I don’t like politicians.

So, considering that point of view, my take is simple: Gore was right in 1992 and he was right again in 2002.

While people are doing mental back-flips over that statement, the reasoning is simple: Hussein was a threat back in 1992. He had WMD’s (we kept the receipts.) He was aggressive toward his neighbors, etc. Gore was correct in being critical of the Reagan/Bush administration in their dealing with Hussein. By 2002, when Gore stated that Hussein was not a threat to the US, he said so because the sanctions imposed by the UN during the Bush Sr. and Clinton administrations had removed said WMD’s. Hussein was no longer a threat, not to his neighbors or to us.

I still hate Gore, but I’m not going to criticism him for hypocrisy he didn’t create.

I read an interesting article once, where the author was claiming that the Internet served to make our society more divided, and issues more polemical. That kind of flies in the face of “the net bringing us all together” meme, but it kinda makes sense. Given any view you might have, there is going to be a cadre of people out there that totally agree with you. Why reach out and have an argument with someone you disagree with when you can just lurk with those of similar minds? Then there is less motivation to actually delve into issues, to struggle with a topic to perhaps become more enlightened, etc. Interesting perspective.

And here I am, doing just that! Reading Glenn Greenwald, Truthdig, Huffington, etc. Hmmm, perhaps I should start hitting Drudge too. Well, actually, I do have to say that my favorite blog/program out there is Left, Right and Center which I think does do a fair turn at trying to have a broad perspective. At least, they seem to do a better job than Bill Maher at getting a balanced group together (that’s not to say that I’m not a huge fan of Maher, but he does often keep the sides off balance in his favor).

-c