Letters to the Editor
-
They may try to destroy Al Gore again
. . . but they might not succeed this time. I've been watching him these last few years and he's changed. I think he's ready to fight back - and without feeling a need to strike out at his fellow Democrats during the primary season. With most of the DLC flacks working for Hillary Clinton, he'll be free to listen to his own wisdom this time. The supposed wisdom of the DLC political machine are part of the reason he lost in 2000. In their absence, Al Gore can be his own man, fight back against the media with grace and strength, and give the average American hope again.
Tall Woman
-
He Can't Be Destroyed
The only fault I ever found with Al Gore was the way he over compensated when he felt compromised. For example, when Clinton was impeached, Gore emphatically proclaimed that history books would come to regard Bill Clinton as one of our greatest presidents. While that may or may not come to pass, I was thinking that, at that moment, Gore was trying to convince himself of something about which he felt very conflicted. It was awkward.
Rather than let a questionable election result destroy him, he went on to explore his passions and has been rewarded with an Academy Award and a nomination for a Nobel. Stellar acheivements to be sure, but the biggest reward of all is that it's clear that this man now knows who he is and is obviously comfortable in his own skin.
Although there are some very good candidates in the running for 2008, I don't see any of them possessing this particular quality - Democrat or Republican.
I like Al Gore and I think he has his facts and priorities in order. The press can do their worst, but they can't destroy him.
I hope he decides to go for it.
-
Why do journalists suddenly love Al Gore?
In 1998, I returned to the US after a six-year stay in Europe. The European press had been (all too) correct in reporting that, in the US, a "moral" cohort on the right was trying to destroy the Clinton presidency because of his sexual affair with a consenting adult woman. What puzzled me, though, was the the American press's continual sniping at the vice president during the Clinton impeachment circus. A cartoon--in the NY Times!--mocked Al Gore for being reserved. Not for being a loud-mouthed, know-nothing political yegg;--but for being quiet and self-possessed, two qualities that translate as "lacking charisma" in our US of A.
A bare two years later, when an intellectually indifferent, and obviously unqualified, George W. Bush was paraded in front of us television-watchers as a serious candidate for the presidency, the same persons and institutions in the press treated him seriously. It seems that their shit detectors have been switched off for a very long time; a most unfortunate circumstance for this country and this world. Now come the consequences.
-
Actually,...
If memory serves...most of us voted for him last time, notwithstanding Nader or the media. It was Reinquist, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas,and O'Connor who didn't.
And, with apologies to another beloved person who lost to W. because of how the press treated her,
Poor journalists! They can't help it. They were born with silver laptops down their throats.
-
Al Gore: Don't get it
I don't understand the buzz around Al Gore (besides the attention he gets from the media). The most recent ABC/Washington Post poll showed 14 percent of Dems prefer him (which is pretty good).
Don't get me wrong: I have alot of affection for him, but he has a high profile on one issue: global warming. That's it. I'm glad he's dedicated himself to it and that he is doing imporant work, but that alone without a complete policy platform addressing a number of issues—or a delineated vision of the country's progressive future—isn't enough for me to support him for the presidency.
-
Absolutely right on
Absolutely right on Joe.
It is sooo frustrating to read the crafted rightwing lies that echo their way out into my daily newspaper. Maureen Dowd especially is nothing more than a very witty dogpiler. What is it about the media bus that the chatterers cannot bear to acknowledge a truly standout person---yet until only last year gave free passes to fools and sociopaths?
Same treatment as Gore for Howard Dean. They ask for a straight talker and when one stands up they use not substance but technique to knock him right down.
-
One issue?
JohnAlive. One issue? What are you talking about, Gore was right on Iraq from the start. So now thats two - the most important two. How many do you need? I like Al. He has character to burn. I like Joe Conason as he is almost always right. The problem we have is the Whore Corporate media. We can't defeat them so we must surplant them. I hope the "new media" will make them obsolete. It sure looks like thats how things are headed. Al Gore would be a better President than just about any other choice except Russ Feingold. I don't think he will run. But then if he wins the Noble peace prize and it looks like he might, who knows. If you do run Al, give the Mediawhores the middle finger.
-
He has said he isn't running ...
... but people still don't get.
Johnalive says:
[Gore's stand on climate change] alone without a complete policy platform addressing a number of issues—or a delineated vision of the country's progressive future—isn't enough for me to support him for the presidency.
This would be a valid criticism if Gore was running. He's not. He's a global warming activist.
It seems that even people who aren't willing to support a Gore run for president automatically assume he is.
Look, I'd like to see a Gore run as much as anyone. But until he announces, let's not judge him on something he keeps saying he won't do.
-
This man, and we, have been done wrong
but it wasn't by Nader. I voted for Nader in 2000. While he may act like a self centered jerk now, he was right on in '99 and 2000. He was the only voice progressives had. Clinton and Gore did nothing of note for the environment until the last months of Clinton's term. They were for NAFTA and for the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
HOWEVER, Al Gore won the election. If wouldn't have been close though, if the media had done their duty of reporting. Instead we got months of smart ass bullshit about Gore's clothes and 'inventing the Internet'. Gore didn't deserve that and neither did the country.
Once the war started, Gore was the highest profile politician in the land to forcefully denounce it. He also made several speeches denouncing the abolition of our civil liberties. The national media permanently discredited themselves, by their treatment of Gore.