Manbearpig reported buys another mansion

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Manbearpig reported buys another mansion
M

Manhattan Buckeye

Senior Member

7,566 posts
Apr 29, 2010 10:41 PM
The story is from an LA Times blog:

http://www.latimes.com/features/home/la-hm-hotprop-gore-20100428,0,4103538.story

Which I read from reading Ann Althouse (Wisky law professor - very weird but very smart).

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/04/8875000-for-ocean-view-villa-with.html

I don't know if this story has legs, if it isn't I'm happy to rescind the post (and LJ and PTown can help me out with that) given that the original source is unknown to me so I can't vouch for its credibility (although real estate transactions are public knowledge in most jurisdictions), but it is consistent with my personal interactions with Al Gore and his wealth and lifestyle vis a vis his 'environmental leanings'...Webster's dictionary of the word "charlatan" should have his picture next to the definition.
Apr 29, 2010 10:41pm
majorspark's avatar

majorspark

Senior Member

5,122 posts
Apr 29, 2010 10:54 PM
Manhattan Buckeye wrote: Webster's dictionary of the word "charlatan" should have his picture next to the definition.
This.
Apr 29, 2010 10:54pm
S

sjmvsfscs08

Senior Member

2,963 posts
Apr 29, 2010 10:59 PM
He's a piece of shit.
Apr 29, 2010 10:59pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Apr 29, 2010 11:04 PM
I'm glad Bush stole the election(sarcasm) in 2000, otherwise can you imagine if Gore would have been president? Good god, he'd be worse than Obama (maybe).
Apr 29, 2010 11:04pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Apr 29, 2010 11:09 PM
ccrunner609 wrote:
dwccrew wrote: I'm glad Bush stole the election(sarcasm) in 2000, otherwise can you imagine if Gore would have been president? Good god, he'd be worse than Obama (maybe).
We wouldnt have Obama.
True, we'd probably have Bush!
Apr 29, 2010 11:09pm
FatHobbit's avatar

FatHobbit

Senior Member

8,651 posts
Apr 30, 2010 9:06 AM
Apparently there's a lot of money to be made in the global warming/climate crisis/sky is falling business.
Apr 30, 2010 9:06am
Little Danny's avatar

Little Danny

Senior Member

4,288 posts
Apr 30, 2010 9:30 AM
Many still buy into the global warming hoax. Particularly those on the left coast and the Hollywood crowd. Here was a pretty funny story I read this weak about Brooke Shields being upset that people are disputing man made global warming.

http://blog.taragana.com/e/2010/04/27/brooke-shields-annoyed-with-global-warming-doesnt-exist-reports-113662/

I wish Al would have won in 2000. People like Reid and Pelosi would not be in the positions they are in and Congress would not be controlled by the dems. Obama would likely be the president of ACORN or heading Fannie Mae instead of leading our great nation.
Apr 30, 2010 9:30am
Writerbuckeye's avatar

Writerbuckeye

Senior Member

4,745 posts
May 1, 2010 11:26 PM
Little Danny wrote: Many still buy into the global warming hoax. Particularly those on the left coast and the Hollywood crowd. Here was a pretty funny story I read this weak about Brooke Shields being upset that people are disputing man made global warming.

http://blog.taragana.com/e/2010/04/27/brooke-shields-annoyed-with-global-warming-doesnt-exist-reports-113662/

I wish Al would have won in 2000. People like Reid and Pelosi would not be in the positions they are in and Congress would not be controlled by the dems. Obama would likely be the president of ACORN or heading Fannie Mae instead of leading our great nation to ruin.
Fixed it for you. :)
May 1, 2010 11:26pm
G

girevik

Member

97 posts
May 2, 2010 10:09 AM
So posting that Obama is "leading our great nation to ruin" isn't a clear violation of the rules of the forum?

I guess the rules only apply to some....
May 2, 2010 10:09am
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
May 2, 2010 10:10 AM
girevik wrote: So posting that Obama is "leading our great nation to ruin" isn't a clear violation of the rules of the forum?

I guess the rules only apply to some....
It's not against the rules when you post the truth. :D
May 2, 2010 10:10am
G

girevik

Member

97 posts
May 2, 2010 10:33 AM
Yeah.

Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
May 2, 2010 10:33am
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
May 2, 2010 10:34 AM
Why does the left hate the truth so much?
May 2, 2010 10:34am
G

girevik

Member

97 posts
May 2, 2010 11:03 AM
The republicans haven't been able to win in an election since 2004. Pretty sure they even lost plenty of seats then, Bush just won a 2nd term, so it's likely been since 2002 when everyone was scared that the boogeyman was going to get them. You're calling democracy "tyrany", "socialism", "fascism", "communism", etcand declaring that the country is on the way "to ruin" beacuse of it.

Like it or not, that's the truth.

Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
May 2, 2010 11:03am
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
May 2, 2010 11:09 AM
girevik wrote: So posting that Obama is "leading our great nation to ruin" isn't a clear violation of the rules of the forum?

I guess the rules only apply to some....
The rules apply to everyone. Obama was already brought up in this thread then an opinion was brought up about him. The rule is because someone would be talking about an Obama policy and someone would come in and go off on a tirade about Bush 1 that has nothing to do with anything.

That being said, I suggest you take a minute to read the rules as I have already had to edit a few of your posts this morning.

I also suggest this topic gets back on topic immediately. This is not a topic of the right vs the left. Any more posts completely off topic past this point will be deleted.
May 2, 2010 11:09am
G

girevik

Member

97 posts
May 2, 2010 11:19 AM
Read above- LJ
May 2, 2010 11:19am
G

girevik

Member

97 posts
May 2, 2010 11:26 AM
Unless you live in a parallel universe referring to Al Gore as anything other than Al Gore violates your own rules.
May 2, 2010 11:26am
LJ's avatar

LJ

Senior Member

16,351 posts
May 2, 2010 11:28 AM
girevik wrote: Unless you live in a parallel universe referring to Al Gore as anything other than Al Gore violates your own rules.
No it doesn't. We had this discussion in November, sorry you weren't here for it, but it has been long standing that name calling of politicians is not against the rules, only name calling of other posters, which is what the rule is written for.

Now, like I said, back on topic. If you want to continue this discussion, PM me. Any further posts off topic WILL be deleted.
May 2, 2010 11:28am
majorspark's avatar

majorspark

Senior Member

5,122 posts
May 4, 2010 3:56 PM
Al Gore's carbon footprint gets bigger. Some pictures of his fourth home.
Given the ocean-view, Gore really can't be too concerned with rising sea levels.
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/exclusive-estimate-carbon-footprint-of.html

This hypocrite has no credibility. Its amazing anyone pays this clown to make speeches or anyone is there to listen. People are bitching about CEO bonuses. Looks like big Al has been getting some big bonuses himself. I can't believe so many people are duped by these elitist bastards.
May 4, 2010 3:56pm
CenterBHSFan's avatar

CenterBHSFan

333 - I'm only half evil

6,115 posts
May 4, 2010 4:02 PM
lol, let them eat cake!
May 4, 2010 4:02pm
redstreak one's avatar

redstreak one

Senior Member

1,152 posts
May 5, 2010 9:07 AM
He used his internet money to buy that house! lol Good night, this guy is unfreakingbelievable!
May 5, 2010 9:07am
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
May 5, 2010 10:49 AM
girevik wrote: The republicans haven't been able to win in an election since 2004. Pretty sure they even lost plenty of seats then, Bush just won a 2nd term, so it's likely been since 2002 when everyone was scared that the boogeyman was going to get them. You're calling democracy "tyrany", "socialism", "fascism", "communism", etcand declaring that the country is on the way "to ruin" beacuse of it.

Like it or not, that's the truth.

Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
And the left doesn't? Didn't they just pass a healthcare bill that a majority of the US didn't want? I'd say that is not reflective of democracy either.

I don't disagree that the right is out of touch, but the left is just as much out of touch.
May 5, 2010 10:49am
C

cbus4life

Ignorant

2,849 posts
May 5, 2010 11:04 AM
It is reflective of democracy because the people voted them into office to represent them. People spoke. Stuck with the results, whether we like it or not.
May 5, 2010 11:04am
S

sjmvsfscs08

Senior Member

2,963 posts
May 5, 2010 2:05 PM
Really because the Senators I voted for didn't get to have a say. If you can't see the health care bill was jammed down our throats, you're oblivious.
May 5, 2010 2:05pm
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
May 5, 2010 2:10 PM
sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Really because the Senators I voted for didn't get to have a say. If you can't see the health care bill was jammed down our throats, you're oblivious.
Both sides have rammed bills through at opportune times for a long time, it's not like this is the first time this has ever happened.

Just because your Senator got outvoted doesn't mean they didn't have a say. Sure, it's frustrating, but that's how it's always been when a party has both houses.
May 5, 2010 2:10pm
Devils Advocate's avatar

Devils Advocate

Brudda o da bomber

4,539 posts
May 5, 2010 2:13 PM
"Really because the Senators I voted for didn't get to have a say. If you can't see the health care bill was jammed down our throats, you're oblivious."

What do you mean ?..They said it over and over again



No... no.....no.....No... no.....no.....No... no.....no.....No... no.....no.....No... no.....no.....No... no.....no.....
May 5, 2010 2:13pm