Sawyer’s Interview Focuses On Media’s Obsessions With Gore, Reaffirms Thesis Of His Book
Sawyer’s Interview Focuses On Media’s Obsessions With Gore, Reaffirms Thesis Of His Book
In his new book, The Assault on Reason, which will be released tomorrow, Al Gore explains “why logic and reason and the best evidence available and the scientific discoveries do not have more force in changing the way we all think about the reality we are now facing.” Gore explains that part of the explanation lies in how much television viewing time is devoted to coverage of “serial obsessions,” such as the Anna Nicole Smith and JonBenet Ramsey.
In her interview with Al Gore this morning, ABC’s Diane Sawyer displayed the media’s propensity to focus on their “serial obsessions” rather than substantive issues that currently affect the country.
Sawyer’s first question to Gore was “You’re not going to tell me again that you have no plans to run, are you?” Gore quickly disposed of the question, saying, “Well, I’m not a candidate and this book is not a political book, it’s not a candidate book at all.” That answer didn’t prevent Sawyer from re-asking the question three more times, consuming airtime that could instead have demonstrated how to raise the level of debate.
Some lowlights:
SAWYER: Again, not to come back to this and fall into your thesis that the press only wants the horserace of the political campaign, but one way…
GORE: But back to the horserace.[…]
SAWYER: And what will it be that causes you to make that decision, if you’re waiting and watching?
GORE: Well, you know, I’m not pondering it, I’m not focused on that.[…]
SAWYER: I just want to say, Donna Brazile, your former campaign manager, has said, If he drops 25 to 30 pounds he’s running. Lost any weight?
Watch it:
At the conclusion of the interview, Gore mocked Sawyer’s line of questioning. “Listen to your questions,” he said. “You know, the horserace, the cosmetic parts of this — and, look, that’s all understandable and natural. But while we’re focused on, you know, Britney and K-Fed and Anna Nicole Smith and all this stuff, meanwhile, very quietly, our country has been making some very serious mistakes that could be avoided if we, the people, including the news media, are involved in a full and vigorous discussion of what our choices are.”
Transcript:
SAWYER: Joining us now is the author of The Assault on Reason, former Vice President Al Gore. And it’s good to have you with us this morning.
GORE: Good morning.
SAWYER: OK, you’re not going to tell me again that you have no plans to run, are you? Tell me this morning…
GORE: Well, I’m not a candidate and this book is not a political book, it’s not a candidate book at all. It’s about the fact that there are cracks in the foundation of American democracy that have to be fixed.
[…]
SAWYER: Well, I want to come back to that thesis because part of it involves our jobs in television news, and I want to deal with that.
But nonetheless, Mr. Vice President, it’s going to be very hard for people to read this book and say this is not a political book, because this is a book that really does go to the current administration. And my question…GORE: Just as one of many examples of how our conversation of democracy has turned toward these buzzwords and phrases, like the frame for the discussion, the logo Campaign ‘08, that’s not what this is about. You know, for anybody who has asked the question, Has something gone wrong in our country? this book is about that. It’s about what’s gone wrong and how we can fix it.
[…]
SAWYER: Again, not to come back to this and fall into your thesis that the press only wants the horserace of the political campaign, but one way…
GORE: But back to the horserace.
SAWYER: … back to the horserace.
[…]
SAWYER: And I just wonder, when will you make a decision? And what will it be that causes you to make that decision, if you’re waiting and watching?
GORE: Well, you know, I’m not pondering it, I’m not focused on that.
[…]
SAWYER: We are going dig deeper — in fact, we’re going to come back with another piece, because I really want to talk more about this thesis.
GORE: Oh, great.
SAWYER: But to dig not very deep, once again, at my peril here…I just want to say, Donna Brazile, your former campaign manager, has said, If he drops 25 to 30 pounds he’s running. Lost any weight?
GORE: I think, you know, millions of Americans are in the same struggle I am on that one. But look — but listen to your questions. You know, the horserace, the cosmetic parts of this — and, look, that’s all understandable and natural. But while we’re focused on, you know, Britney and K-Fed and Anna Nicole Smith and all this stuff, meanwhile, very quietly, our country has been making some very serious mistakes that could be avoided if we, the people, including the news media, are involved in a full and vigorous discussion of what our choices are.
SAWYER: Former Vice President Al Gore.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
75 Responses to “Sawyer’s Interview Focuses On Media’s Obsessions With Gore, Reaffirms Thesis Of His Book”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I think that SAWYER well recognized it as well. At least give credit for that.
May 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amI
May 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amGore ‘08!
May 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amThe big problem with the MSM is that after 7 years of BushCo B.S. they don’t know how to deal with serious people and serious issues so they resort to pithy pablum.
May 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amAh, the serial obsession with the presidency.
May 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amWe have all the evidence we need by now to realize that the modern day American president is merely a figurehead and a puppet, who dances on the strings of the corporate militarists.
Gore is being far more effective on the national and world stage than he could be as president.
(key word: effective)
Nice Work Sawyer!!
Way to stay off topic. The people don’t need to worry about what goes on in the world. That’s why they hired me. All they need to do is read about K-Fed and keep shopping at Wal-Mart. I will take care of everything as long as they stay out of my way.
May 21st, 2007 at 11:55 amAl ROCKS!!!
May 21st, 2007 at 11:57 amMore hollow “journalism” pandering to “what Americans want.” How about instead of trying to keep all your ratings up, you just do you job?
Later, Sawyer asked Mr. Gore, “Who are you wearing?” /sarcasm
May 21st, 2007 at 11:59 amWay to go Al!! It’s great to see yet another book attacking faith as a way of thinking about real-world problems. The faith-based mindset of Bush and his supporters is what is responsible for the damage done these past 6 years. Like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and others, it’s great to see some pushback against this lack of critical thinking that has taken over. Time for religious faith to become a personal matter again.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:00 pm#5
I agree that the position of presisent is very beholden to corporate military interests, but I think there is still some considerable power left in the position. I can’t help but think how different things might be today if gore had won. (Well, actually he did, but I mean if he had gotten into office as he should have been–minus the electoral colledge and the cronies on the supreme court)
May 21st, 2007 at 12:00 pmsimplicio,
Great point!
IT’s interesting the pedestal we give to superstition. We can run someone down over their political views, but if we mention that their ‘faith based’ views aren’t tolerable, then we have stepped over some imaginary line. Scinetists are applauded by each other for proving each other wrong, but fiath is immutable, and untouchable.
People on the right tend to get crazy over political correctness, but they demand it when it comes to matters of faith. SCREW THAT!!!
May 21st, 2007 at 12:06 pmBut, really, how much does he pay for his haircuts?
May 21st, 2007 at 12:06 pmBravo, Al. Men like Rupert Murdoch has built their careers around distracting the average citizen and manufacturing consent for the most awful things.
CNN’s initial success was because it ran press conferences and speeches and happenings unedited and uncensored. It no longer does that. More in more it resorts to the usual tactic of the 15 second soundbite followed by a summary that is easily distorted and turned into an editorial.
The rise of Christian fundamentalism is directly related to the use of TV and radio. And there is more in common between Pat Robertson & Rupert Murdoch than there is between Robertson & Desmond Tutu.
TV wants a society that is elitist, racist, bigoted and class-oriented. Although the printing press is what brought us Freedom & Democracy, Radio & TV brought us totalitarian dictatorships. Whereas the book had to be bought and read –requiring Free Choice, TV & radio are everywhere and free –that is, they are paid for with corporate propaganda.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:07 pmGore should have asked Sawyer if she was wearing panties.
(Which comedian was it that did just that to Sawyer?)
May 21st, 2007 at 12:09 pmSawyer seemed very self-conscious during the “interview,” like she knew her questions were off-track and trite. One wonders if her producer pressured her to take that tack. Gore did an excellent job of not accepting her frame or her talking points.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:10 pmA good interviewer listens, but good interviewers are scarce as hen’s teeth. Jon Stewart is great at it, but constrained by the limitations of his show for the most part. Terry Gross is brilliant, and always extremely well-prepared. The rest of the people doing “interviews” on radio and especially tv are hacks.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:11 pmIt would be cool if Sawyer was trying to be ironic, but instead it’s just sad and laughable.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pmThis is exactly why I stopped watching Good Morning America : it just the Peoplemagazination of The News. I wonder how many people that work on GMA actually support this lousy excuse of a President.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pmWho actually watches MSM anyway? No substance. I think this sort of reporting became more prevalent back in the early ’90s when Fox News stations started reporting more news in one hour, which meant they gave trivial points instead of substantive news (=details). The segment that peeved me most was “World News in 60 seconds” or whatever they called it (with an actual clock running). Knowing trivia became more important than becoming fully informed to be able to hold intelligent conversations or form substantive arguments.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pmAl Gore - Looking more Presidential every day.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:14 pmyou can almost see Sayer’s soul rotting away… and she knows it. Pathetic
May 21st, 2007 at 12:17 pmOMG, high school journalism at its best.
Sawyer: “So, Al. Are you going to ask Amy out? She really likes you!”
May 21st, 2007 at 12:17 pm.
I wonder if there was a reflection?
Sawyer was either too shallow or too biased (or both) to recognize that Al was holding up a mirror to her, a typical MSM blatherer.
The profit-chasing selection of “news” items during a typical news program on both cable and broadcast outlets is, to be kind, stunningly absurd.
If Edward R. Murrow came back and saw what is being done in the name of journalism, he’d never stop throwing up.
.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:18 pmComment by Some Guy
Beauty!
May 21st, 2007 at 12:21 pmIn order for the reporters to ask the hard questions, they have to do the hard thinking and research before hand. It is so much easier for them to go with the horserace/clothes/made-up story lines. They can twist those story lines any way that they want to get the outcome they want. If a subject actually tries to get on the real theme of why he/she is being interviewed, the reporter can show how the subject didn’t want to answer the “hard” questions.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:21 pmSawyer: “Yes, I know this is an interesting perspective, but I really want to stay in the tabloid setting. What juicy unimportant crap can I squeeze out of you today and make it sound like I’m still a real life reporter?”
May 21st, 2007 at 12:24 pmI am surprised she did not ask him how much he pays for his haircut… After all, Anericans are just DYING to know about it.
Sawyer has turned into an airhead, like the rest of the MSM “reporters”.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:26 pmGore would have been so much more effective if he had followed up “Britney and K-Fed and Anna Nicole Smith” with “and who’s up and who’s down in the presidential horse race.”
May 21st, 2007 at 12:27 pmI thought Al was absolutely great. Diane Sawyer and that “thing” Robin Roberts are laughable as “journalists”. Al really put her in her place.
Gore “08
May 21st, 2007 at 12:27 pmOne word for the wife of Mike Nichols: “PLASTICS”
I saw The Graduate recently and I must say that its whole smug, psuedo-Salinger indictment of the phoniness of “the establishment” rings awfully hollow when you know that Nichols goes to bed with this superficial old barbie doll.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:29 pmPeople on the right tend to get crazy over political correctness, but they demand it when it comes to matters of faith. SCREW THAT!!!
Comment by Crump’s Brother — May 21, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Exactly right. Though I will add that as long as faith remains where it belongs, in the home and in the church, then it should be of no real concern. If a Christian person can govern without bringing his/her religious beliefs into the arena, then I couldn’t care less what the specifics of his/her religion are. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, this has rarely been the issue as of late.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:34 pm“It seems likely that even if Gore opts not to run for president in 2008, this book may serve to drive presidential candidates, including Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Barack Obama, D-Ill., and former Sen. John Edwards, even further to the left, both in rhetoric and substance.”
I certainly hope so!
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/21/1331/
May 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pmGore should have asked Sawyer if she was wearing panties.
(Which comedian was it that did just that to Sawyer?)
Andrew Dice Clay is the name I was looking for.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pmHe may be Diane’s worst nightmare of an interview in her ’storied’ career.
“The book opens with Gore wondering why Senate Democrats were so silent during the debate before going to war in Iraq and toward the end faults them for being so silent about the administration’s warrantless surveillance program.”
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/21/1331/
May 21st, 2007 at 12:36 pmAl Gore was, is, and will always be a personal hero to me.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:40 pmKudos to Gore. I am eager to read his new book.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:42 pmIt’s mind boggling to me, it truly is.
For as long as I can remember, there have always been people WITHIN the media griping over how we, the audience, are becoming more coarse and crass. We don’t care about weighty issues, all we want is gossip. We strictly base our votes on who we’d enjoy sharing a beer, or watching a football game. I’ve been continually told “Americans don’t care about the issues.”
Now, we’re in a sort of re-awakening, a current event renaissance, something to which I primarily credit the internet in general, and blogs in particular. Suddenly, those scattered few around the country and the world who see the writing on the wall have decided to document that writing as they see it. Other people are finding out that there are voices that share their concern, and they bring others into the fold, who in turn, bring others, and (as the old Selsun Blue commercials go) they tell 2 friends, and they tell 2 friends, and so on, and so on…
But the old, lazy mainstream media demands that they know we don’t want to be informed. At best, we want to be infotained. And no matter how much people demand substance to reporting, they insist we really don’t want substance at all. Like an ignorant father insisting you love peanut butter for lunch when you haven’t eaten a peanut butter sandwich in 3 years. We don’t want substance, we only want fluff. This is the way it is because this is what they always told us was the way it is.
But even if that ’s the way is used to always be, doesn’t mean it’s the way things have to change. Maybe…JUST maybe, fluff was a sign of THOSE times, not THESE times. Come on, MSM, ask a hard question, of anyone, of everyone. ELEVATE the discourse. Make us better-informed, and make us want to be better-informed. You have a public that now gets their information off the itnernet (READING! SHOCKING!) because they want more than what you’re providing. Maybe it’s time to offer them a few crumbs. You know, before it’s too late and shows like “Ow! My Balls!” from Mike Judge’s Idiocracy become de rigeur.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:42 pmRon Brownstein had a column a couple of months ago in which he bemoaned the lack of oversight on the part of the late, unlamented repuke Congress. He didn’t say anything about the lack of oversight on the part of the beltway whores, including himself. The Bush Presidency has been an unmitigated disaster, but the beltway whores, most notably David Broder, would have us believe Bush is just biding his time, until he unleashes he terrible, swift, rebirth.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:45 pmI think 2008 will bring a Democratic Presidency, and bigger margins in both houses of Congress, but the beltway whores will have us believe we are heading for disaster unless we impeach and reinstall a repuke.
Maybe the interview would have been easier for Diane if Al was cutting brush while he was answering stupid questions…
May 21st, 2007 at 12:46 pmBut while we’re focused on … Britney and K-Fed and Anna Nicole Smith … our country has been making some very serious mistakes that could be avoided if we, the people, including the news media, are involved in a full and vigorous discussion of what our choices are.
Just wanted to repeat this. I have no other comment.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:52 pmMy goodness she spent almost half the interview asking the same question about his running & kept getting the same answer.A perfect demonstration of how insipid those who”present the news are”,makes for a dumbing down effect on our country.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:55 pmHard not to notice the big “Race ‘08″ graphic they somehow thought was a fitting backdrop…
May 21st, 2007 at 12:55 pmMan, Al Gore took the words right out of my mouth regarding the media’s regurgitation of non-issues while the U.S. is facing the most corupt admin since Nixon.
May 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pm“Don’t look at that man behind the curtain!! Look over here at Anna Nichole Smith’s rotten corpse!!”
Gore/Edwards 2008!
May 21st, 2007 at 1:01 pmHow about Gore/Obama and Edwards as AG?
May 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmWell, first off, she didn’t read the book. So at best she got a staffer to cull some stuff. The problem is (like study notes cribbed from a friend) they’re no good for any substantive discussion. So she focuses mainly on the externals, how thebook is doing, details of the book tour, and what other reviewers (who hopefully HAVE read the book) have said about it. Then try to pick up on something he says in the interview. After all, the audience hasn’t read the book either, and discussing it might make the audience feel left out. Right? Right?
Maybe we can start turning things around with a Bill Maher-esque New Rule: Either READ THE BOOK or get someone to do the interview who has.
We can get to intelligent discussion after that, but let’s get rid of this “how can I get through class when I haven’t even opened Middlemarch?” shool of television first.
May 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pmMe too…
Watching this man speak makes me mourn for what could have been. I am not sure even he can straighten things out now.
May 21st, 2007 at 1:10 pmHow embarrassing! I can’t imagine the issue being put forth more directly and clearly, and still Dianne Sawyer simply could not help herself.
May 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pmSawyer does not care, she is another small cog in the corporate media. She knows that stories like K-fed and Nicole Smith’s death are what passes as today’s meat and potatoes diet of what they call ‘news’. It fills up the public with empty non-issue garbage that is cheap to produce and non informing of real news or issues. Its the “Enquirer” effect, the media has become just another profit center for the corporations, and has abandonded its role to inform the public.
May 21st, 2007 at 1:18 pmStop referring to D. Sawyer as a “journalist.” She’s a Baba WaWa wannabee … always has been. Her pathetic furrowed brow, like she really wonders and cares in the depth of her soul … it’s all an act.
Off her …. I LOVE Al Gore. Gore for King of the Universe!
May 21st, 2007 at 1:21 pmWhy couldn’t this have been the Gore running in 2000, instead of the guy who ran a very sad campaign-I’m not a Dem, but how do you NOT utilize Bill Clinton on the campaign trail?
And Diane Sawyer lost all credibility eons ago, with perhaps her worst moment coming when she “interviewed” Elian Gonzalez while he was being kept away from his father and held captive by his wingnut Florida relatives
Fewer Diane Sawyers, and more Christiane Amanpour’s and Lara Logan’s will be the perfect tonic for the mainstream media
May 21st, 2007 at 1:43 pmSawyer’s pathetic “interview” with Gore establishes beyond all doubt that in terms of journalistic credentials and integrity, she is absolutely no better than the folks who hawk jewelry on QVC. Given that they don’t pretend to be anything other than salespeople, they’re more honest in my book.
May 21st, 2007 at 1:49 pmAs prescient as Gore is on the decline of public debate in America, he may well understate the more fundamental transformation: politics itself as entertainment.
For the story, see:
May 21st, 2007 at 1:56 pm“Politics as Theater: Al Gore’s New Book ‘The Assault on Reason.’”
I’m reminded of the Simpsons Whacking Day episode where Quimby is booed after Lisa gets fickle Springfield to stop. After calling them “mush-heads” they say “He’s right! Give us hell, Quimby!” Its that very reason why Gore won’t run. He’s telling people what they don’t want to hear, as honest as it is. The MSM has fallen into the Jerry Springer trap of giving people what they want… mush as journalism, and now people expect it. Gore tells the MSM and by proxy the mushheaded viewers, “how stupid are you?” And they turn around, upset at Gore for proving how dumb and vapid they are and cast their vote elsewhere.
May 21st, 2007 at 2:10 pmangry one: “he may well understate the more fundamental transformation: politics itself as entertainment.”
Absolutely. And this transformation flows naturally from the one before it: news as entertainment. News as entertainment was predicted by the 1974 film “Network.” I highly recommend it to everyone. But, when you watch Howard Beale melt down, remember that this film was done in the context of 1974 news. At the time, “Network” was thought of as over the top in the context of how news was reported back then.
May 21st, 2007 at 2:14 pmOMG: sawyer is beyond a lightweight bimbo.
May 21st, 2007 at 2:44 pmThe book to get on the danger of “infotainment” is:
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business by Neil Postman. Written in the early 80’s, it’s more relevant than ever.
Postman also wrote How to Watch TV News with Steve Powers.
A more recent contribution to this genre is Media Unlimited by Todd Gitlin.
May 21st, 2007 at 3:04 pmRUN AL RUN! You are the smartest, most experienced candidate with the most respect on the international stage. You are the one who can bring the country together and restore our standing on the world stage. Barak would be a great running mate.
Hillary is a pathetic, conniving, opportunistic bitch who can’t hold a candle to you. Besides, her perspective on Iraq is no different than those running on the other side (at least as of thelast poll Mark Penn took for her).
May 21st, 2007 at 3:18 pmAn article at the freepress states that part of the problems Gore rails about are of his making.
May 21st, 2007 at 3:42 pmBill Miller, now that you have argued that “Hillary is a pathetic, conniving, opportunistic bitch” and that “Barak would be a great running mate,” maybe you could explain any differences in political and social positions between Hillary and Barak. How exactly do Hillary’s and Obama’s positions on any of the major issues differ?
May 21st, 2007 at 5:26 pmOK, maybe Bill Miller is gone. Can anyone on this thread tell me any major differences between Obama’s positions and Clinton’s positions? I see a lot of Obama love and Hillary hate on these threads and I’d just like to know if there is a cogent, fact-based argument on issues and positions to support this.
I like Gore too. Gore should have been president a long time ago and he still would make a great pres. But, don’t fool yourselves into thinking that the media wouldn’t simply continue its war on Gore once he committed. The mainstream media will continue its game next year. Somehow, they’ll be able to think of lots of reasons why the Dem nominee is a creep and a phony, while the Repub nominee will be someone you’d “like to have a beer with.”
May 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmHillary is a pathetic, conniving, opportunistic bitch who can’t hold a candle to you. Besides, her perspective on Iraq is no different than those running on the other side
You took the words out of my mouth!!!! Do not be taken in by Hillary Clinton!!!!!
May 21st, 2007 at 6:51 pmI’m still waiting for an argument, any argument on why Hillary is so different from Obama. Come on people. If you harbor a hatred for Hillary and can’t really explain it, then you are a tool of and a fool for the media.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:54 pmIs this Gore’s version of WJC’s bitchslap of Chris Wallace?
May 21st, 2007 at 9:41 pmOne word: Iraq. Hillary supported going to war. Gore and Obama did not. Period. End of story. She took a poll and Mark Penn provided her with bad advice.
May 21st, 2007 at 11:31 pmAl Gore for President. If he runs, he wins.
May 22nd, 2007 at 4:30 amThere is only 1 objective to be seen in Obama’s eyes:
to destroy the usa with atomic bombs
if you are all that dumb not to see the truth
i think i rather convert myself to islam too …
better be save then being slaughtered
paranoia?
nope
he was brainwashed by his mother that all people the same color as herself, where bad (slavery, colonial, fighting, jews and all the cliche’s).
she hooked herself up into the sixties to secret bedroom talks that the ‘white man’ (do they exist ? i don’t think so).. are evil and bad
problem the usa does have, is their are only a handfull of muslims.. and they are moderate (as otherwise they would never live their in the first place).. the usa people have no idea how the majority of the moslims think.. it’s that easy.. they have only 1 focus.. which is to conquer the west and other religions …. that is what their whole religion is about ! .. christianity does have the same in essense, but is filled with compromises and they don’t take the first testament that serieus anymore .. and jesus was a hippy.. so it’s all reasonable peacefull and more a way of thinking.. however moslims are filled with anger, hate towards the usa and the west.. also they feel underdogs … i would advise: go live in Amsterdam .. to get a real taste how the most people from none western countries think.
Obama will push the atomic bomb buttons to destroy the usa. It’s not fantasy, it’s reality.
May 22nd, 2007 at 9:11 amMenno,
Put the crack pipe down!!!!!!!
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:40 pmShorter Gore: ‘Listen to yourself, you stupid shill for erection pills.’
I wish he was a little less polite. A little more Jon Stewart on Crossfire: ‘Look, Diane, I’m not your monkey.’
May 22nd, 2007 at 1:54 pmMenno, Are you not worried about who has their finger on the button right now? You’re freaking over some possible candidate who might possibly make a run for a very tough political spot to get? And just so i understand your bigotry, let me see if I can add you to my absolutions list, let’s see…
All Irish are drunks.
All Britons have bad teeth.
&
All Muslims want to take over the world.
Okay, got it, thx!
May 22nd, 2007 at 2:54 pmYEA Gore!
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:18 pmGore is a nutter!
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:20 pmDear Al,
Beware of what you ask for. If you arrange an interview with a network pinhead, you’ll be asked network pinhead questions. On the other hand, if you’re serious about ideas, why not share a forum with other men and women of ideas? If you do this enough times, someone is bound to make you explain how the animated flood of Manhattan (to take but one example) makes you fit to title a book ‘The Assault on Reason.’ You bet I’ll TIVO that sucker! I’m sorry, did I interrupt your puff piece with Diane Sawyer just as she was about to throw you the softball you wanted? Please carry on!
Your Pal,
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:29 pmLet’s ask Al Gore: 1. Why did you snitch for the FBI in the 1970s in framing up black legislators in Nashville?
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:21 am2. Why did you authorize the bombing of Sudan’s only pharmaceutical plant, while you boss, President Clinton was defending himself from a lynching, of which, apparently, you and Joe Lieberman conspicuously approved? 3. Why did you side with the pharmaceutical giants against the desires of South Africa’s President Mbeke to produce cheaper generic anti-viral drugs to slow the ravages of AIDS in his nation? Answer: ‘Cause you’re a RACIST, that’s why! A racist whose bogus “environmentalism” would depopulate the earth and kill the hopes of the Third World for development, by criminalizing CO2, which is, of course, the nourishment for all vegetation on this planet. As the ditty goes: Al Gore will kill you, NOT CO2, not C, not C, NAZI Al Gore will kill you… Give it up Al! Go on vacation. And be careful when you and Tipper jump into the ocean–you might cause the sea levels to rise!
Joe Jennings, do you feel shame at being a nobody, or does that possibility ever occur to you?
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:43 amThe Gore family are more capable business people, statesmen, and inspired leaders than anyone you will ever possibly touch in your miserable little life.
And as far as the South African president…wasn’t he the one who was denying the AIDS-Antiretroviral premise entirely? Wasn’t Mbeke the AIDS denialist?
So where in the Hell do you get off comparing Mbeke’s ostensible nobility against Gore’s alleged immorality?