Gore’s Mistake

Filed under: Al Gore, Climate Change, Global Warming — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on July 23, 2008 @ 2:00 pm CEST

Al Gore makes quite some mistakes when he tries to explain to people what they (we) should do about global warming, but Vincent Carroll explains one of those mistakes quite well: Gore’s impossible ‘plan’ for the US to “commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.” (more…)

Al Gore

Filed under: Al Gore, United States — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on July 18, 2008 @ 1:00 pm CEST

Although I agree with Al Gore that something has to be done about climate change, and that there are many things the US and the West as a whole can do about this problem, I’ve got to say that the man’s arrogance and obvious left-wing bias make it difficult for me to publicly support anything he suggests. (more…)

Out of Control Super-Delegates

Filed under: 2008 elections, Al Gore — Jason, Managing Editor on March 25, 2008 @ 4:13 pm CET

In a move that highlights the potential for mass chaos at the Democratic Convention, Florida Congressman Tim Mahoney is floating the idea of a super-delegate coalition throwing both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama overboard in favor of…wait for it…Al Gore.

While much has been made by the Obama camp of the destructiveness of super-delegates frustrating the will of 51% of Democratic primary voters, the potential of frustrating the will of 100% of Democratic primary voters would be infinitely worse.

And the prospect of yet another droning, preachy Al Gore campaign is enough to make moderates run screaming for the exits from a Democratic Party that currently holds a significant advantage among this critical swing demographic.

Al Gore Accepts Nobel Prize

Filed under: Al Gore, Environment, Global Warming, United States — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on December 11, 2007 @ 7:44 pm CET

Yesterday (my apologies, this was put on the timer for yesterday but, for some reason, didn’t get published) former Vice President Al Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize. To watch his acceptance speech, click here (entire text follows below). One of the main points he made:

One hundred and nineteen years ago, a wealthy inventor read his own obituary, mistakenly published years before his death. Wrongly believing the inventor had just died, a newspaper printed a harsh judgment of his life’s work, unfairly labeling him “The Merchant of Death” because of his invention — dynamite. Shaken by this condemnation, the inventor made a fateful choice to serve the cause of peace. Seven years later, Alfred Nobel created this prize and the others that bear his name. (more…)

VF on Gore, Bush

Filed under: Al Gore, George Bush — Pieter Dorsman on September 17, 2007 @ 5:17 am CEST

OK, my guilty pleasure this weekend was the new edition of Vanity Fair, which is a must-read for political and culture junkies. There were two very instructive pieces in it this month, the most revealing one no doubt by Evegenia Peretz (yes, Marty’s daughter) piece on how the traditional media (Notably NYT and WaPo) influenced the 2000 campaign. The rightwing blogosphere should take note:

Perhaps reporting in this vein was just too gratifying to the press for it to stop. As Time magazine’s Margaret Carlson admitted to Don Imus at the time, “You can actually disprove some of what Bush is saying if you really get into the weeds and get out your calculator, or look at his record in Texas. But it’s really easy, and it’s fun to disprove Al Gore. As sport, and as our enterprise, Gore coming up with another whopper is greatly entertaining to us.”

A study conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center and the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that 76 percent of stories about Gore in early 2000 focused on either the theme of his alleged lying or that he was marred by scandal, while the most common theme about Bush was that he was “a different kind of Republican.”

The article also reveals that Gore was by far the most serious candidate and the one to be quite uncomfortable hanging around the press corps in a folksy manner. Possibly the fact that he was still Veep at the time played a part in this, but it is also quite plausible that Gore’s character just did not fit into the sort of campaign format that we have become used too. Some journalists may now lament the merciless treatment they meted out to Gore eight years ago.

In same issue - alas not available online - a piece on the bunker mentality that has permeated what is left of the Bush presidency by Todd Purdum. If you wonder why I felt that last week’s speech was ‘2003′ read Purdum’s piece, as it nicely corroborates my argument.

UPDATE: Al Gore picked up an Emmy last night, and no, not for An Inconvenient Truth but for his work for Current TV.

Nader Might Run Again

Filed under: Al Gore, Democrats, Independents, John Kerry, Ralph Nader, Third Parties — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on June 21, 2007 @ 2:10 pm CEST

This is going to make quite some Democrats very unhappy:

Ralph Nader says he is seriously considering running for president in 2008 because he foresees another Tweedledum-Tweedledee election that offers little real choice to voters.

In an interview Nader told The Politico: “You know the two parties are still converging — they don’t even debate the military budget anymore. I really think there needs to be more competition from outside the two parties.”

When asked about the ’spoiler’ accusation, Nader said: “Democrats have become, over the years, very good at electing very bad Republicans. Democrats always know how to implode, how to be ambiguous, how to waver, how not to be authentic.”

About Hillary Clinton: “She is a political coward. She goes around pandering to powerful interest groups on the one hand and flattering general audiences on the other. She doesn’t even have the minimal political fortitude of her husband.”

Ouch - that has got to hurt.

Chris Lehane, who worked in Bill Clinton’s White House and Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign, is quoted by Roger Simon (in return) as saying: “His entry into the race, even to those who voted for him in 2000, would be just another vainglorious effort to promote himself at the expense of the best interests of the public. Ralph Nader is unsafe in any election.”

Now, I am everything but an (American) progressive, let alone that I would ever consider voting for Nader, but the entire “spoiler” accusation is beyond ridiculous. Back in 2000, Gore lost because of Gore. Back in 2004, Kerry lost because of Kerry. It can never be wrong that there are more parties out there, who try to serve the people. Is the American political system broken? I most certainly believe it is. Well, by forcing the two parties to fight for every vote, the system might, perhaps, be fixed or at least improved.

The Assault on Gore

Filed under: Al Gore, Books — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on June 10, 2007 @ 4:00 pm CEST

Yesterday, I published a post about an OP-Ed in the WaPo, written by conservative (journalist) Andrew Ferguson. Ferguson argued that Gore falsely attributed a quote to Abe Lincoln and that Al Gore did not use footnotes (or endnotes) in his new book The Assault on Reason.

Now, I haven’t read Gore’s book yet (although I am looking forward to do so), so I have to rely on other sources for information about what Gore exactly wrote. The main source of information: interviews Gore gives about his book, and reviews.

Back to Ferguson’s column: it seems that Ferguson lied, or at least didn’t have his facts straight. The Anonymous Liberal and Ron Chusid both point out that Gore did use endnotes and that “the Lincoln quote on page 88 has its very own endnote, which reads:”

Abraham Lincoln, “Letter to Col. William F. Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864,” The Lincoln Encyclopedia, ed. Archer H. Shaw (New York: MacMillan, 1950), p. 40.

Just wanted to post this to set the record straight.

The Assault on Quotes

Filed under: Al Gore, Books — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on June 9, 2007 @ 8:22 pm CEST

Andrew Ferguson wrote a fascinating column for the Washington Post about Al Gore’s new book, The Assault on Reason. Ferguson is wondering about something…

You can’t really blame Al Gore for not using footnotes in his new book, “The Assault on Reason.” It’s a sprawling, untidy blast of indignation, and annotating it with footnotes would be like trying to slip rubber bands around a puddle of quicksilver. Still, I’d love to know where he found the scary quote from Abraham Lincoln that he uses on page 88.

In a chapter entitled “The Politics of Wealth,” Gore argues that the ancient threat to democracy posed by rich people run amok has finally been realized under the man who beat him in the 2000 presidential race. Even Lincoln, Gore says, saw the age of Bush coming in 1864: “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”

Now, this quote might sound very familiar to a lot of you; when I read Ferguson’s column I thought “yes, I know this quote.” Ferguson explains:

The quote is a favorite of liberal bloggers, which is probably how Gore came across it. And as a description of how many on the left see the country seven years into their Bush nightmare, it’s pretty much perfect.

Too perfect, in fact. If you’re familiar with Lincoln’s distinctive way of expressing himself, you’ll hear the false notes the passage strikes. For one thing, Lincoln just wasn’t the “trembling” kind — or if he was, he kept his trembling to himself. Words such as “enthroned” and “aggregated” are a bit too fancy for his plain, unclotted prose, and the phrase “money power” suggests a conspiratorial turn of mind that would have been foreign to him. Indeed, these words don’t show up anywhere else in “The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln” (which, thanks to Gore’s Internet, are now searchable at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/).

Moreover, the point of the passage is very un-Lincolnian. A corporate lawyer whose long and cunning labor on behalf of the railroads earned him a comfortable income, Lincoln was a vigorous champion of market capitalism, even when it drifted (as it tends to do) toward large concentrations of wealth. Many of his administration’s signal initiatives — the transcontinental railroad, for example — amounted to what liberals today would condemn as “corporate welfare.” Lots of speculators got rich under Lincoln, as Gore notes. As Gore does not note, Lincoln seemed not to have minded.

There is more:

Writing in 1999 in the Abraham Lincoln Association’s newsletter, the great Lincoln historian Thomas F. Schwartz traced the bogus passage to the 1880s, about 20 years after Lincoln’s death. One theory is that it first appeared in a pamphlet advertising patent medicines. Opponents of Gilded Age capitalism — Gore’s forerunners — found the quote so useful that Lincoln’s former White House secretaries felt compelled to launch a campaign “denouncing the forgery,” Schwartz said. Robert Todd Lincoln, who was the president’s only surviving son and himself a wealthy railroad lawyer, called it “an impudent invention” that ascribed to his father views that the former president would never have held.

Lesson learned: check your quotes.

Having said that, it has to be pointed out, of course, that this misquote does not discredit Gore’s message. His point still stands: Reason is, according to Gore, assaulted by politicians, lobbyists and the media alike. Reason has been replaced by soundbites and shouting and yelling at each other. Political discourse has become a caricature of what it once was. Science is under attack by pseudo-science, the list goes on and on.

Gore(’s Friends) Getting Ready (for Gore) to Run

Filed under: 2008 elections, Al Gore, Democratic party, Hillary Clinton — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on April 22, 2007 @ 2:30 pm CEST

The (surprising) hero of the Democratic Party these days, and Oscar winner, Al Gore seems to be - secretly - preparing for a second run for the White House. Well, better said: his friends seem to be preparing for a possible Gore campaign.

Friends of Al Gore have secretly started assembling a campaign team in preparation for the former American vice-president to make a fresh bid for the White House.

[A]aware that he may step into the wide open race for the White House, former strategists are sounding out a shadow team that could run his campaign at short notice. In approaching former campaign staff, including political strategists and communications officials, they are making clear they are not acting on formal instructions from Mr Gore, 59, but have not been asked to stop.

His denials of interest in the presidency have been couched in terms of “no plans” or “no intention” - politically ambiguous language that does not rule out a run.

One of his former campaign team said: “I was asked whether I would be available towards the end of the year if I am needed. They know he has not ruled out running and if he decides to jump in, he will have to move very fast.

“He hasn’t asked them to do this, but nor has he told them not to.”

In an interview on Thursday, which touched on the prospects for next year’s presidential election, Mr Clinton commented: “You’ve got the prospect that Vice-President Gore might run.”

Gore has the name recognition, many people feel that he would have been a better President than George W. Bush who ran as a “uniter” but proved to be anything but, he has made himself incredibly popular among members of the MSM with his documentary, he will get the support from the ‘progressive base’, but centrist Democrats might feel attracted to Gore as well… in short, if Gore decides to run, the Democratic nomination becomes about just as exciting as the Republican race right now, meaning that it’s completely open.

The former Vice President’s supporters think that Hillary Clinton will win the nomination, if Gore does not run, but that she will not be able to win the presidency because too many people think too negatively about her. This is, indeed, a major handicap for Hillary. I for one, believe that she will be able to improve her numbers a bit, but a handicap it is, and a handicap it will be.

More at TalkLeft, The Impolitic, The Moderate Voice and The Reaction.


 

Editorial Staff

Editor-in-Chief: Michael van der Galien
Managing Editor: Jason
Assistant Editor: Claudia



 



Listen to PoliGazette Radio on internet talk radio




 

Proud member of Moderate Blog Network, a FeedBurner Network.

Recent Comments

  • Torrance Green: Former BoyChat webmaster and convicted child molester, Jon Savarino Schillaci...
  • Evan Williams: http://wikisposure.com/Bill_Ev ans
  • Chris: Its a funny thing about memory.  My distinct recollection is that long before "surge", McCain was...
  • RRRocks: If I might offer one explanation for what I believe is the problem with the GOP right now.  Its the...
  • utsu: I really don’t like Hot Air (Cox & Forkum art taking place in your design is a sure sign) but...

Partners