Al Gore’s new book "The Assault on Reason" has definitively established one fact: Al Gore is still the sorest loser in American politics. Even liberal book reviewers are wincing at the tone of his jeremiad against the Bush administration. The book should have been titled "They Should Have Elected Me Instead: How Much Better America Would Fare With President Gore."
He seems to believe his own silly "Saturday Night Live" skit from last year, the one in which he pretended to be president and gas was 19 cents a gallon and the budget surplus was $11 trillion. He even implies he would prevented 9/11.
Like many liberals with the itch to micromanage our lives, Gore clearly believes the American people are ignorant to the point of endangerment. So he’s become a media scholar, and unloaded his communications theories in a book excerpt hyped by his friends at Time magazine.
One reason for general public ignorance, he believes, is the celebrity-obsessed world of television news. Political junkies of every stripe – left, right, and center – can nod their heads that the news isn’t substantive enough, that it focuses too much on trivial stories like Britney Spears shaving her head. More voters can name Homer Simpson’s cartoon kids than Supreme Court justices. Gore can get an Amen on that.
The networks will reply that politicians in general bore TV bookers to tears, outside the Sunday morning newsmaker shows. As a matter of fact, despite his newly found celebrity, Al Gore is a good example of a sleep-inducing self-impressed wonk. Thus, the number of politicians and cabinet ministers showing up on the network morning shows has dropped like a stone. The old format, watching a Republican and a Democrat squabble on a morning show, is almost non-existent on ABC, CBS, and NBC today.
But then Gore leaves the reservation of clear thinking in favor of liberal cant. He complains that the dearth of substantive TV news means the news shows don’t have the same impact now that 30-second political commercials do. This is a common (and self-interested) liberal complaint: Why pay attention to those horrendous Republican ads when you can, and should, focus your attention on the worldview of Katie Couric?
But Gore takes this argument one arrogant step further: when voters lose an argument (read: election), it is proof that the voters are ignorant and/or distracted. We went to war in Iraq because we were too distracted by Paris Hilton news. We’re cooking the planet with global warming because ignorant people gave Bush the presidency and left poor Al Gore with an Oscar as a consolation prize. Gore thinks the right choices on Iraq and the environment were "glaringly obvious," but the voters weren’t instructed well enough in the facts that prove him right.
It’s a common liberal conceit: liberalism is the very definition of sweet reason, so an attack on liberalism is an "assault on reason." Democracy is only truly democratic when the Democrats are in charge. Debates aren’t truly informative unless the liberals win the argument. The same holds true for elections.
Time magazine highlighted Gore’s excerpt with this sentence: "The world of television...makes it virtually impossible for individuals to take part in what passes for a national conversation." How ironic. Isn’t it Al Gore who’s been wandering throughout the media telling them it’s way too late for a "national conversation" on global warming? That the people who disagree with him aren’t really part of a debate, or players in a democracy, but an evil array of corporate publicity tools who have no belief in Science (and Reason)? That only foster confusion? There’s very little difference between Al Gore and Hugo Chavez on a censor-conservatives creed.
Perhaps the oddest part of this book tour is how masochistic the liberal media have become in response. Look no further than the 15 minutes ABC’s "Good Morning America" awarded Gore to plug his book. One segment was devoted to beating up the media, and ABC host Diane Sawyer willingly explained that Gore thought the media were distracting the public just as farmers can hypnotize chickens. ABC put these words on the screen: "Al Gore’s Media Assault: Is The News Hypnotizing You?"
But Gore wasn’t about to be paired with a conservative who would disagree and – gasp – challenge him. That kind of balanced "national conversation" is apparently not on ABC’s agenda. ABC would rather risk a ratings meltdown with 15 minutes of Professor Gore’s Sunrise Semester than let a conservative talk about media failings on their set. To Gore and his liberal media friends, Reason is a one-way street.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I can see it now
May 30, 2007 - 11:25 ET by Cool ArrowREELECT AL GORE
How putrid.
Gore lied. Nobody fried
Al Gore's Time magazine book excerpt
May 30, 2007 - 14:46 ET by SportPoliticsI started reading the "Time" link above, and ignored the headline as I sometimes do since I've been informed a hundred times that editors make headlines and book titles.
So, I'm going down through I reading and thinking, this reporter is really supporting some demolibidiot point of view as usual, and I get almost to the bottom of the first page before I come back here, read some more, and it dawns on me it's part of Al Gore's book, it's an excerpt, verbatim.
LOL
Man, I'm telling you, it might as well have been any of a thousand texts I've read from the mainstream "unbiased" alphabet reporters.
I couldn't help but reread the first page and see the immense glaring hypocrisy of Al Gore. I wonder how he will sleep at night when global warming completely crumbles under... as we see it is beginning to do, and the scientists have come out against the "exagerrator".
You know that's what Al Gore was first labelled in public as I recall. An Exagerrator.
Maybe Al Gore should realize, that the reason we have the type of celebrity crap we do in the news, is because the massive left wing diatribes of lies and biased to the hilt anti-American BS is much worse than watching Lohan or Hilton getting busted. At least we can rest assured that they actually were arrested and charged for a crime that they indeed apparently did commit. When it comes to that, we get moving videos of the vehicle in question, or pics of it wrapped around a tree or a phonepole, and the celebrities own statements of how and why they caved to drunken driving or drugs, and the fact that they actually checked in to some rehab clinic,or a pic of them passed out on the front seat.
In other words, it's actually news that the general public feels is VERIFIED. It's actually FACTUAL. It's the one time that we as news viewers feel that in between all the HATRED the talking heads spew toward Hilton and Lohan and the glee with which they report their arrest and incarceration time upcoming, that by golly, they actually do have , for the first time in ages, THE UNDERLYING FACTS THAT SUPPORT THEIR RAMPANT OPINIONATED SPEWING. ( not always as in the Duke case - but besides their massively flawed guilty take, there were actually charges - and reported "facts" about who accused what about whom)
Now, ya see, that is actually WHY the public eats it up. For some reason, the reporters are very capable in gleaning the facts and presenting certain proof of them in such cases. The OJ trial was "factual" - heck WE GOT TO SEE IT. We didn't ahve to put up with " unidentified sources" " anonymous sources" " a high official " or a million other "covertly acquired" FAKE FACTS.
Contrast that with regular political reporting, where the left wing press comes on, tell us 100 lies about why GWB lied, how he lied, how he lies always, and then goes into a thousand speculative and repeated mantras NONE OF WHICH actually jibe with the thin spread of often not mentioned FACTS that are gleaned through alternative media, like the INTERNET.
After watching endless hours of that, the dimmocrat media spokespeople and congresspeons come on, and spew their CRAP which matched EXACTLY with the worst baseless accusations of the msms, while republicans outnumbered and under-represented on TV, barely able to rebutt in the time alotted by the sea of blood sucking sharks surrounding them make a weak attempt that is ignored and trod under within the very next line from either the msm or the demo mouthpiece.
Ya know what Al Gore - we like our OJ and our Hilton and our Lohan, because WE ACTUALLY DO GET SOME UNDERLYING FACTS, THAT AREN'T JUST MADE UP BS FROM YOUR LEFT WING LYING HACKS.
That's why we have what we have.
If YOU - AL GORE - were held to telling the truth, it wouldn't be BORING - as so many on your side chant, it would be - THE END OF YOUR ENDLESS STRING OF LIES, AND THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WILL NEVER LET HAPPEN, NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU CLAIM THE ABSENCE OF REAL DEBATE IS TERRIBLE.
I won't forget that Congressman from Idaho , who RIPPED YOU APART , in your little stupid appearance before the committee headed up by Barbara Boxer, the one where she grabbed the gavel and said " There's a new power here and you don't control things now" - or some crap like that to the republican on her right.
That man from Idaho CAUGHT YOU TRYING TO LIE BY YOU MAKING A FACE - as he explained how you and slick willie ZEROED the nuclear power funding during your vice presidency.... and immediately took you to task for the LYING face you were making trying to hide your culpability.
Turns out HE was telling the truth, something you had to CAVE to in your stupid response.
Now, you want a public DEBATE ? HA ! You cannot even stop your own attempts at LYING BEFORE CONGRESS.
An open debate is the very last thing you would survive, and yes, I know what kind of lying fool you are now, from that simple exchange with the congressman from Idaho, not to mention your book excerpt.
YOU AL GORE - are what is WRONG with the USA.
Don't hold back. Tell us wh
May 30, 2007 - 20:50 ET by halfacarafeDon't hold back. Tell us what you really think. Very astute.
Crybaby.http://suewidemark.co
May 30, 2007 - 11:35 ET by mattmCrybaby.
http://suewidemark.com/historyinfo/election2000.htm
Here's a rib tickler: I wonder if Al will demand a recount...
the smart ones
May 30, 2007 - 11:49 ET by bulbasaurThe smartest democrats, like Cindy Sheehan, are leaving in disgust. Given this latest cry for help from Algor, can you blame them?
Actually, Gore and Sheehan ha
May 30, 2007 - 12:08 ET by QueenMumActually, Gore and Sheehan have a lot in common. They both think it their mission in life to save America from itself.
On what IQ scale are you usin
May 30, 2007 - 12:10 ET by FastEdOn what IQ scale are you using? demolib Idiot Quotient? Mother Sheehan smarter than her thighness? (well actually . . .) Actually, I hope algore DOES run - it would make for some really great political theater - her thighness, algore, hairwards, obama (we need to share, we need to conserve, I have the best hair, and I'm where?)
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Wouldn't it be brilliant if
May 30, 2007 - 12:20 ET by OIFveteranWouldn't it be brilliant if he ran and lost...AGAIN.
<insert something clever>
So who's going to "steal
May 30, 2007 - 14:00 ET by FastEdSo who's going to "steal" the election in 2008? February 2009 "algore Suit in Florida Similar to 2000. Court appearance cancelled due to heavy snow. Seems global warming has been put on hold."
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
So Gore's book is fictional
May 30, 2007 - 12:21 ET by Chris NormanSo Gore's book is fictional alternate history? Those books are usually found in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy section at Barnes and Noble...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Gore would've prevent 9/11? ha!
May 30, 2007 - 12:42 ET by Gary HallAl Gore would have prevented 9/11?
Oh my
“The Gore Commission's final report which will examine the entire government role in aviation is expected in mid 1997.” PBS. Online News Hour SEPTEMBER 3, 1996
And what occurred? What did Gore (and the Clinton administration) do to implement the security recommendations?
Are you kidding?
Keep in mind that 1996 was an election year.
A bit more, perhaps…
Following the election, in January, Gore floated a draft final report that eliminated all security measures from the commission's findings, according to the insider. Two commission members balked, as did CIA Director John Deutch. How Gore aborted air safety
Looks more like Gore was an active and effective leader in making sure that our airports were not safer. In fact, it appears that had Gore and Clinton not interferred with their own assignments, 9/11 may very well have been prevented.
Not getting traction with your WHOPPERS? Up the ante!
May 30, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Ten7sIts so absurd. Gore expects us to believe that he would have done more in 8 months than Clinton/Gore did in 8 years!? Its so absurd. But then Gore expected us to believe that he "invented the internet", "was the inspiration for Love Story", "broke the Love Canal story", etc. etc. ...
Not getting traction with your WHOPPERS? Up the ante! Gore's now the posterboy for the Greatest HOAX of the 21st Century, namely the Man-made Global Warming Theory. And with that as a springboard, what does he do? You guessed it, more LIES!, a whole full-length movie slam-pack full of half-truths, distortions, hype, and downright lies. Maybe you've heard of it?
And now he writes this book, which seems to start with another self-evident premise (namely the banality of TV) but quickly devolves into another lie-filled delusional World According to Gore diatribe. People are begging him to enter the Presidential race; really he should be locked up.
Ten7s
May 30, 2007 - 14:41 ET by Gary Hall"People are begging him to enter the Presidential race; really he should be locked up."
so should "they"! (;~>
PS. Technically, I believe that he said he "created the internet." Possibly on another occasion he said "invented." On CNN's "Late Edition," March 9, 1999, Al Gore stated, "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
See, he "created the internet." No wonder the media is so determined to convince folks that he did not say that he "invented the internet." Personally, to me, "created" seems to take on an even higher standard - one of perhaps "Goracle" standing.
But notice, Gore didn't just go out and "create the internet," he first had to "take [took] the initiative." I wonder who he took it from?
Forthe record, I recently went to bat with two journalists, Carla Marinucci at the San Fransisco Chronicle, and James Boyce, former Kerry Sr. advisor and leftist blogger. Both of them insist that "I took the initiative in creating the internet," in no way imply that Gore said that he "invented the internet." When pressed on, "OK, did he say that he created the internet," the answer was, "no, he said that he took the initiative - and he did."
Truly, it's something about white brain matter.
And our cowardly members of t
May 30, 2007 - 14:04 ET by FastEdAnd our cowardly members of the msm (Lsm) are where? GH - if I was able, I'd nominate you for a Pulizer, for the quick research that puts the agenda driven "journalists" to shame. Too bad they don't know what shame is.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
FastEd
May 30, 2007 - 14:44 ET by Gary HallHey - Pulitzer? Oh man - my head was swelling there for a second. Of course it could never get as big as Al Gore's. Besides, I can't get a Pulitzer - I'm not an angry hate spewing radical liberal. thanks. (;~> gary
Great stuff GH. Keep it up.
May 30, 2007 - 14:11 ET by Airforce_5_OGreat stuff GH. Keep it up.
Gore is a truly sad individ
May 30, 2007 - 12:50 ET by marvlGore is a truly sad individual. He casts about life trying to find something to make his pathetic little life relevant, and keeps coming up empty-handed. Waaaaaaa. Does anybody give a rat's ass about his opinion on the media and the intuitions of the American people?
It was bad enough having to endure his incredible, self-absorbed megalomaniacal delusion that he is a world class earth scientist. Now this. What a putz.
If only he could explain it t
May 30, 2007 - 12:52 ET by KC MulvilleIf only he could explain it to us …
The toughest issues rise to the top because no one below wants to decide them. Those issues are always filled with “robbing Peter to pay Paul” choices. We all want to stop pollution, but not to the point of abandoning all machines. We all want healthcare, but it doesn’t come free, and we need a fair way to pay for it. We all want to punish terrorists, but we don’t want to slaughter the innocent with the guilty. And so on. That’s why, on any national issue worth having a conversation about, you have conflicting sides. It usually isn’t because one side is stupid and the other knows the truth; it’s usually because the sides value Peter and Paul differently. And when that happens, we discuss, we clarify, we haggle, and then we vote. That’s reason in a democracy. That’s a national conversation. It only happens when Peter and Paul display mutual respect. But Gore doesn’t want that. He doesn’t want to participate in the conversation -- he wants to end it. He believes that once he investigates an issue, there is no longer any need for any other perspective, because he believes himself pure of heart and clear of mind. Those who disagree, therefore, are either impure or unclear.
Media scholar, or media whore
May 30, 2007 - 13:24 ET by Sick-n-TiredMedia scholar, or media whore?
Whore. Man that was easy.
May 30, 2007 - 13:37 ET by Airforce_5_OWhore. Man that was easy.
Sorry, I will try to make it
May 30, 2007 - 13:45 ET by Sick-n-TiredSorry, I will try to make it tougher next time! :>)
BTW, I love the Psalms!
Sick, At least you didn't say
May 30, 2007 - 13:49 ET by Airforce_5_OSick, At least you didn't say nappy headed.
Thanks on the Psalms. Thats what happens when I get sometime off. I get in trouble with the Libs. hehehehe
mental health warning
May 30, 2007 - 13:28 ET by Jack BauerAgain it behoves me to warn my NBuddies about the scary mental health problem sweeping the left and lib***ls...
Yes, in the exciting world of mental health professionals this is the newest condition to be recognized by The Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-V.
The good news is that this mental disorder can be controlled by plenty of bedrest in a controlled environment, such as a rubber room, restrained in a straight jacket, wearing one of those neat Hannibal Lecter masks.
One thing to note about narci
May 30, 2007 - 14:17 ET by danboOne thing to note about narcissistic personalities. When someone challenges their fragile ego. Or fails to feed it. They become very mean. Often turning not just on foe, but also friends they feel did not adequately support or appreciate their egotism.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
danbo learns
May 30, 2007 - 14:50 ET by SportPoliticslol-
The rosie reactionary.
O'Donnell: classic Borderline Personality Disorder
May 31, 2007 - 09:12 ET by Jack Bauerdanbo -- seriously, ODonnell seems to exhibit a classic case of Borderline Personality Disorder..
In the DSM-IV, BPD is characterized as:
Once again I postAlgores Psal
May 30, 2007 - 13:36 ET by Airforce_5_OOnce again I post
Algores Psalms
Al Gore is my Sheppard, I shall always want.
He makes me lay down in an Eco-friendly house.
He lead me beside higher waters because of Artic Melting
He owns my liberal soul.
He leadeth me in paths of unproven science to sell more movies and books for his names sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of his girth,
I will fear all conservative ideas; for he does too
His fairness doctrine and internet blogs, they comfort me
Thou preparest a table for the welfare by taking from the evil rich
Thou aniontest my head with an Inconvenient Truth; My liberal cup runneth over.
Surely carbon offsets and one sheet of toilet paper will follow me all the days of my life.
And I will dwell as a caveman for all the days of my life.
Man I love being Right Wing!
ROTFLMAO
May 30, 2007 - 13:39 ET by misterbillROTFLMAO
"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of his girth,"
"Surely carbon offsets and one sheet of toilet paper will follow me all the days of my life."
One roll of toilet paper 53cents. One AF gore put down ---priceless!!!!
Isn't "the sorest loser
May 30, 2007 - 13:43 ET by j. frank wilsonIsn't "the sorest loser in American politics" Aaron Burr?
Although one could certainly argue that the "sorest" loser is Alexander Hamilton...[rimshot]
More like - Badda-bump... &qu
May 30, 2007 - 16:24 ET by PeskyDaneMore like - Badda-bump... "Thank you, I'm here all week, remember to tip the wait staff..."
Actually, Burr comported himself with a lot more dignity.
"Is anybody here from Co
May 30, 2007 - 16:58 ET by j. frank wilson"Is anybody here from Connecticut?"
Connecticut
May 30, 2007 - 17:12 ET by RJYou're playing off the entertainer question, j. faux, but there's irony there.
Connecticut has literally been taken over by the unions and a veto-proof Democrat Legislature. People are leaving the state en masse, due to the highest national taxes and highest government to private employee ratio. In fact, a study shows that government employees here get (in pay and benefits) 144% of the income of similar positions in the private sector.
Soon that question "Is anyone here from Connecticut?" will be asked for it's nostalgic value.
Watch Connecticut as a bellweather for what will happen everywhere if the left takes over.....
now that's scary!!!
May 30, 2007 - 17:27 ET by Sick-n-Tirednow that's scary!!!
J. Frank
May 31, 2007 - 09:18 ET by Cool ArrowWhy must you be so "cavalier" in your reference to Burr. I'm sure he gave Hamilton a "Last Kiss"
Gore lied. Nobody fried
I believe him
May 30, 2007 - 13:50 ET by c5thenHe probably would have prevented 9/11 if he had been elected President in 2000. His first act as President, after getting his National Security Brief, would have been to surrender to Osama. Osama would then have called off the attack and we'd all be praying 5 times a day and facing east.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
what a waste of flesh and guts
May 30, 2007 - 15:51 ET by CTDRULES...why am I wasting my time even commenting on him?! :-{