Al Gore still doesn’t understand just why he lost in 2000. Eliminating the filibuster rule on appointees is not a “lust for one-party domination.” If anything, it’ll reassert the principle that it should take 51 senators to deny a confirmation, not 41 the way Democrats want to keep it. Someone should make campaign buttons that say “51, not 41” or something to that effect. The former senator offers us this gem, which just shows how bitter liberal Democrats have become:
“This aggressive new strain of right-wing religious zealotry is actually a throwback to the intolerance that led to the creation of America in the first place,” Gore said as many in the audience stood and applauded. The speech was sponsored by the liberal group MoveOn’s political action committee.
Gore recalled that when the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Bush v. Gore in December 2000, handing the presidency to George W. Bush [typical AP liberal bias here -Ed.], he accepted the decision.
Accepted the decision, yes, but still whines to a liberal group who blatantly approves of comparing Bush to Hitler. He just can’t let it go. And MoveOn’s name is blatant false advertising, too. Why can’t Al Gore complain about that?
Edit: I forgot to comment on the contents of Gore’s quote, which is why I bothered to include it here in the first place. Is he suggesting that people such as Washington, Franklin, Adams, et al. were intolerant when they chose to break from England? If he’s suggesting that England’s religious intolerance at the time led to colonists coming here, how the hell does this current debate compare to it? He’s not making any sense here, folks, yet people still cheer him. I’m flabbergasted that some people still don’t seem to get the main point of ending judicial nominee filibusters.