Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Would we better off with an A. Gore administration? really? What do you think? Are you sure that a Gore administration would have accomplished anything? or was it better to let the world move on the topic leaving US behind? Will Hillary Clinton address the topic? And isn't it easier for her to take strong measures after A. Gore Nobel Prize?

Gore fell off the horse on the way to Damascus some time in 2002 so, no, I don't think Gore would have been a revolutionary President had he been awarded a win in 2000. Less criminal or incompetent than Bush, surely. But his 2000 campaign was atrocious and uninspiring.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Oct 14th, 2007 at 06:22:28 PM EST
... would have had the funds saved in a Lock Box, so it would not be in danger to the negative financial fallout from global warming over the next five decades.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Oct 14th, 2007 at 08:26:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It is true that for the Us econmy Gore would ahve been a better president.. i can clearly see social security safe. medicare adn medicaid in good shpae and the SCHIP program.

I can also see Saddam Hussein out of Iraq and without war...

But I am not sure if he would ahve een s revolutionary on global warming... I even doubt he wold ahv ebeen able to pursue even Kyoto...

that's the reasonf or this diary...

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Mon Oct 15th, 2007 at 04:19:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes. I basically agree with this statement... so if he would ahve not been revolutionary...  the question becomes..

Is it abetter a Bush do-nothing or a US trying but not doing even Kyoto.. or a US just working on Kyoto.

I clearly prefer Bush to a gore administration trying but not accomplishing even Kyoto (like Clinton)... but I am nto sure what is better .. a ush do-nothing or a world ding just Kyoto...with no more ambition...

That was my question.. yep..

I am not sure...so I wait for more comments :)

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Mon Oct 15th, 2007 at 04:22:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Probably the Iraquis could give you a less complicated opinion.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Oct 15th, 2007 at 05:33:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As I say in the diary.. Us citizens and iraqies  would give me a very clear opinion....I know.. But besides low income US citizens and iraqies the world is much better off if I do not think about global warming...The loss of US hegemony has been a great thing...

The question is.. is it worthy given global warming? One coudl say. . given the number of iraqies death adn the destruction on US citizens.. it is not... and I agree... but the US government has been involved in other masacres in central america, Latin America, Asia and Africa without having any positive outcome.

On the other ahnd.. it is tru that durign Bush father and clinton the number of americna involvements reached a minimum compared with other decades adn we expected to follow the trend.. but still

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Mon Oct 15th, 2007 at 05:52:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series