It's just not economically. Gore is a harder question to answer.
2006-07-18 14:42:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
yes they are too busy trying to get elected and then forget what they were elected to.
And to the answer above, NO the economy was going down the tubes when Bush took it over. I know because I am one who lost money the year before when the market crashed. The april before in 1999 the market plumetted. Anything Clinton got was a result of Reagan and the First President Bush.
2006-07-18 15:44:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by killowen05 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why is it that republican conservative fascist like yourself can''t bring up any facts what-so-ever and only resort to name calling? case and point, just look at your question, all I see is name calling. You probably find Al Gore boring because you have no interest in the environment, the future, or anyone else other than yourself, and how great you think your opinions are.
2006-07-18 15:07:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by ↓ImWithStupid ░░▒▒▓▓ 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because money is not our only reason to exist, a problem the right seems to have a problem with. There should be a 12 step program for GREED.
2006-07-18 14:51:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Who cares 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Huh. I thought liberals were economic strong men. You know, they want everyone else's money and they certainly have the might to take it.
Great irony, jednci! Hilarious irony!
2006-07-18 15:08:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The economy roared before bush, even after absorbing all the changes due to the cold war.
2006-07-18 15:10:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by DT 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The world may never know
2006-07-18 14:43:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by readerfreak4 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Guess you weren't alive during the 1990's.
2006-07-18 14:56:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Franklin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why are neocons such wasteful fools..
2006-07-18 14:52:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by hardartsystems 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Could you follow that up with some examples?
2006-07-18 14:48:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by normobrian 6
·
0⤊
0⤋