New Front Page         
NMJ Search              
International              
Islamist Terrorism      
Government & Politics
National & Local        
The Fifth Column       
Culture Wars             
Editorials                  
Analysis                   
Archive                     
NMJ Radio                 
NMJ TV                    
Constitutional Literacy
American Fifth Column
Islamist Terrorism
Books 
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...         
Facebook            
Twitter           
Site Information
About Us              
Contact Us           
US Senate
US House
Anti-Google
Wouldn't It Be Lovely
If Gore Would Go Away?

EDITORIAL Frank Salvato
January 15, 2004

"From a scientific and environmental perspective, Al Gore's speech today should be ignored. No serious policy person could give the speech Al Gore gave today." - Amy Ridenour, president of The National Center for Public Policy Research

Al Gore, the first runner-up in the 2000 Presidential Elections and self-proclaimed inventor of the Internet, will be giving a speech January 15th lambasting the Bush Administration on issues concerning the environment. Of course it is curious he would be considered an authority on the issue, as he has been so off on many of his contentions about it. From Global warming to arsenic in the drinking water, Al Gore has misled and confused the actualities of the issues. Now, that’s odd for someone so bright as to have invented the Internet, don’t you think?

Al Gore will most likely talk about how horrible the Bush Administration has been for the environment and he will no doubt cite specific issues. But like the liberal spin machine his specifics will be generalized and his facts will not be based in any factual research but rather on the misguided and uneducated mainstream beliefs of our sitcom attention-spanned society. He will be once again employing the political tactic of repeating something often enough in hopes the populace will eventually accept it as the truth.

He may talk about mercury and arsenic levels in our water and how the Bush Administration has looked the other way while the dangers of these chemicals have been allowed to increase. Regarding both chemicals he is terminally wrong.

While Gore will flash around some numbers about mercury levels the fact is there were no established standards for mercury levels with regard to drinking water until President Bush signed them into law. Even under Gore’s former boss Bill Clinton there were no guidelines and that was during an administration where Gore actually held some weight, allegedly.

As far as arsenic is concerned, President Bush delayed the lowering of arsenic levels when he put a blanket stop on the multitude of presidential orders Bill Clinton tried to sneak through between the 2000 election verification and the moment George W. Bush become the 43rd President of the United States. Bush did this so his administration could look over the orders to see if they were consistent with the idea of being good for the country. After looking at the arsenic level proposal in-depth, a proposal that was not intended to go into affect until 2006, he signed off on the lowering of the levels. Yet, Al Gore has been going around the country saying President Bush has put more arsenic into our drinking water. The rational mind would have to wonder how he could say this with a straight face or without being called a liar.

He will most likely bring up global warming, one of his favorite environmental topics. But as he contends that disasters around the globe are the result of global warming many top names in the scientific field that study the theory of global warming contend that Gore hasn’t a clue as to what he is talking about.

One of the then-Vice President's talking points went like this: "Human beings, through their burning of fossil fuels, are accelerating global warming. This increased global warming, in turn, is inducing more frequent and more powerful El Niños. In Central Florida in 1998, El Niño produced heavier rains in the spring, which increased vegetation, and a drought in the summer created the ideal conditions for wildfires.” But scientists rebuke this theory citing the fact that the El Niño patterns have had little to do with the droughts shattering Gore’s model of proof. In the end, Gore’s argument for assailing the Bush Administration on the issue of global warming is, simply put, based on innuendo, conjecture and rumor. For him to be spreading "the sky is falling” fear among the American people is to incite and it is without a doubt an under-handed political move designed to impugn the integrity of the Bush Administration’s environmental record. It seems odd that someone who allowed strip mining on his family farm would be so quick to toss about barbs.

It is becoming overwhelmingly obvious that Al Gore is a very bitter man. He is bitter because he lost the election in 2000. He is bitter because his former boss made it virtually impossible for him to ascend to his "rightful” political destiny. He is bitter that the DNC didn’t come begging for him to "save the day” from the likes of Howard Dean and Wesley Clark. He is bitter for a lot of things and for this reason he continues to lash out. The only problem with his lashing out is that his accusations are baseless. So, it bears saying, the only person’s integrity that Al Gore seems to be impugning is Al Gore’s. Again, surprising for someone with enough vision to invent the Internet.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization. Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal. The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative. Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project’s goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

hit counter

The New Media Journal.us © 2011
A Division of BasicsProject.org
 

Dreamhost Review