going to hijack airliners and fly them into buildings, would you have believed it?

So people become terrorists because they’re poor and uneducated? From that I can really tell that you’re well informed. I’m sure you are well aware that the 9-11 hijackers came from middle-class backgrounds and were college-educated.

It is true that terrorism is not unique to the Middle East. There is ETA in Spain, the IRA, domestic terrorists in the US, etc., etc., etc. However, Islamafascism is unique to the Muslim world. This form of terrorism is unique. ETA and the IRA aim to damage property and usually make sure to alert police to a planted bomb. Al Qaeda promotes violence for the sake of violence. Unlike the IRA and ETA, they cannot be negotiated with, because, whatever demands they currently list, they only want to kill people for the sake of killing people.

Bush does not outsource jobs to other countries; private businesses do. And despite the hype and rhetoric, outsourcing of manufacturing jobs is not really detrimental to the US economy.

In the 2005 balanced scholarly poll, Bush was ranked 19th out of 40 presidents, a reflection on the current division in the country, so he will likely move as he becomes a part of history. (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007243) For a full explanation of this, ranking, there’s an article linked to the rankings. In short, the below average and failed presidents (Carter, Buchanan) sat by idly during crisis. Above average, and high-average presidents (Wilson, LBJ) had great vision, but their projects were, in the end, unfruitful. Great and near-great presidents (FDR, Reagan) faced unprecedented challenges and overcame them. Just because you don’t like Bush’s vision of an ownership society in the US where human life is respected and a free and democratic Middle East (I suppose you would prefer a world where Americans are reliant upon the government for their every need — something sure to help the deficit — and the Middle East is still subject to brutal dictatorships.) does not mean he does not have a vision. Bush will, at worst, remain near the middle of the presidential rankings, and may even get into the near-great presidents, if Iraq becomes a success.
5 Simeet Gandhi Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 10:56 pm
President Bush: A Modern Anti-Robin Hood Figure

1) The United States as a country emits the most greenhouse gasses. In 2001, President Bush pulls us out of the Kyoto Accords. This weakened it significantly. Without our leadership, the world community to this day suffers from a lack of focus and committment. Tony Blair has said that climate change is the most serious threat facing the nation. President Bush has provided no leadership on this issues. Read this as it shows CO2 levels are the highest ever, (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060314/wl_nm/environment_greenhouse_dc_2.). A top NASA scientists gives his view on climate change here.
(http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkzJmZnYmVsN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2ODk1ODE1JnlyaXJ5N2Y3MTdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5Mg==). The upcoming hurricane season willl be a good showcase for the hurricane side of this issue. Global warming is the cause of many serious problems, coastal flooding, drought, hurricans, diseases, etc. (http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060314-012005-6432r).

2) The Iraq War. It will go down in the books as a utter disaster. President Bush rushed to war when there were other, better, more effective options. How many justification has Bush given for the war? He did not do any of the planning one needs to do to win a war and keep the peace. Paul Bremer will tell you. President Bush misued and the intelligence and exploited the fears of Americans to launch a premptive military campaign in Iraq. (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/10/iraq.intelligence/index.html).
Instead of a dicator, now the US has 2,000 dead soldiers and counting. A war that could cost trillions. Probably close to 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. A fractured country. Devastated infrastructure. Political instability. All this in the name of a ‘war on terror.” A recent poll shows that most Americans believe that the Iraq war was a mistake, and does the rest of the world. U say that Saddam Hussein was a threat, of course he was. But there were ove 30 countries at that time who represented a greater threat. We did nothing to Iran, and now they are developing uranium for an atomic bomb. A showdown with Saddam was going to happen, but it did not need to be done the way Bush did it. The US enjoyed international support on the war on terror. UN inspections, international economic sanctions, and pressure on the Hussein regime would have eventually toppled his regime. Saddam was no longer producing WMDs and had no WMD program. The Iraq War was a diversion from the real war to hunt down terrorisits. Bin Laden should have been caputred long ago and the Al-Qaida cells should have been apprehended and shut down. Now the United States is bogged down in Iraq which has become a breeding ground and training ground for more Islamic fundamentals. You may also later say that bringing democracy to the Middle East is important, but what about the fact that democracy has allowed Middle Eastern countries to elect leaders who were more anti-west than before. Look at Egypt and the Palestinines as an example, Hamas anyone? And in Iraq a anti-west and pro-Iran government may end up forming. How ridiculaous will Bush & Co. look then?

3) You are misinformed on the pre 9-11 situation. President Clinton missed killing Bin Laden by one hour. A Pakistani informant tipped Osama bin Laden off, and he escaped. After the embassy bombings in 1998 and the 2000 hit on the USS Cole, President Clinton saw Bin Laden and Al-Qaida as the #1 threat facing the nation. In fact, during the presidential transition briefings, Richard Cark and Sandy Berger briefed Condoleeza Rice on a recommended plan to roll back the Al-Qaida group. The Bush team were presented with numerous warnings about a terrorists threat to attack the US. They did nothing to follow up those leads, nothing that Bill Clinton would have called together the FBI, CIA, and national security agency to review everything, which he always did. there was enough information within the governmental agencies to disrupt the attack. Not that the current Al-Qaida man was already arrested before the attacks of 9-11. Now I would condone torture to get information out of him! (http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,333835,00.html). George W. Bush had no interest in the terrorist threat. He was too busy vacationing in August 2001, the longest presidential vacation ever. I remember being a high school senior and thinking that it was wrong. So if I was the President of the United States, and I was told before 9-11, and Bush was told over month before 9-11, that this group was going to attack, I would bring together the FBI, CIA, and the NSA to see what they had and make a move. It is not understandable that Bush did nothing. Not understandable at all. Just ask Richard Clarke, Al Gore, Robert Mueller, and Sandy Berger.

4) Islamic fundamentalism is unique. It is a violent terrorism because it is idealogically based. These people believe they are doing Allah’s work. A lot of the BS they are led to beleive is fed to them by the corrupt states they live in. The princes and palaces maintain their power by keeping hte masses ignorant and poor. These corrupt Middle East dictatorships were put in power by the US because of their oil interests. Saddam Hussein was a puppet leader installed by the US. I am not Muslim and I am no expert. But I think it is clear that a lot of Muslims do no condone 9/11 nor do they condone violent radical Islam. How do any of us know whether the attacks of September 11 were just a violent act by a small group of dedicated and well-financed Muslim criminals?

5) Finally, there can be no sholarly ranking of President Bush yet. But once his term is over and a few years have passed, he will definitely go down as once of the worst. President Bush has had vision and has had some big projects, but he has been a disaster as president. I think that George W. Bush is a decent enough Southern fellow, and he is a good family. But his wife is the only professional in his own family. President Bush has been a irresponsible and reckless president. It seems his only claim to power is his daddy’s name, and his tax cuts for the rich, and his loyatly to the right-wingers and their corporate lobbyists. President George W. Bush does not do what is best for America and the world, he does what preserves the status quo and keeps the rich even richer. He takes from the poor and gives to the rich, a kind of modern day anti-Robin Hood figure. What a terrible model and influence he is the young and impressionable people of the world today. In domestic and foreign affairs, he will leave office I believe a disaster. He entered office with a budget surplus, he will leave office in fall 2008 with a record budget deficit. He entered office in a time of peace and economic prosperity, he leaves office in 2008 with inflation and the economoy slow and the gap between rich and poor stronger than ever. He will leave office with health care and eduation reform unchanged. And he will leaves office with a growing cynicism about government and truth. To be honest, Bush is not exactly the devil, and the American government remains a strong force to protect Americans and to promote peace and freedome and progress for everyone. But as the last best hope for mankind, the United States deserves a truly special person to lead, someone who has the intellect and curiosity to search for the truths and bring people togethre and lead America to the promised land, someone like Albert Gore, Jr.

George W. Bush was never the right person to lead this country. But what does he care, he may as well stick his tongue out to the average American. He will go back to this Crawford ranch, have his own presidential library, and write his autobiography and remain a celebrity. But I do not think he will go down as a good president.
6 peter Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 11:03 pm
“To be honest, Bush is not exactly the devil.” Bush not the devil: I suppose I could agree with that.

See, Mark: I can be even=handed!
7 Mark Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 11:15 pm
Yes, well, in the same spirit, let me say that Jimmy Carter was a better president than William McKinley…
8 peter Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
How gracious of you…
9 Aaron Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 11:27 pm
Actually you’re quite ill-informed on President Clinton’s record: he was watching bin-Laden in realtime via a predator drone. All he had to do was say the word and bin-Laden would have been killed. He chose not to as it wouldn’t look good. This is according to Clinton’s advisor, Dick Morris.
10 peter Says:
March 14th, 2006 at 11:29 pm
I wouldn’t trust anything Dick Morris says — especially if it’s about Clinton –