deleted because people here can't take any criticism of Al Gore.

[stevedeshazer]

:wtf:

[NanceGreggs]

1. Well, there's nothing more to be said ...

It came from the ENQUIRER, so it must be true.

Why allow the RW and the so-called "media" to have all the fun? Let's do their dirty work for them!

[stevedeshazer]

4. I only bring it up because it's the new right-wing toy.

Or distraction.

We're gonna hear about it anyway. Better to be out front, no matter how ridiculous the charge.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

9. Go ask John Edwards about the National Enquirer n/t

[NanceGreggs]

15. Why?

I don't care about John Edwards' private life any more than I care about Gore's.

And I certainly don't care what the Enquirer has to say about either one of them - or anyone else.

But I do think it's really important to cite garbage tabloids on a Democratic website when their latest "scoop" is something scandalous about a prominent Democrat. Keeps things fair and balanced and all.

[Forkboy]

19. Did the story affect only John Edwards, or did it have larger ramifications for Dems?

Personally, I don't care who fucks who and with what, but if this is true (and I don't think it is), then it affects more than just Al Gore's private life. If it turns out to be true it will be used to discredit him in every way, including his enormously important contribution to climate change awareness. They will hammer home how he can't be trusted, ergo, his work on CG must also be untrustworthy. And we don't have time for that kind of setback. This is how the game gets played, and sticking our heads in the sand because the story is unsavory is pretty shortsighted. Scolding others for it even more so.

[stevedeshazer]

24. Yes, of course, Nance

It's important to ignore what's coming. :sarcasm:

Come on, really? Of course it's garbage. DUer's are smart enough to know that. Give us some credit. My post is an alert, not agreement.

Jeez.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

26. Well

I think it is important to note that, that "tabloid" broke the John Edwards story and covered it when no one else did. They were completely right about every aspect of it, including the love child.

It is easy to dismiss the Enquirer as tabloid fodder and there is no doubt that these kind of stories are tabloid fodder, but in the case of Edwards it was completely true.

The Gore story might be bullshit I dont know but to dismiss it out of hand seems to be a bit naive given their recent track record.

Like you, I could care less about Edwards' or Gore's private life, its none of my business. But imagine if John Edwards had gotten the nomination in 2008, we all would have cared then.

[Subdivisions]

47. . n/t

[drm604]

2. Wow.

First I had a picture taken of me with John Edwards, then I had a picture taken of me with Al Gore. Is there a pattern here?

Politicians, if you see me approaching you with a camera, run! Maybe I should start going to Republican events and getting my picture taken with their candidates.

All joking aside, considering that this is the Enquirer, I'm calling bullshit unless there's more evidence.

[gateley]

7. Ha! Start with Boehner and McConnell. I'm sure we'll all chip in to cover your

expenses.

The thing about the Enquirer, though, is that they nailed it on Edwards and everybody blew it off because of the source. They've certainly gotten a LOT of things wrong, but since the Edwards thing, I don't necessarily discount them out of hand. All we can do is wait and see, and hope this is one of those times when they're totally off base.

Let us know when you're ready to head to DC for Operation Photo Op -- standing by!

[drm604]

11. They were right about Edwards

but that doesn't mean that I'm not going to assume innocent until proven guilty. It could easily be the case that the first one fabricated the story and the other two are copycats.

[gateley]

46. Agree -- I always assume innocent unless proven otherwise because even

legit organizations make mistakes, it's just that I'm not dismissing Enquirer reports automatically like I used to.

[monmouth]

42. HA! Well, it's obvious you will be going to hell, right? Pictures taken

with these guys would deserve gold/silver frames for me. LOL. I've noticed little to no discussion re Gore, of course I keep my tv off most of the time. I think the media knows this is a non-story, most unlikely true and when the news came out that the Gores were separating, bingo....You've got a made up story by a mentally challenged middle-aged woman who wants a payout. That's how I'm reading it anyway...

[drm604]

43. I'm not sure why I'm going to hell, but I'll let that pass. lol

I watch a lot of political TV and I'm online a lot and I've seen very little discussion of this so I think you may be right that the media isn't that interested. Then again, Gore isn't running for office. If he were I'm sure this would be 24/7 for at least a short while.

I do think it's likely that the story was made up by the first woman and the other two are copycats.

[monmouth]

44. Oh no, the "going to hell" was strictly tongue in cheek. I'd give anything

to have had my pic taken with these guys. I need to start using the sarcasm thingy. Love your posts.

[drm604]

45. Oh I realized it was tongue in cheek. So was my response.

I'm glad you like my posts. It's nice to know that somebody notices me on here. :hi:

[Bolo Boffin]

3. How awful.

Hey, did you hear that a really big financial reform bill just became law yesterday?

[drm604]

5. Why no, I didn't. I'm interested in more important things like what the Enquirer claims about Gore.

The timing of these distractions is interesting isn't it?

[stevedeshazer]

6. I did.

This is how they intend to distract us.

[Radical Activist]

8. TAKE CARE OF THIS!

WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THIS CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM RIGHT NOW!!!

[spiritual_gunfighter]

10. Edited your own post about the new Al Gore accusations

uh okay.

[stevedeshazer]

14. That's funny. You edited your post, too!

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/exclusive_al_gore_sex_scandal_two_new_female_accusers_assault/celebrity/69024

[spiritual_gunfighter]

16. Yeah I did the first post was rude

I dont think we should be afraid to post something just because it might make people mad or that they might attack you for trashing Al Gore.

[cherokeeprogressive]

12. I'm going to run for political office...

Who wouldn't, knowing that it's the only pathway to blowjobs from people you've never met other than straight out prostitution??

I may have finally found the path to eternal happiness...

[Bluebear]

13. You just want President Palin to win!!!

:cry:

[stevedeshazer]

17. But Al Is God!!

It's right there in front of you, and you just don't want to see it.

[Bluebear]

20. Good heavens.

Al won Election 2000. He's a leader on climate change. And to think that posting an Enquirer story on a Democratic website is intended to "bring him down" and that we aren't adult enough to know what's being said out there about politicians is just plum ridic.

[NightWatcher]

18. Saint Al?

Dare not harm his name here.

Dare not mention that since slinking away from the 2000 election all he's done is make billions through venture capital and book and movies where he talks a great game.

Dare not insult Saint Al, The Holy, dear sir.

You should say a thousand "hail al's" for your sins. Go forth and doubt no more, my son

[NanceGreggs]

21. Oh, you're SO right ...

People just can't take any "criticism" of Al Gore - even when it's based on an article in an above-reproach trash tabloid.

People are just too think-skinned nowadays.

[blogslut]

22. How do you equate a tabloid smear to criticism?

Those are some powerful mental gymnastics you must perform.

[Bluebear]

25. FFS did he say he agreed with the article? Are we not adult enough to read what's out there?

stevedeshazer is a valuable member here. Insulting with "mental gymnastics" here is really uncalled for.

[blogslut]

27. He edits his OP to describe his contribution as "criticism"

Now, you tell me, how is does one equate a tabloid smear to criticism?

[Bluebear]

28. Semantics. The poster was accused of being anti-Democratic, weak, doing the right wing's work at DU.

I certainly understand why he would withdraw the post after those ridiculous assertions.

[blogslut]

30. I'm not opposed to a member posting the story

I am opposed to the wording in the re-edit of the OP title and the various invectives flouted against Mr. Gore in this very thread.

But, what can I say? Haters gonna hate.

[Bluebear]

32. "Haters gonna hate". Stevedeshazer is not a hater, I can assure you.

[stevedeshazer]

34. Thanks.

You shouldn't have to defend me here; my record stands for itself on DU. I appreciate it very much.

For crying out loud, all I did was post an article about him that was unflattering. You'd think I'd have clubbed a baby seal to death or something.

Al Gore isn't God or something, he puts his pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else.

[Orsino]

36. Then you weren't even criticizing Gore.

Did you have a criticism to offer?

[Forkboy]

23. Fuck the reaction here...post the story.

It has ramifications beyond Gore diddling anyone, and if people want to stick their heads in the sand so be it. No reason for you to accommodate them. ;)

[stevedeshazer]

29. Here

Be careful: Saint Al's folks might be offended.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/national_enquirer_two_more_mas.html

[Bluebear]

31. Oregon Live is trash! Trash!

:cry:

[NanceGreggs]

33. So ...

... you've gone from "I only bring it up because it's the new right-wing toy.
Or distraction. We're gonna hear about it anyway. Better to be out front, no matter how ridiculous the charge." to "St. Al's folks being offended".

Nice ...

[stevedeshazer]

35. Well, you are NanceGreggs

I know you're smart enough to reconcile the two thoughts.

I'm just stevedeshazer.

Jeez.

[Warren Stupidity]

37. I have no idea what the o-op was but the new op is crap.

[Forkboy]

39. It was this story.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/national_enquirer_two_more_mas.html

[sendero]

38. I said this before you all believed the Edwards story....

.. and I will say it again now. Lumping the Enquirer in with the rest of the tabloids is a huge mistake. They only run stuff they can prove in a court of law after getting their asses sued off long ago.

If it is in the Enquirer it is almost definitely true, whether you like it or not.

[Edith Ann]

40. Al

First, Gore is a private citizen working as a private citizen. I know he has a good resume. Second, How many private citizen CEO's of companies, a lot of them right wingers with family values, do you suppose are helping themselves to what doesn't belong to them? If Al's fair game, so are they. Enquirer start looking a the banking CEO's and Captains of industry and I'm sure you'll find more sex scandals than you can find paper to print them. Go after Newt. God knows he's a slug and should never be president. How about Viter and Ensign. They are still in office. Play fair and be an equal opportunity sex scandal monger.

[Javaman]

41. Fail. nt