Sex Poodle

July 9th, 2010

Inspired by Al Gore: big lummox or crazed sex poodle? (WashingtonPost.com 6/24/10), Global Warming Causes Masseuse to Accuse Al Gore of Trying to Have Sex With Her (DougPowers.com 6/24/10), Police reopen inquiry into sex allegation against Gore (Washington Post 7/02/10), A very inconvenient masseuse: How saint Al Gore, the sanctimonious eco-crusader, lost his halo (and his wife!) Daily Mail 7/03/10), Al Gore’s moral confusion (Jerusalem Post via ClimateChangFraud 7/05/10), and Tipper Gore Isn’t Buying Masseuse’s Story (People 7/09/10).

“Al Gore is a pervert and a sexual predator. He’s not what people think he is — he’s a sick man!” – Gore groping accuser Molly Hagerty (Washington Post 7/02/10)


Like everyone else, I was surprised by the recent revelation

Of Al and Tipper Gore’s separation.

In spite of apparent marital bliss (at least that’s how they portrayed it),

It’s ironic that Bill and Hillary are the ones that have made it.


Could this recent groping allegation

Be the reason for the Gores’ separation?

Could this have caused the marriage to sunder?

Is it even true? I wonder.


The incident shows a lack of character

That for Gore seems out of character.

But what makes hardest for me to believe it’s true

Is that Gore just seems too nerdy, something like that to do.


It’s hard to imagine a guy like Gore

Doing the things he’s now being investigated for.

Impossible? No, but it’s strange there have been no other cases

Of other such behavior at other times or places.

(Even Tipper says that Al wouldn’t something like that do,

Though it would be in her interest to say the allegation’s true.)


For now, I’m willing to give Al the benefit of the doubt

(That’s what “innocent until proven guilty” is all about).

If he did do it and now’s gotten caught,

I’m sure it’s gonna cost him a lot.


Either way, as all good climate change deniers know

(For examples, watch the videos below),

This and Inhofe’s igloo conclusively squash

The myth of Gore’s global warming hogwash.

***

Here’s Portland, Oregon’s KGW-TV Channel 8’s report (that’s where the alleged assault happened).
 

Here’s the Fox News report.

Here’s climate expert Sean Hannity back during the big Feb. 2010 snowstorm.

Here’s Alex Jones’ “report” (read Ballad of a Thin Man for more about him).

Sphere: Related Content

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Democrats, Environment, What ails us | 1 Comment »

Get Music, Movies, and More With SuperPass - 14 Day Free Trial

Stream 7 million songs and download MP3s with free Napster trial Follow Newsericks on Twitter

Comments

One Response to “Sex Poodle”

  1. Rohita Says:

    TLDR: politics stay the hell out of scneicePolitics has no business in scneice, whatsoever. By using the scientific method, we aim to figure out the overwhelming number of things surrounding us that we do not understand.Good scneice always allows for open mindedness and allows in different thinking where there is merit, following evidence to the logical conclusions it leads.When politics gets injected into scneice, it almost always starts with the desired answer and works it way backward to cherry-pick information that will support the result. While the contrived evidence is plainly brittle to most scientists, politics also adds an entire belief component, clouding the process when discussed outside of the scientific community. That is to say just because you are more passionate does not mean you are more correct.As a scientist, I can objectively see that Roy Spencer (the article author) not only writes a paper that flies in the face of stacks of other papers, not only see that he is a supporter of Intelligent Design, and I can still say, well so what, let’s see what he has to say . I don’t know jack about the cloud formations he is talking about, so I have no idea if he is right, wrong, deceptive, or ground breaking.But I know other scientists will take up his work and over the course of 1, 2, 5, 10 years, we’ll know if he is right. No one puts too much emphasis on a single paper is what I am getting at. A single paper can gain momentum quickly by follow-up research, replicated by others, but one paper alone does not strike down a theory.There’s a good reason for this. Quite simply, there are very few things you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt are true. For example, gravity, something we take for granted and every fiber of being tells us it exists, is just a theory (google/wiki it if you don’t believe me).Politics speaks in much more absolute terms, caring far less about accuracy. It perverts the openness of scneice to score points in such a way that can only make people of a true scientific background roll their eyes and shake their heads.I’m not going to call this guy a fraud or even say he is wrong. I’m not going to talk about Al Gore. I simply want to say, if you are going to hold up a piece of scientific work, then respect the entire process, taking all bodies of work into account, and do not cherry-pick the studies here and there that support your political beliefs.

Leave a Reply

 Comment Form 

*