English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Saying that you took the initiative in creating something is different than saying you created it. Intelligent people understand that the word "in" such as you took the initiative "in" creating something, implies that it was some sort of project which you helped to develop.
Look at this and where it says "Contents" click on "2.Misconceptions in the media".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore_controversies#Misconceptions_in_the_media
I guess repubs don't understand the written English language very well.

Go figure...many of them are rednecks anyway.

2007-02-25 12:44:16 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

winemkr, although your comment is irrelevant, let me tell you something: Bush and Cheney never saw a day of combat either. As a matter of fact, those losers both dodged the draft in their own ways.

2007-02-25 12:54:45 · update #1

11 answers

Repugs do not care what the truth is, especially if it does not fit their agenda.

2007-02-25 12:48:04 · answer #1 · answered by nemesis 4 · 5 2

Gore and the Internet "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet" Gore said when asked to cite accomplishments that separate him from another Democratic presidential hopeful, former Sen. Bill Bradley of New Jersey, during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN on March 9, 1999.
Gore supported technological advances related to the advancement of the Internet, but to say that HE took the initiative in creating the Internet is a bit much.
(Sources: Transcript http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/18390.html )

2007-02-25 12:50:46 · answer #2 · answered by dottygoatbeagle 3 · 0 0

They like to take things out of context and then distort them all out of proportion, they are doing in answer to this question. I also had to laugh at the person would said Gore never saw a day of combat -- as if Bush did? At least Gore served in Viet Nam, a lot closer to the action that Bush or Cheney ever got.

2007-02-25 12:57:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

certainly your Quote is misguided. right here is the certainly Quote. BLITZER: i prefer to get to a number of the substance of kinfolk and international subject concerns in a minute, yet permit's in basic terms wrap up incredibly of the politics superb now. Why could Democrats, watching the Democratic nomination technique, assist you particularly of invoice Bradley, a chum of yours, a former colleague interior the Senate? What do you are able to hold to this that he would not inevitably carry to this technique? GORE: properly, i would be offering -- i would be offering my ingenious and prescient whilst my marketing campaign starts. and that's going to be complete and sweeping. and that i desire that that's going to be compelling sufficient to entice human beings in the direction of it. i've got confidence that that's going to be. whether it is going to emerge from my communicate with the yank human beings. i've got traveled to each little thing of this u . s . a . over the previous six years. for the period of my service interior the USA Congress, I took the initiative in becoming the internet. I took the initiative in shifting forward an entire variety of initiatives that have shown to be significant to our u . s . a .'s monetary advance and environmental secure practices, advancements in our academic device. word i'm not arguing for or against your ingredient... in basic terms saying which you would be able to have precise records.

2016-10-16 12:03:19 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Let's dissect your last statement regarding rednecks.

Red states elect republicans. True.
Red states share one or more common similarities:

* Southern (low ranking educational systems)
* Religious in nature (brainwashed to believe without critically analyzing)
* Gas and oil (Texas, Wyoming, etc) - their natural enemy is Gore, because he knows that burning our natural resources is killing the planet.

The internet thing was just a side job that added a little extra ammo to the pile.

2007-02-25 12:55:32 · answer #5 · answered by powhound 7 · 0 1

This is just one of many, many bogus "facts" bandied about by people from both sides of the isle.
It's pretty much the type of reply you'll get when your question doesn't support the answerer's preconceived conclusion - irregardless of any valid facts you might site.
The sad thing is that if it's repeated enough, people will tend to believe it as gospel.

2007-02-25 13:00:11 · answer #6 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0 1

The Pentagon started the internet. The complexity of the project was well beyond anything that algore could ever comprehend. It's kind of like global warming, algore thinks that he has his sh!t in a group, but he only has ghost writers, and voodoo science to back him up.

Oh, BTW, algore never saw a day of combat in his life.

You forgot to include Bill Clinton and his wife in that annotation Stevie.

I notice that algore's controversies page has the excessive energy consumption controversy ALREADY added to it, and a EXCUSE AS WELL.

2007-02-25 12:52:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Because everyone knows he didn't so it was rather ridicules for him to even imply that it existed because of him. Conservatives like to throw it out there cause it drives liberal crazy. To bad their not smart enough to see it.

2007-02-25 12:52:07 · answer #8 · answered by Koolaid Kid 2 · 1 0

Wiki can be edited by anyone. How do you know that The Inconvenient VP didn't change that himself?

2007-02-25 12:55:24 · answer #9 · answered by bigsey93bruschi54 3 · 0 1

It is how repuglicans discredit people, take something that is said and spin it to sound like something that was said and proceed to assassinate the character of who ever they are attacking. Example Kerry and the swift boat veterans. Not a bit of truth in it but it worked.

2007-02-25 12:50:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers