M
Manhattan Buckeye
Posts: 7,566
Apr 29, 2010 10:41pm
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.
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.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Apr 29, 2010 10:54pm
This.Manhattan Buckeye wrote: Webster's dictionary of the word "charlatan" should have his picture next to the definition.
S
sjmvsfscs08
Posts: 2,963
Apr 29, 2010 10:59pm
He's a piece of shit.
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Apr 29, 2010 11:04pm
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).
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Apr 29, 2010 11:09pm
True, we'd probably have Bush!ccrunner609 wrote:We wouldnt have Obama.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).
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Apr 30, 2010 9:06am
Apparently there's a lot of money to be made in the global warming/climate crisis/sky is falling business.
Little Danny
Posts: 4,288
Apr 30, 2010 9:30am
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.
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.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
May 1, 2010 11:26pm
Fixed it for you.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.
G
girevik
Posts: 97
May 2, 2010 10:09am
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....
I guess the rules only apply to some....
believer
Posts: 8,153
May 2, 2010 10:10am
It's not against the rules when you post the truth.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....
G
girevik
Posts: 97
May 2, 2010 10:33am
Yeah.
Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
believer
Posts: 8,153
May 2, 2010 10:34am
Why does the left hate the truth so much?
G
girevik
Posts: 97
May 2, 2010 11:03am
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?
Like it or not, that's the truth.
Why does the riiight hate democracy so much?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
May 2, 2010 11:09am
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.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....
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.
G
girevik
Posts: 97
May 2, 2010 11:19am
Read above- LJ
G
girevik
Posts: 97
May 2, 2010 11:26am
Unless you live in a parallel universe referring to Al Gore as anything other than Al Gore violates your own rules.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
May 2, 2010 11:28am
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.girevik wrote: Unless you live in a parallel universe referring to Al Gore as anything other than Al Gore violates your own rules.
Now, like I said, back on topic. If you want to continue this discussion, PM me. Any further posts off topic WILL be deleted.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
May 4, 2010 3:56pm
Al Gore's carbon footprint gets bigger. Some pictures of his fourth home.
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.
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/exclusive-estimate-carbon-footprint-of.htmlGiven the ocean-view, Gore really can't be too concerned with rising sea levels.
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.
CenterBHSFan
Posts: 6,115
May 4, 2010 4:02pm
lol, let them eat cake!
redstreak one
Posts: 1,152
May 5, 2010 9:07am
He used his internet money to buy that house! lol Good night, this guy is unfreakingbelievable!
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
May 5, 2010 10:49am
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.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?
I don't disagree that the right is out of touch, but the left is just as much out of touch.
C
cbus4life
Posts: 2,849
May 5, 2010 11:04am
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.
S
sjmvsfscs08
Posts: 2,963
May 5, 2010 2:05pm
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.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 5, 2010 2:10pm
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.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.
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.
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
May 5, 2010 2:13pm
"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.....
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.....