Dennis Byrne; Dissing Al Gore
Dennis Byrne's latest column in the Chicago Tribune is serious slap at Al Gore. "Scary thought: Al Gore could be in charge" supposes that if Gore had been elected in 2000 we'd be a less safe place, with many more missing buildings from Islamofascist attacks, a war between Syria and Israel, and a brewing nuclear arms race between Iran and Iraq, $8.35 a gallon gas and 9% unemployment.
I'm not sure Byrne is right on every count in his op/ed indictment of Gore, but I'm sure he's probably closer to the truth than fiction with lots of it.
Having listened closely to Gore in 2000, and since, I too am convinced that the aftermath of 9/11 would have been much different had he been in charge, and we would be less safe. Now, both Byrne and I could be wrong. Gore has the ability; as do all but one person in the world; of seeing things not through the eyes of the President, but instead of an outside critic. Maybe, had he won the Oval office in 2000, Gore would have had his perceptions of the world changed by 9/11 in a different manner. However, I don't think he would have, the reactions of the previous administration during things like the 1993 WTC bombing, and various other terror attacks makes me side with Byrne.
I'm sure that Gore supporters will hammer Byrne over his commentary, claiming as folks have for 6 years that somehow "we are to blame" and had Gore been elected 9/11 wouldn't have occurred. Those folks are blind, (along with deaf and dumb), they ignore that terrorists were attacking the US and it's interests long before the 2000 election. It just makes them feel better about losing to say that it's Bush's fault.
Go ahead and read Byrnes column, also available at his blog, and let me know what you think.
Technorati Tags: Al Gore, September 11th, Dennis Byrne, Terrorism
I'm not sure Byrne is right on every count in his op/ed indictment of Gore, but I'm sure he's probably closer to the truth than fiction with lots of it.
Having listened closely to Gore in 2000, and since, I too am convinced that the aftermath of 9/11 would have been much different had he been in charge, and we would be less safe. Now, both Byrne and I could be wrong. Gore has the ability; as do all but one person in the world; of seeing things not through the eyes of the President, but instead of an outside critic. Maybe, had he won the Oval office in 2000, Gore would have had his perceptions of the world changed by 9/11 in a different manner. However, I don't think he would have, the reactions of the previous administration during things like the 1993 WTC bombing, and various other terror attacks makes me side with Byrne.
I'm sure that Gore supporters will hammer Byrne over his commentary, claiming as folks have for 6 years that somehow "we are to blame" and had Gore been elected 9/11 wouldn't have occurred. Those folks are blind, (along with deaf and dumb), they ignore that terrorists were attacking the US and it's interests long before the 2000 election. It just makes them feel better about losing to say that it's Bush's fault.
Go ahead and read Byrnes column, also available at his blog, and let me know what you think.
Technorati Tags: Al Gore, September 11th, Dennis Byrne, Terrorism
posted by Crazy Politico at 9:35 AM
0Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home