The reason I despise Bush is because he is the personification of the dumbing down of America to it's lowest common denomenator. (Not surprising for the former governor of a state that ranked 49th in standardized education tests).
He is not only a fool but he's anti-intellectual. People who can speak polysyllabicaly frighten him. No wonder. Most times he's tried to say a "big word," he mangles its prononciation or simply creates a new word, or just sounds ridiculous.
Today's Bush quote from the NY Daily News (2/19/2000) is "I understand small business growth. I was one." (Sigh). Actually Bush ran 2 corporations - into ruin.
I also despise him for his attempts to force his right wing views on everyone. From cutting federal funding to agencies whose health policies covered abortion, to seeking to ban stem cell research, (which I'm sure he has no clue about), to cutting welfare funding to single parents (who need it the most) reflects this.
I dispise his failure to act. He's good at making vaguely threatening speeches (albiet ones that sound comical b/c of his mispronounciations), but he just doesn't follow through. He's talked up the war against terrorism, but hasn't delivered on his rehtoric. I suppose that's because he manages to find ways to ally the US with terrorist states such as Saudi Arabia. He talked big against North Korea and their nukelear (his pronounciation) program, and their threat as part of the axis of evil, but didn't have any problems allowing them to sell scud missles to Yemin. Remember the Cole? Remember the anti-US sentiment expressed there to this day? Bush doesn't.
I could go on about Bush and his ineffectual, inconsistent, silly ramblings, and his transparant effect to buy the next election with a tax cut for the wealthy, but you asked specifically my opinon about Gore.
Make no mistake - Gore was a terrible candidate. But he was at least an intelligent man, and intelligent people have at least a chance of learning. Bush's pitiful intellect does not present him with this opportunity. Yes I'm sure Gore would be doing a better job.
Gore was the lesser of two lousy candidates. Forgetting about Bush's lack of qualificaitions, Bush is frightening b/c of his simplistic (and extremist) views coupled with stupidity. These views are dictated by the religious right. Lieberman, Gore's running mate was even WORSE than Bush in this regard. Fanatics of any stripe are dangerous people.
Bush and the invisible man (Cheney) ran against Gore and Lieberman. It was clear that Bush would be a disaster. It was clear that Gore was the better candidate b/w the two (and the people of this country agreed). Lieberman had potential to be far worse than Bush b/c he was not a stupid man, just a nut who liked to blame movies and video games for society's problems. If Gore had been elected (well he was so rather let me say, if Bush had not stolen the presidency) Lieberman would be a non-entity like most vice presidents. His wackyness only would have become relevant if Gore had died, and the odds were greatly against this.
It's a very sad commentary on our country that Bush and Gore were the only options. If the democrats put up a halfway decent candidate, the election is in the bag. But look at who has currently announced their candidacy. Still, no matter who ends up running against Bush has my vote, not b/c of his qualification, but b/c it's a vote against Bush.
<img src="http://members.aol.com/rnfpantera/hking1">