It just struck me that, when the discussion turns to politics here, the arguments are always over Bush & McCain. Why is that?

See, my take is that we've got two pretty good candidates on the republican side. The arguments on the forum seem half-hearted, kind of "which one of these guys more represents my feelings"?

Obviously McCain draws more support from the middle ground and liberal side. He can only win primaries with large cross-over votes that'll dissappear when (if) he went up against Gore. Bush worries some as being too out of touch or too conservative. The moderates worry about his religious connections.

But, would any of you who support one of these guys actually cross over and vote for Gore if your man didn't win the republican primariies? Can you really consider Gore's ethics and honesty preferable to either Bush or McCain? Are you really more worried about religious influence than Chinese influence?

So, what about Algore?

Can anyone defend Gore's honesty? Not camparisions to others. Not childish excuses like "well Bush did it too". These red herring arguments always end up in the gutter, discussing whose worse.

I'm looking for actual defense of him and his behavior. Is this a guy you'd hire to watch your store while you were out of town? Can you sell him based on his integrity?

I'd love to see some arguments defending his lie to have invented the Internet, his lie that Love Story was written about him, the release of millions of gallon of water just to float his canoe, the $1,000 checks that he got from Monks that had taken a vow of poverty. What about his friendship with the slime-ball President and scores of suspects that have now fled the country rather than testify? Are we judged by the company that we keep? Do smart people do so many dumb things?

Hows about it? Anyone out there a Gore supporter?

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 20, 2000

Answers

Good morning.

Can any honest person vote for an environmentalist who has water released from a dam in the middle of a drought so that he can have a photo op in a canoe? How about an anti-war type who serves a very short tour in the safest part of a war zone so that he can put "veteran" on his resume? There are so many reasons to despise the guy that I won't continue along that line. It's enough to say that he is a lying liberal Democrat. Is that redundant - lying liberal democrat?

Michael

-- michael frazier (mfrazier@pacific.net), February 20, 2000.

While this doesn't answere your question, I'll have to aske you another "See, my take is that we've got two pretty good candidates on the republican side. "
What about Alan Keyes. Granted he is not going to win the nomination, but hopefully he will stay in the primary race so he can be featured on the debates. His articulate answers put both McCain and Bush to shame.

-- Butt Nugget (catsbutt@umailme.com), February 20, 2000.

He does what he's told and says what he's told to say.

-- King Bill (BC@The_Big_House.com), February 20, 2000.

We can't prove that he actually murdered anybody 'personally'.

-- Porky (Porky@in.cellblockD), February 20, 2000.

I will vote for Alan Keyes if he stays in. Otherwise, it is difficult to say. My vote could be just a "no" vote, a vote against my least favorite, rather than something I'm satisfied with as a promotion of what is right.

At least Al Gore seems to consistently stand for a particular viewpoint and is predictable. Even though I don't agree with him, at least I know what his agenda is. He isn't pretending he stands for things he doesn't.

The more I learn about McCain (esp. his personal life, which shows what he really believes), the less I would consider voting for him. But I'm not going into that. Is the enemy you know better than the "friend" you don't know (and he may actually be an enemy too)?

More importantly for me, Keyes' lack of support from those who supposedly support what he supports (because "he can't win"?) makes me very disillusioned with the supposed champions of many of my ideals, and their organizations. The compromise they are making is made clear because we finally have someone in the race who clearly supports their side of the argument with integrity and skill, and also because he himself believes in it.

Winning does not justify compromise, and my support for those groups who seem now to be showing their true colors (the end-justifies-the-means colors) may be at an end, after this betrayal of principle. You don't compromise principle (as opposed to non-essentials) so "you get into a position where you can do some good." If you compromise, you become just as bad as the other guys, only you are a traitor as well. I would rather lose and have my integrity than win and become my enemy.

-- S. Kohl (kohl@hcpd.com), February 20, 2000.

Re Algore:

The best quote I've seen on Mr. Gore is that "it takes two Al Gore's to make one Dan Quayle". 'Nuf said?

-- bz (beezee@statesville.net), February 20, 2000.

WASHINGTON--One of Al Gore's first hires after he was elected to Congress in 1976 was Peter Knight, a hard-charging 25-year-old aide earning $20,700 a year. Roy Neel, a former Tennessee sportswriter, soon followed. Gregory Simon, a rock 'n' roll drummer until age 30, joined Gore's Senate staff in 1991. Jack Quinn, a lawyer, signed on to Gore's ill-fated 1988 bid for the presidency before becoming his vice presidential chief of staff. Tom Downey, a congressional colleague, bonded with Gore during competitive, late-afternoon basketball games in the House gym. As Gore's political career took off, each man remained intensely loyal--raising money for his campaigns, dispensing advice or simply being a friend. Knight, for instance, helped Gore land the contract for his bestselling book, "Earth in the Balance." Neel helped arranged a memorial service in Nashville for Gore's father. Downey introduced Gore's eldest daughter to her future husband. They are key figures in his kitchen cabinet, five men whose pasts--and, to some extent, futures--are inextricably linked to one of the most influential vice presidents in modern times. They have helped Gore rise to the brink of the presidency and, in turn, benefited handsomely. Today, all five are off the public payroll, having turned their government ties and tenure into lucrative Washington lobbying work. Not coincidentally, the interests of their clients--from technology to telecommunications, from the environment to the Olympics--often have dovetailed with Gore's public policy portfolio. Case in point: While Gore was overseeing a commission to foster joint ventures between the United States and Russia, two American companies, Lockheed Martin and DuPont, paid Knight and Downey to lobby the White House on behalf of their corporate interests in Russia.

Group Is Not Typical of Kitchen Cabinets The evolving relationships between Gore and the lobbyists are a window into how Washington works and how much that insular world has influenced the vice president. To a striking degree, Gore has surrounded himself with a revolving door of political insiders whose careers he helped propel. These Gore advisors are unlike the business titans, self-made millionaires and home-state political leaders who typically have made up other White House kitchen cabinets. "These individuals are classic representatives of the Washington insider-political-establishment way of doing business," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a public policy organization devoted to political reform. "And that is obviously not the message that the vice president wants to take to the country." For all of Gore's efforts to distance himself from Washington--he moved his presidential campaign to Nashville in October, saying he was more a man of Tennessee than a creature of the Beltway--the vice president has received more campaign donations, $592,325, from lobbyists than any other presidential candidate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group. While Gore's office maintains that the vice president has taken no improper action on behalf of his friends or their clients, the very nature of his inner circle raises questions about whether some White House decisions driven by the public good may also have hidden private interests. "Every decision the president and the vice president has ever made has been based on . . . what is in the best interest of the country," said Gore spokesman Chris Lehane. Moreover, Lehane said, Gore has taken positions opposed to the interests of his friends' clients on immigration, prescription drug and legal reform issues. Added Simon: "As far as I'm concerned, the people around the vice president bent over backward not to even have an appearance of a conflict." All five lobbyists have seen their incomes soar during Gore's vice presidency. Since 1997, clients have paid more than $17 million for their services. Moreover, Gore's ties to Quinn, Knight and Neel have led to prestigious or potentially lucrative presidential appointments. If Gore is elected president, the stock of the five loyalists is certain to rise further, perhaps with positions in his administration or enhanced standing as Washington power brokers. Some Democratic insiders speculate that Gore's chief of staff and attorney general could come from this group. The lobbyists maintain that they have earned their newfound wealth primarily through expertise and experience, not simply because they are close to the vice president. "I never made money in my life until I left government," said Simon, who in 1997 opened a lobbying practice focused on the same issues he handled for Gore as his chief domestic policy advisor. "I think people hired me because, if I could give the vice president and, occasionally, the president good policy advice, I could give them good policy advice too." Alliances between political leaders and lobbyists are as common as marble colonnades in Washington, where people often work in the public sector for years, then cash in with private clients willing to pay generously for access and insights into government decision-making. "It happens in this town," said Neel, a former Gore chief of staff who has become a highly paid telecommunications lobbyist. "There is nothing illegal or untoward about it." In 1993, the Clinton administration swept into office decrying the influence of lobbyists who struck it rich after cutting their political teeth in government. One of Clinton's first official acts was to set up strict ethics rules banning senior presidential and vice presidential appointees, such as Quinn and Neel, from lobbying the White House for five years, and others who earned less, such as Simon, for one year after leaving the administration. The Gore advisors insist that they have followed those regulations and there is no indication that their lobbying activities have violated the ban.

No Evidence That Efforts Violated Rules While the former Gore aides deny seeking to influence the vice president directly, Knight, Simon and close associates of Quinn all have lobbied Gore's staff. Downey, the former congressman, has lobbied Gore and his aides. "He has occasionally raised issues with the vice president, but the vice president has not taken action as a result of their conversation that he would not otherwise have taken," Lehane said. "There's been no special treatment." And the Gore associates all have enjoyed considerable access to Gore and his staff. The vice president's office acknowledged that former Gore chiefs of staff Knight, Quinn and Neel met occasionally with the vice president or his top aides for lunch over a period of several months ending last spring. In addition, all of the men except Simon belonged to a coterie of informal advisors that periodically met with Gore's chief of staff in the White House complex. It was at one time nicknamed "The K Street Group," after the Washington corridor where many lobbyists have their offices. And Knight, Downey and Neel have traveled with Gore on Air Force Two since October 1998. Gore's office declined to release Secret Service records that would show how many times each of the lobbyists had visited the White House. The lobbyists have something else in common: Their firms and some of their clients are donors to Gore's presidential campaign, the Clinton-Gore reelection, a fund to renovate the vice president's residence and a scholarship at the University of Tennessee to honor his late sister. Four of the lobbyists have helped finance Gore's 2000 campaign, including Knight, the chief architect of the fund-raising effort. Downey has solicited more than $75,000, and Neel and Simon $25,000 each, Gore aides said. Quinn has raised no money. At the same time, the advisors have lobbied the administration on a variety of policy issues. On an April day in 1996, Knight attended a Cabinet-level meeting on the Olympics in Atlanta chaired by Gore, who headed the administration's task force on the Games. Knight served as Gore's chief of staff from 1977 to 1989 and ran Gore's 1988 presidential bid. He then worked for a pharmaceutical firm before becoming a lobbyist in 1991. But he remained Gore's major fund-raiser, helping bring in nearly $50 million for Gore's political committees and other causes since 1983. He was deputy director of personnel for the Clinton-Gore transition team in 1992 and took a six-month leave in 1996 to head the Clinton-Gore reelection effort. But on that April day, Knight wasn't wearing any of those hats. He was at the White House as a paid lobbyist for both the U.S. and international Olympic committees. The outcome of the meeting: an announcement of a federal commitment for 1,000 more police officers at the Atlanta Games. While a former Atlanta Olympics official said Knight played no role in the decision, his recurring presence at the White House underscores the symbiotic relationship between Gore and his friends. Knight's lobbying practice took off after Gore became vice president. Billings for clients he represented exceeded $2.5 million from 1997 to mid-1999. This included four different clients associated with the Olympics alone. Gore told ABC-TV's "This Week" in October: "Peter Knight has never, ever lobbied me. Ever. Not for a single client."

Lobbyist Investigated but Not Charged In addition, with Gore's support, Knight was appointed by Clinton to the board of the Comsat Corp. in 1994, a quasi-public satellite communications firm. The high-profile post earned him $21,500 annually for several years but now pays him in stock options whose worth has fluctuated widely. Knight currently holds 13,402 options. Some of Knight's business activities have attracted controversy. In 1997, congressional Republicans investigated his role in deals involving several clients who also were Democratic donors. He was not charged with any wrongdoing. Knight left his lobbying practice at the end of last year, primarily to assist the Gore campaign. Among those closest to Gore is Downey, who lives across the street from the vice president's mansion in Washington. The two are weekend basketball buddies, often playing two-on-two with their teenage sons. "More than with anyone else, [Gore will] let down his guard with Tom," said Lorraine Voles, Gore's former communications director. Downey, 51, never worked for Gore. A liberal Democrat, Downey was elected to represent a Long Island, N.Y., district as part of the Watergate class of 1974. He was defeated in 1992 after serving nine terms and opened his own Washington lobbying firm. He assisted Gore by playing the roles of Republican vice presidential nominee Jack Kemp in 1996 and Bill Bradley, Gore's current Democratic presidential opponent, during debate preparations. Downey refused to be interviewed. He told the National Journal in 1998 that his access to Gore was "an important reason" why clients hired him. Still, he said, "I try not to trespass on the relationship." Downey's firm has taken in more than $4 million from clients he represented from 1997 through the first half of 1999. He signed a contract with Fuji Photo Film USA in 1995 to provide "information, analysis and insights into current legislation as well as the direction of government policy." The pay: $35,000 a month. Six weeks later, Downey met with Leon Fuerth, Gore's national security advisor, on Fuji's behalf, documents filed with the Justice Department's Foreign Agents Registration unit show. Gore aides said that no action was taken after that meeting; Fuerth also met with representatives of Fuji's U.S. competitor, Eastman Kodak Co. Since 1996, Downey or his firm lobbied the vice president's office 47 times on behalf of 22 clients, according to lobbying records. Even Gore acknowledges that Downey has lobbied him. "It has been a long time ago," Gore said in a brief interview. "He doesn't lobby me directly at all. And in the past, it might have been to ask me to meet with someone, or something of that sort."

Advisors Didn't Ask for Special Treatment Gore did not recall meeting with clients at Downey's request but referred questions to his staff. Senior Gore aides declined to provide any further information. Downey, as well as Knight, occasionally called Gore's office to discuss telecommunications and other policy issues while Simon was domestic policy advisor, Simon said. He added that neither man asked for special treatment. Toward the end of Gore's first term, Simon decided that he wanted out of the White House. Simon, formerly a drummer in the Zambini Brothers band, had two young children, and the travel and long hours had taken a toll. He made the transition with ease, thanks to contacts he had made while working for Gore. One of those was John Doerr, the Silicon Valley venture capitalist. Doerr and other executives met privately with Gore at the White House complex shortly before the 1997 inauguration. Simon, then Gore's chief technology expert, helped set up the meeting. Two months later, on a swing through California, Doerr gave Simon the start-up boost he needed to set up his own firm. Doerr introduced Simon to four of his first clients, Simon said. One of those early clients was Cisco Systems, the San Jose technology powerhouse. "We called the other high-tech companies and said, 'Is this guy good?' " said Dan Scheinman, Cisco's vice president of legal and government affairs. "And they all said: 'He added value when he was in the White House, and he knows our issues.' " Already familiar with Gore's commitment to expand the use of computers in education, Simon helped Cisco bring technology to high schools in low-income empowerment zones, a Gore pet project. Gore publicly praised Cisco's involvement in the program during a speech in Washington, a salute that Cisco subsequently touted to investors in a news release. Simon's firm, which now includes two more former Gore aides, has taken in about $1.9 million since 1997. These days, Simon, 48, is no longer barred from lobbying the White House. Since his one-year ban ended in 1998, Simon said he has lobbied Gore's staff on behalf of a variety of clients, including technology upstart Time Domain and the Southern Company, an energy firm interested in global warming, another of Gore's favorite policy issues. And Simon still acts as an informal advisor to his former colleagues on Gore's staff. "I lobby staff from time to time, and occasionally they ask for ideas," Simon said.

Lobbyist Acknowledges Clients Aware of Access The White House ban on lobbying was developed by a group of lawyers including Quinn, who served as Gore's vice presidential chief of staff in 1993. He became White House counsel in late 1995. He has assisted Gore's presidential campaign in various roles, from screening problematic donors or fund-raisers to helping with initial debate preparation last year. "I consider myself a great friend and supporter and occasional advisor to the vice president and will do whatever I can to help him succeed," Quinn said. In 1997, Quinn resigned from the White House to return to Arnold & Porter, the law firm he left four years earlier to join the administration. He established a small public policy group and quickly built a lucrative consulting practice.

-- Vern (bacon17@ibm.net), February 20, 2000.

If you have no control over your life and no self responsibility - Vote for Gore. If you are not capable of raising your children - Vote for Gore. If you are not capable of working - Vote for Gore. If your health is bad - Vote for Gore. If you like government housing - Vote for Gore. In other words if you need someone to take care of you from cradle to grave - Gore is your man.

I didn't say anything bad about Gore. Did I?

-- Lucy (lifeisgoodhere@webtv.net), February 20, 2000.

Great input, however...

Not one defense of "Gore, the man".

Surely, someone can say something good about his war record, his down- home, hands-in-the-soil farming history, his support of big tobacco (or is that his attack on big tobacco).

Haven't we learned our lesson yet about the importance of character?

PS: at 4% of the vote, Keyes is irrelevent, however worthy.

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 20, 2000.

Well, Gore has a lot of experience now in government. He does not seem likely to do anything too rash. Course, we're outta the prediction business for a while ;^)

At least Gore has the courage to talk and write about the environment. Obviously humanimals must pay more attention to respecting and living in harmony with the earth, air, water, etc.

If it actually comes down to Gore < --- > Bush, we'll vote for Gore. But we are dismayed that it has petered down to these "choices."

Still, we're on a permanent high that the lights are on, hot showers are awaiting, shopping is still cheap, easy, fun and plentiful, and we're able to work and barely meet our modest expenses -- happy happy celebrating Doomers here!

Politics really is pretty boring :-P

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), February 20, 2000.

I grew up in Tennessee, so I must comment. Gore is IMHO no way either a Tennessean or a Southerner or a farmer. His growing up years were spent in a DC Hotel, with an occasional summer vacation in Carthage (his dad's home town). My problem with Gore is that he appears to have carefully hidden his values and agenda from the public. I believe that his public statements are very carefully crafted to win the support of key special interest groups. Before anyone votes for Al, I suggest reading his book and thinking carefully. And I fear that he has learned all to well at the desk of his master, Clinton. Especially in doublespeak. I suspect that Al would go to about any length to win the presidency. He will totally savage Bush or McCain in ways we can only imagine now. Remember, Al was the originator of the "Wille Horton" ad.

-- Les (holladayl@aol.com), February 20, 2000.

OT: Doesn't anyone have anything good to say about Gore?

HELL NO! I'd rather vote for Mickey Mouse than that lieing crrep!

-- HELL NO~! (hellnooo@hellnooo.xcom), February 20, 2000.

There are reasons that so few vote in the U.S....you've enumerated a number of them here today..Is that right? Nope....Will your vote matter? Wish it were so...Been around long enough to say NO again...Now if you REALLY care, get out there and campaign for somebody you think will make a difference. Wish I knew somebody I'd campaign for...but again, NOPE....sigh...and yes character counts...but evidently NOT to the voting populace....

-- xyz (exforumregular@lurker.com), February 20, 2000.

Al cleans up good.

-- O Yeah? (worldpage@aol.com), February 20, 2000.

Gore's got the Peter Jennings head-fake down pretty good.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), February 20, 2000.

Okay, we're two hours into this thread and not one decent Gore defense.

Isn't there one democrat out there that can explain away or support his lies, poor memory and choice of "friends"?

Remember the rules: stick to defending Gore's behavior, not comparisons to others.

Come on liberals, show yourselves.

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 20, 2000.

Does Gore have behavior?

-- where? (missed@it.somehow), February 20, 2000.

Why is there so much concern with Bush and any affiliations with the religious right? Ozone Al has affiliations with the Buddusts/Hindus/ and anything else that comes down the pike. Any left wing parade of losers he affiliates himself. He supports the Kyoto treaty which will make it unlawful for a person to use a woodstove for heat. Also it will increase your heating bills by at minimum (this is before the oil crisis situation) by at least 20%. Let hear what good this will due us and the economy?? Come on you left wing non athletic supports of Ozone AL, debate this issue.

-- robert knight (rknight@nb.net), February 20, 2000.

If you are dismayed by the lack of support for the Tennessee State Vegetable, just wait until this summer when he picks Hillary as his running mate. With the exception of looney liberal tree huggers and socialized medicine advocates, EVERYBODY will become a Doomer at that point.

-- Irving (irvingf@myremarq.com), February 20, 2000.

Make a checklist of things you would like to see in a presidential candidate. Go down the list comparing Bush to Gore. If you evaluate them honestly and equally, you'll find that Gore is a god compared to Bush.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 20, 2000.

OK,he's also good at droppin' Gs when talkin' about farmin'.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), February 20, 2000.

"The Lying Two Faced God." Nope, doesn't sound right. "The Scumbag Liberal Politician God." Nah, it's redundant. "The Closet Socialist Bought And Paid For By The Chinese God." Too wordy. No ring to it. "The Not Quite As Smooth Copy Of His Smarmy Treasonous Boss God." Still too wordy. But you're right, compared to Bush, he is a god. . . .

-- Zardoz (none-so-blind@liberal.doofus), February 20, 2000.

Zardoz,

Like a typical right-winger, you're not playing by the rules. I said...

"If you evaluate them honestly"

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 20, 2000.

I really liked quote "It takes two Al's to make one Dan".. would like to see more quotes about all the candidates

-- george (jones@choices.com), February 20, 2000.

Hawk,

You seem to be the only serious Gore supporter so far (must be lonely).

I appreciate your response, but how's about addressing the actual challenge?

Support his lies, support his choice of friends...

The best you could do was to suggest comparing him to Bush, something I specically asked you not to do.

So, once again, how do you justify your support of a man who pretends to be a farmer and is not, lies about his claims as I originally posted & chooses friends such as our president (who's loosing his licence due to his lying)?

See, it's too easy to just fall back on comparisons such as who's worse. Kids do that "Mommy, Georgie did it too!" Two wrongs don't make a right. Hawk.

I'm not trying to pick on you, but so far you're the only supporter. Defend your position. How do you support (or explain away) a lier to be the chief law enforcement officer in the country?

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 20, 2000.

I just can't face the thought of listening to Al Gore for four more years, minimum. Calvin Coolidge was boring too but he had the grace to say very little.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 20, 2000.

Okay, I accept the challenge and will say something good about Al Gore:

Bill Clinton is worse.

Harvey

-- Harvey Ballwhanger (harvey@whang.com), February 20, 2000.

"How do you support (or explain away) a liar to be the chief law enforcement officer in the country?"

If everyone who has ever made a false statement is disqualified for public office, no one would ever be on the ballot. This is not an explanation or an excuse, it's just the way the world turns.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 20, 2000.

Truth is, I'm not a Gore "supporter", but given the choice, I see him as the lesser of two evils. I don't believe that we should even have a president, too much power for one person. Decisions should be made by commitee. If forced to vote, I would vote for Alan Keyes, but he doesn't have a chance because the world is still dominated by wealthy racist elite like the Bush dynasty and their following of bible-thumping extreme conservatives.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 20, 2000.

I'm a bible thumper Hawk but so is Keyes. How do you get from wanting to vote for Alan Keyes to Algore? They are on opposite extremes of the spectrum. Even Bush has more in common with Keyes not to mention more integrity even if you factor in everything his detractor say about him.

Keyes is my man, as well, but I'm still wondering how some people figure ...sdb

-- S. David Bays (SDBAYS@prodigy.net), February 20, 2000.

Someone asked for quotes, so here's my personal favorite. I first heard it in reference to George Herbert Walker, but it seems to fit nicely for George Dubya as well.

"He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple."

-- semper paratus (still_here_with@my.pals), February 20, 2000.

I'm gonna drop this thread, I think it's about played out, but consider this:

Would you choose to become, or remain friends with the likes of Al Gore? Would it matter to you if your friend committed adultry against another of your friends and then lied under oath about it? Would you chose to spend time with pathalogical (or calculating) liers? Would you loan them money or hire them to manage your business or watch your kids?

I don't and wouldn't.

I expect at least as much from my representitives as I do my friends and employees and don't understand the idea of supporting the worse of two evils. Why do we "put up" with this? Why are our standards so low?

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 20, 2000.

I see I stepped into a Heap of republican Manure.Now my good Friends,how much have you righteous,forthcoming Republicans done to put "NOTA" (none of the Above)on the Ballot????

-- Drained (Republican@hornblowers.stink), February 20, 2000.

I can truthfully say that I was elated when Gore was elected vice-president. It got him out of my home state of Tennessee.

JS

-- JS (joewstout@iswt.com), February 20, 2000.

My favorite quote of the "political season" so far came from this forum. I forget who said it.

"If Bush wins the presidencey, my biggest fear is that there is a shadow government controlling things. If Gore wins the presidency, my biggest fear is that there isn't..."

-- (gore@bush.bothsuck), February 20, 2000.

My favorite quote is...

"George W. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth"

LOL!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 20, 2000.

The reason you don't see Democrats responding to your post is that the list is still populated by wacko Y2k nuts... who epitomize the looniness of the far right.

Let's see... I can vote for Al Gore or G Junior the coke freak, who's bought and paid for by every religio gun hugger group in the country. And the HMO/tobacco lobby.

Your really think that I have a hard time defining the line between a man who is friends with a guy who got a blow job and the guy who wants to pay back his trip to the Oval Office with a tax cut for the wealthy.

Go back to the bunker... reality will bite you.

-- H.H. (dontscrewme_2000@yahoo.com), February 20, 2000.

Aaaaw come on now H.H., Bush is a nice guy, just like his Daddy.

You just need to learn more about him. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 20, 2000.

In defense of Al Gore, he just might turn out to be somewhat less unctuous than Bill Clinton.

Oh, and I think he invented the 'algorithm', for which programmers everywhere are forever indebted.

-- Nathan (nospamwh@tsoever.moc), February 21, 2000.

"It takes two Al's to make one Dan"

It takes one Alan Keyes to beat them all, put together.

-- Powder (Powder47keg@aol.com), February 21, 2000.

I am for Algore....without him my dogs might piss on my porch.

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 21, 2000.

I am voting for Al Gore because he is the only politician who for 30 years has had the guts nd the honesty to make the environment his priority. He did so when all others considered environmentalism political suicide. The smear campaign starting against him because he had a Buddhist temple help in financing is ridiculous. Is Buddhist money less acceptable than christian? Besides every corporation that supports Bush is making money in China so US corporations are political money lauderers anyway mostly for Republicans.

There is much that Gore will surprise us with. The fact that he remained a loyal friend of Clinton when it could have been politically damaging shows he is a Man whose word and loyalty stands the test. He has ten times the experience of Bush. Besides Bush is so transparently a phony that only rich republicans and their bootlicking sheeple will vote for him. Mac Cain is at least daring and believable when it comes to campaign financing and reform of government corruption.

Keynes is the brightest of all the candidates and the most eloquent. Unfortunately in our racist nation we are still one generation removed from equivalent rights and are too ignorant to appreciate true talent.

This forum seems populated by narrow minded nit pickers without social or human conscience. That is why we are the richest nation in history while millions of our children go hungry and have no medical oe educational help. History has yet to finish off the fascists in our midst.

-- Citizen (Citizen@usa.free), February 22, 2000.

Someone wrote: "This forum seems populated by narrow minded nit pickers without social or human conscience. That is why we are the richest nation in history while millions of our children go hungry and have no medical oe educational help. History has yet to finish off the fascists in our midst."

Indeed,hungry children...oh my...IMO this is because liberals/democrats advocate relinquishing the responsibility of PARENTS to their children. They advocate that the "government" will take care of you, no matter what you do or DON'T do for your children.

WHY are these children hungry? There are FREE (read: paid for by taxpayers/workers) clinics all over this city (Houston)where these children canand DO get medical care. Their mothers just need to GET UP in the morning to take them there and sometimes even WAIT! There is FREE public education; and if the PARENTS supervised their kids and homework, maybe the kids would learn something? (Well, if the parent/mother is not cracked out at the time).

As far as Al Gore and the environment, don't make me laugh!!!! "Earth in the Balance" is a joke; it is scientifically inept. Yeah, let's all do away with the combustion engine and see where our economy goes? In that scenario, do you want to talk about hungry children? Good grief! Get a grip on REALITY!!! If you look at a geologic table, you can see that earth warming and cooling has gone on for millions of years, way before humans had any input at all. What we do it nothing..not even a drop in the proverbial bucket!

Al Gore is a hypocrite and a liar and, at best, a gullible sort of fellow! Definitely NOT presidential material!

-- WhoMe (WhoMe@nowhere.none), February 22, 2000.

While I enjoy a good tree-hugging every now and then, I can't say that I support Al Gore. His philosophy on government is fundamentally flawed. He believes that the first and highest priorty of government is to "protect the environment." I disagree. The highest priority of government is to protect our liberty.

There may be cases where our liberty may be threatened by abusers of the environment. In such cases, they should be prosecuted.

However, to say that the environment is THE central issue around which policy is to be dictated gives a potential ruler dictatorial powers. Any and all acts of a tyrant could be justified in this manner. Shooting people, seizing property, and taxing businesses into the grave are all activities which could be done in the name of "protecting the environment"

Clearly there are critical environmental concerns around. Clean air and water are necessarily public resources which have to be shared publically. If someone pollutes, government needs to prosecute. But again, it needs to be done in the name of protecting our lives and freedom, not for any other reason...

-- jon carson (joncarson@yahoo.com), February 23, 2000.

I had a dog once,,it was named Rego, it was a very good dog, minded well, but he got killed, wanted the dog food on the other side of the fence. Weird that his name and Gore's got the same letters...huh?

-- real (realanimallover@pikthepook.com), February 29, 2000.

Socilaism/liberalism as you call it created the greatest totalitarian empire in the world which killed many more people than the Third Reich, and lasted longer. So who are the fascists.

-- Sir Richard (richard.dale@unum.co.uk), March 01, 2000.