As if America hadn’t overdosed on media attention of the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Al Gore last week, the former vice president donated his latest efforts to the cause.
Gore managed to find time amidst celebration this past weekend to post a series of videos on his peer-to-peer video sharing site, Current.tv – including one calling for “government-funded” health care. He is chairman of Current.tv.
Looking more like a bored college student making a video in his dorm room or a clip from Saturday Night Live, Gore was shown proclaiming that health care in America “ought to be a matter of right,” addressing what he thinks to be an “immoral” health care situation.
“I strongly support universal single-payer government-provided or government-funded health care” droned a languid Gore in his video. Michael Moore was clearly overjoyed by the plug for universal health care, as the video is now also listed under the title ‘Gore Goes SiCKO’ on Moore’s Web site.
Moore has used his movie to promote a crusade to mandate universal care. The Business & Media Institute revealed in a June article the flaws in Moore’s ‘SiCKO’ and the gushing media coverage it had received from the media.
Alas, Gore puts that media support to shame. Since the release of his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” in early 2006, media coverage has given him almost rock star status. On October 10, BMI warned of Gore’s lack of willingness to enter into a debate on global warming. Also, in an article posted last Friday, BMI detailed the extent to which the success Gore has enjoyed has been a result of media endorsement.
Despite rumors and websites such as DraftGore.com, Gore has not of yet indicated he may seek a 2008 Democratic Nomination. Nevertheless, it appears he thinks the public is interested in his opinion. The two other videos posted by Gore state his position on the recent hot topics of troop withdrawal and increased protection for Americans against invasion of privacy by the Executive Branch.
All three of the former vice president’s recent videos, averaging around one long minute each, appear to have been posted by Gore himself and serve as further examples of just how far left his positions are.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I have a right to a
October 16, 2007 - 16:17 ET by drillanwrI have a right to a medium/rare Porterhouse Steak every night at dinner, and dag-nam-it, the government had better provide it!
Haven't You Heard?
October 16, 2007 - 17:47 ET by Wildcatter1980Eating meats like beef will clog your arteries and add to global warming (animal flatulence, you know) so if The Goreacle has his way, you ain't gettin' nothing like that and you will LIKE it!
lol ;-)
And, tough if you don't because the government is protecting yourself from yourself. You see, in The Goreacle's world you are considered incapable of taking care of yourself and therefore cannot be left to decide for yourself how you want to live your own life. Hhhhmmmm! Kinda sounds like The Goreacle would really like to deny us our liberty, doesn't it? Guess it is inconvenient for him that the Declaration of Independence has that little phrase in it. What was it, again?
Just my $0.02
But wait ... Eating med/rare
October 16, 2007 - 18:07 ET by drillanwrBut wait ... Eating med/rare Porterhouse Steak is my religion (yeah! that's the ticket!) ...
He isn't running for
October 16, 2007 - 16:21 ET by Sick-n-TiredHe isn't running for president...................yeah, right. The other shoe is starting to fall. Here we see him discussing liberal/democrat talking points----#1 universal health care. Looks like he is edging into the fray and gearing up for a run.....IMHO anyways.
Also, notice the old Gore here; the incesant droning with no inflection to his voice or demeaner. Killed him once, it will happen again.
Well he is a Nobel Peace
October 16, 2007 - 18:52 ET by Chris NormanWell he is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, which makes him the moral authority on everything.
Yes, we must all bow and
October 16, 2007 - 19:43 ET by drillanwrYes, we must all bow and kiss his carbon credit ... er, ring.
drill, The thought of
October 16, 2007 - 19:46 ET by Chris Normandrill,
The thought of seeing the "honor" of "Nobel Peace Prize Winner" in front of this charlatan's name for the next ten years (and we know the MSM will do it) is enough to pump my stomach.
Rights
October 16, 2007 - 16:23 ET by 10ksnookerRights and responsibilities are inextricably linked. If you give up your responsibilities you will be left with no rights.
Individual's health care is a responsibility.
We the People
October 16, 2007 - 16:27 ET by JayTeeWe the people, in order to form a more perfect Union, "have the right to Medical Care provided by the Govt." ? ?
Sorrryy, that does not compute with the Constitution.....we need to be able to afford it. Govt. should be like the People, if we can't afford it, we don't get it.
I don't belong to the Govt., and neither does my Health.
You lose yourself, you reappear
You suddenly find you got nothing to fear
Alone you stand with nobody near
When a trembling distant voice, unclear
Startles your sleeping ears to hear
That somebody thinks
They really found you.
A question in your nerves is lit
Yet you know there is no answer fit
to satisfy Insure you not to quit
To keep it in your mind and not fergit
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to.
Dylan
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Algore is a wrong
October 16, 2007 - 16:44 ET by mattmHealthcare is not a "right." Neither is food clothing or shelter. These things are necessities. What the Commu-crats want is to make every necessity a "right" and every desire or luxury a "privilege." This way, the government, as run by Commu-crats, will have power over every aspect of each person's life.
What we have a right to is Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness. And one way to aid in that pursuit, is to keep commu-crats like Algore and Hitlery out of power.
If something is a "right",
October 16, 2007 - 17:05 ET by motherbeltIf medical care is a right, does that give me the right to force someone else to pay for it? Walter Williams has a great column called "Rights vs. Wishes" in which he explains, among other things, that:
A right confers no obligation on another. For example, the right to free speech is something we all possess. My right to free speech imposes no obligation upon another except that of non-interference. Similarly, I have a right to travel freely. That right imposes no obligation upon another except that of non-interference.
Contrast those rights to the supposed right to decent housing or medical care. Those supposed rights do confer obligations upon others. There is no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy. If you don't have money to pay for decent housing or medical services, and the government gives you a right to those services, where do you think the money comes from?
If you said "From some other American," go to the head of the class. Your right to decent housing and medical care requires that some other American have less of something else, namely diminished rights to his earnings.
As is commonly said in the blogosphere: Go read the whole thing.
You're right
October 16, 2007 - 17:22 ET by mattmThis is why necessities and wants are not rights. My point is that the Algores of the world want to make them rights, because then they must be enforced by government, thus empowering the anti-libertarians of the Socialist/Communist/Democratick Left.
of course healthcare is a
October 16, 2007 - 17:09 ET by MrSnugglesof course healthcare is a so-called "right". nobody should be turned down. what Gore and other lefties mean is that we have the "right" to have SOMEBODY ELSE PAY for our healthcare, even if we are very capable of paying for it on our own.
R. Reich - cutting 3 years off life expectancy
October 16, 2007 - 17:50 ET by Gary HallR. Reich - cutting 3 years off life expectancy.
I hope someone can find this. A freshman student told me that he very recently attended a talk by Robert Reich (Clinton's labor Sec) at UC Berkeley, in which Reich surprisingly was discussing things that politicans will never admit to publically. Apparenly, while supporting government provided universal health care, he said no-one is going to tell you that a cost of making that change will be that we will have to accept that the average life expectancy in the US will decrease by about 3 years. Of course, this is obvious - but it was refreshing to hear that Reich admitted it. Was certainly 'big' of him.
More Soylent Green please...
October 16, 2007 - 18:55 ET by MivvisMore Soylent Green please...
Boy, they're just lickin'
October 16, 2007 - 18:56 ET by Chris NormanBoy, they're all just lickin' their chops, salivating over getting into power, so they can socialize a huge chunk of the economy - so they ruin it, like everything else they touch, so, later, they can spend trillions of dollars more to "fix" it. Their drool is almost palpable...
One of the prime
October 16, 2007 - 19:09 ET by MidAmericaOne of the prime motivations for the leftists to impose 'government funded healthcare' is because it is so inefficient. Taxes are raised to such an extent that ordinary people have very little extra cash and are easy to control. After that, the big payoff for them, in order to avoid even higher taxes the military budget is reduced to modest defensive levels. Look at our more progressive allies. Their militaries are mere shells compared to ours. ...and still their health service is broke.
I hope when people are pulling out their own teeth (as some in England are reported to be doing for lack of NHS doctors) that they remember all that al and hillary and all the rest have done for them.
I'm old enough to remember
October 17, 2007 - 02:52 ET by CooltomI'm old enough to remember JFK saying, 'Ask not what your country can do for you..." Liberals now do nothing but ask for the gov to solve all their problems. All Democrats do is tell people that they'll give people free stuff in exchange for their vote. I wonder what would happen if someone proposed that anyone receiving welfare, universal health care, or foreclosure relief would suspend their voting rights due to the innate conflict of interest of voting oneself benefits from the public coffers.
As for health care being a "right." There is a reason why medical care on a community basis, such as dealing with epidemics and disaster relief, is called Public Health. The government has a duty to protect its citizens in such cases. Private Health, or taking care of one's own personal health, is the duty and financial responsibility of the individual.
Rights
October 17, 2007 - 11:12 ET by iveseenitallOur "rights" have been choking us for decades. If Hillary and the socialists/communists win the next election, it'll be all over. Unfortunately, she and her elite pals will not suffer; they will prosper, just as all dictators do in Communist nations. Check out the Gore/Clinton bank accounts over the last ten years. America better wake up. Then again, it may already be too late.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"