Posted on 08/15/2011 8:09:32 PM PDT by RED SOUTH
In an interview with an Iowa radio station on Monday, the Republican presidential contender explained his role as the Gore campaign’s Texas chairman by saying that “this was Al Gore before he invented the Internet and got to be Mr. Global Warming.”
But in fact, global warming was already a significant theme for Gore in 1987 and 1988 — long before his activism led to several books, a Nobel Prize and a part in an Academy Award-winning film. It was also well before the right gave him the "Mr. Ozone" nickname and talk radio heaped endless mockery on the future vice president.
MB supported Jimmy carter and worked on his campaign.
Also...read “Earth in the Balance” and then get back to me on Gore’s timing for his econazi leanings. He was that way long before anyone ever heard the name “Rick Perry”...or “Al Gore” for that matter.
Not the 1988 Algore. He was a certified leftist by then and totally corrupted by the Clinton machine. Perry supporting him showed incredible lack of judgement.
I did the search “Rick Perry Michael Dukakis” and I can’t find anything that says Rick supported Dukakis. And I believe someone has posted links here, that I’ve read, that say Perry voted for Bush. Do you have a link to an actual news source that says he voted for Dukakis? I am just curious.
Anyway, my point about happening after 1988 is that, some people, going beyond the discussion of Perry being a democrat in the 1980s (a serious issue which can be discussed seriously) have gone beyond that to claim that he is lying because he said the Al Gore of 1988 wasn’t the “internet inventor” and “Mr. Global Warming”.
But his statement is factually correct, and that is the point of discussing the dates. It doesn’t change that he supported a democrat, it just negates the claim that he’s a liar now.
Here are the facts: 1988 was long before his activism led to several books, a Nobel Prize and a part in an Academy Award-winning film. It was also well before the right gave him the “Mr. Ozone” nickname and talk radio heaped endless mockery on the future vice president.
So the reporter agreed -- Perry's support of Gore was LONG BEFORE he became known as the leader of the global warming kooks (Mr. Global Warming).
We are quoting a sound bite from a speech, so it's pithy and incomplete. Perry has mentioned Al Gore's global warming positions, and said he disagreed with them when he was supporting Al Gore.
The reporter mistakenly confuses "global warming was an issue for Al Gore" with "Al Gore was known as "Mr. Global Warming", something the reporter admits happened LONG AFTER the 1988 presidential election.
If you parsed that any thinner it would split an atom.
I see why it’s useless to debate you honestly. You refuse to do it.
He was a KNOWN eco nut LONG before the late 80s.
Norm Lenhart: He was that way long before anyone ever heard the name “Rick Perry”...or “Al Gore” for that matter.
The question isn't when Al Gore started believing in GLobal Warming. The question is whether Rick Perry is lying when he says that in 1988, Al Gore wasn't known as "Mr. Global Warming". As you say, it was long after he started believing in global warming that people even heard the name "Al Gore", much less started calling Al Gore "Mr. Global Warming".
Thank you for being so helpful in refuting the claim that Al Gore was already well-known as the leader of the global warming movement in 1988, and therefore putting down the lie about Perry's statement.
I bet you believe Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski...a single time either.
That’s technically true by your logic too right?
Troll boy, there’s a urinal at Trollhenge waiting just for your name.
1. Leadership abilities
2. Character
3. and conservative.
Which candidates (that are running) make it through your filter?
Rick Perry grew up in Paint Creek, north of Abilene in west Texas.
But you just said he was an eco nut way before anybody even knew his name.
We lived in the 1980s. Al Gore was not the face of global warming in the 1980s. It was just another of his bad positions on issues. It wasn't even his signature issue, just one of many things he did.
I don't know what you mean about debating honestly with me, I'm using the facts that you provide to show that Rick Perry was not lying, and you don't like that, but you have yet to show a single piece of evidence that Al Gore was ever referred to by anything like the name "Mr. Global Warming" before the 1988 elections.
The fact that Al Gore wrote a book MUCH LATER in which he mentions how much he was an eco-nut in the 1980s is hardly evidence that everybody knew it then. We didn't have his book in the 1980s.
But I guess this is what we have to attack Perry for -- the minutae of what Al Gore said about global warming over 2 decades ago. Because that is what is really important in this election.
Yesterday there was a flame war in another thread because someone had the temerity to post something Sarah Palin said all the way back in 2008, when she was McCain's VP. We were told that was out-of-bounds, because it was so long ago, and she had said different things later and people who are supporting a candidate as their VP have to say things they don't believe.
Now it seems the same people are saying that Al Gore's position on Global Warming in the 1980s is critically important in judging Rick Perry, regardless of anything he has said at any time since 1988, even though 1988 is 20 years earlier than 2008.
I suppose if we had actual quotes of things Sarah Palin said in 1988, I would be arguing that they weren't very important relative to what she is saying today (we probably do have "quotes" from her from 1988, I believe she was a sports broadcaster at the time, and they probably have her shows taped somewhere.
(Lest anybody claim I'm making false inferences, Palin has always been a republican, as she registered in 1982).
He was a KNOWN eco nut LONG before the late 80s.
“But you just said he was an eco nut way before anybody even knew his name.”
Which shows that such information was available once people did...say late 80s...say Rick Perry. and PLEASE do not even try to claim a person running for that high an office is a blank slate over his environmental stances.
You haven’t the slightest grasp of logic, reason, cause and effect or the most basic rules of debate. Do you care what you look like or are you just a paid shill that repeats talking points despite evidence to the contrary?
Don't put words in my mouth. I explicitly said that I did NOT think Sarah Palin was lying. Nor did I say that Palin Supporters were lying. I said that Sarah Palin SUPPORTERS make arguments that suggest that Sarah Palin was lying.
I know, it's a bit more complicated than the 4-word mis-statements of my words that you used. Real arguments often are more complex than people want to think about.
What amounts to lying? Everybody here knows that the public persona of Al Gore in 1988 was NOTHING like the public persona of Al Gore nowadays. Heck, everybody knows that Al Gore in 1992 was not the joke that he is today.
That was exactly what Perry was saying -- don't judge his support of Al Gore in 1988 by what your image is of Al Gore today, because that image is a lot different than the Al Gore of 1988.
You and others are the one that are getting hyper-literal with his statement, claiming that it was a specific instance of fact-claiming; I'm refuting you using that same specific fact-claiming and literal interpretation.
You can't have it both ways. If you are going to talk about generalities of the statement, then you fail in your argument because we all know that generally speaking, the statement is absolutely correct -- The Al Gore in 1988 was NOT the internet-creating, love-canal-inspiring, global warming nutcase spokesperson that he is today. That is an absolute fact.
But if you want to take it entirely literally as a fact-claim, then IN FACT Al gore had not yet claimed to have invented the internet, nor was he known as Mr. Global Warming, in 1988. That is exactly what Perry said, and that is literally the truth.
And if you want to argue that, then all you need to is provide specific evidence that Al Gore wsa reported as inventing the internet in some newspaper before 1988, or that Al Gore was being called Mr. Global Warming, or Mr. Ozone, in newspapers and on radio shows before 1988.
This very article admits that neither of those is the case, and therefore shows that Perry was being truthful. Your arguments also show his truthfulness, because you have admitted, and not withdrawn your claim, that al gore's name wasn't known when he first was an eco-nut.
People will have to decide if they can support a candidate who was a democrat until 1989. But they don't need to be mislead by false claims that Perry is lying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.