Had Al Gore won the Election of 2000, we'd all have gotten a pony

At least that's what is currently being argued on a remarkable Tuesday Open Thread at Delawareliberal.

Using a wonderful counterfactual chart by Bruce Bartlett that argues that we would have a $5.6 Trillion surplus now if Al Gore had won the Election of 2000, DelDem goes on to argue that

I believe under a President Gore, 9/11 never happens.

Which then socialistic ben takes to its logical (?) extreme, first arguing Trutherism

it was ALLOWED to happen under Bush.

And then (according to many commenters there) apparently veering into racism. . . .

With President Gore, there would have been no President Obama

It goes without saying that with President Gore there also would be no global warming and no insensitive rap lyrics (Tipper would not have allowed that), and that we would now be awaiting (or just on the other side of) the rapture.

For those who are not particularly religious, replace "rapture" in previous sentence with "Age of Aquarius."

Comments

delacrat said…

Al Gore will always be "Holy Joe" Lieberman's running mate to me. That he selected an overtly intervention happy, warfare state enthusiast indicates he would not have cared if he offended the anti-war movement, of which he was hardly at the forefront.

June 26, 2012 at 7:21 PM

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...

Search This Blog