Clinton/Gore

President Bill Clinton’s first decision as the Democratic nominee in 1992 was to select Al Gore as his Vice President.

When Al Gore ran for president in 2000 a great many of the people that today lionize Al Gore attacked him.

The same people that attacked Al Gore in 2000, most disgustingly Big Media and Naderites, attack Hillary today.

These unrepentant Naderites (launching their attacks from Big Blogs) and Big Media employ the same untrue and twisted arguments against Hillary that they used against the wonderful Al Gore (see the Daily Howler and their archives for the full ugliness of the attacks against Al Gore).

Today Al Gore is continuing his decades long work for the environment with his Live Earth concerts.

Hillary Clinton is asking all of us to support Al in his great work.

Share

31 thoughts on “Clinton/Gore

  1. I am with you. There is value in some of the things Nader says, but he has positioned himself so far outside the mainstream that he is a voice in the wilderness, and that is a shame. We need to affect positive change in the areas he is legitimately concerned with, like making globalization work for the middle class of this country. The only way that will happen however is to have a President who represents the American People, and has the experience to work within the system, because like it or not it will require a consensus.
    As an independent voter I have looked at all the candidates, and I honestly believe Hillary Clinton is the only one who can do it.

  2. u are the money. i bet 95% of these people that hate hillary now were nader voters of 2000 and 2004. u can read between the lines becuase they hate bill clinton too and he is last ELECTED 2-TERM DEMOCRAT plus they hate him and hillary. i dont get it. nutroots/netcooks for sure.

  3. terrondt, you are right about this. The netroots et. al. are idealistic, and distrust compromise. But if you want to get things done in the world of politics you need to compromise. Thus when Hillary reaches across the aisle to co-sponsor a bill, we see that as evidence of her proven ability to forge consensus, while netroots see it differently. I really believe their attraction to Obama is based on the fact that he has so little experience that they can read into him anything they want, and his rhetoric lends itself to more than one interpretation. The good news is many of them are starting to realize this, and I have faith that they will support Hillary when the time comes.

  4. New Obama article on Newsweek:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19651719/site/newsweek/page/5/

    Despite the continued fawning by press over this guy, the following paragraph shows his real color.

    Sometimes, the middle ground doesn’t hold between black and white, and Obama’s innate sense of caution and compromise can look like weakness. Just before his big announcement outside the old state capitol in Springfield—where Lincoln delivered his “house divided” speech—Obama abruptly changed plans and asked his pastor not to deliver the invocation prayer. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is the man who gave Obama not just spiritual direction, but also his signature phrase, which became the title of one of his books, “The Audacity of Hope.” But in the days before Obama officially launched his campaign, Wright was also caricatured as a “radical” for his Afrocentrism and his focus on black issues—a strange criticism, perhaps, of a preacher on the South Side. (The Reverend Wright is considered mainstream among African-American church leaders; Ebony magazine once named him one of the top 15 black preachers in America.) “Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” a clearly perturbed Reverend Wright told The New York Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”

    Obama says he was just trying to shield his pastor from harsh media attention. But the effect was to look like he wanted to distance himself from his own spiritual leader and community. “It’s conceivable that I might have been overprotective, and probably didn’t anticipate that he might feel hurt by it,” Obama concedes. “So we had a discussion about it and everything is fine at this point.” (Wright declined to talk to NEWSWEEK.)

    In March, he traveled to Selma, Ala., to mark the Bloody Sunday march of 1965—a turning point in the civil-rights struggle. There, Obama delivered a powerful speech about the need for his generation to overcome its apathy and take action in politics. But he also went too far in suggesting a personal connection to Selma, saying his parents “got together” because of the march, when he was actually born four years earlier, in 1961. A few blocks away, Obama’s main Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was making her own pitch for the African-American vote, drafting her husband’s public help for the first time in the campaign. Obama tells NEWSWEEK that his error was simply the result of “testing lines” without forethought; he denied with a wry smile it had anything to do with pressure from the Clintons and a heated competition for black voters.

    So far, the press gives him kid gloves, treats him like the second Jesus. Obama is MSM’s McCain. This guy will be destroyed in general election in two minutes. He has zero substance, all is the cheap talk of ‘audicity of hope’.

  5. Just to go off topic – I have been crawling news about Hillary and very disappointed at the media bias. Right-wing attacks her and the far left [small group] attacks her and has found obama to be their hero:(
    I was thinking myself that despite all this Hillary hopefully will pull through and be the nominee of the democrats but touch wood if she doesn’t – I will tell you now – Democrats are loosing again. This is not the first time democrats had snatched defeat from the jaws of victory! Hillary is the only person who knows how to beat the Republican slime machine. Give her a chance and tell every democrat you know to support her! Go Hillary 2008!!!

  6. secretpolitics u got it right. the media is propping obama down our throats. hillary is 23 points ahead in the new newsweek poll but what does newsweek do? they put mr pretender”obama’s face on their cover like HE is 23 points ahead. unreal.

  7. my take on the “nutroots”. they are a tiny minority of the far left fringe, i say 1 to 5% tops. but they are very loud and vocal and dominate leftwing bloggers like daily kos, mydd, and huffington post. so they give the illusion of having vast overall support. so when these kooks attack hillary and bill just remember they represent a tiny loopy left wing wackjob vote. GO HILLARY GO!!!!

  8. Hello terrondt,
    Thank you for observing hypocrisy of the media like newsweek. I am hoping in a way this pushing Obama down the throat is good as people hopefully will get sick of him and understand that there is too much hype with no substance.

    For example when Hillary was pushing the Health care bill in 93-94 – the same media attacked her for being revolutionary. Today she understands how the system works and how to get things done. But, now they attack her for being establishment candidate and Obama is what people want. For god sakes!!

    For example today Fox has released 6 chapters of attacking Hillary on Youtube. I just went through that and thought to myself if a woman failing on her health care is all you have got against her – bring it on!

    She at least had the guts and the conviction to boldly try it and she has certainly learnt her lessons – how to finds these hawks – which precisely is why she will be the best candidate to beat the Republicans!!

    Why aren’t Republican candidates attacking Obama who clearly is the poster boy of Hollywood and far-left? Why is that? Because, the Republican candidates know that the real challenge is Hillary and not Obama. They fear her and they want to prove that they can take her. They consider her a worthy enemy to take on.

    There far leftist have always been a burden on the democrats – we finally have someone who understands how the system works – understands how to beat the Republicans – give the woman a change in the liberal media will you?

    I feel like yanking the media out of their sickening crush ob Obama. Let him learn the rope for another 15 to 20 years and wait for his time. He has been in the Senate for 2.5 years – what makes him think he is a presidential candidate? And what makes the liberal media go gaga for him.

    Again I applaud you for standing up for Hillary!

    Go Hillary 2008!!!!

  9. Hello terrondt,
    I totally agree that nutroots is a far left fringe element that doesn’t represent the views of majority of Democratic voters. But as you say these bloggers give the impression that Hillary is marginal.
    This is democracy people not mobocracy! Just because someone shouts the loudest doesn’t mean they win! Just remember that they are just having the platform to shout – that is it! I only hope that Hillary wins the Democratic nomination!!

  10. last week on daily kos i posted a comment calling them 5% of the farleft fringe and they went bananas. i love it. mydd is far more foam and the mout rabid lefty wackjobs. i bet none of them ever voted for a democratic nominee in the last 3 elections(1996,2000, and 2004). they love al gore now but i bet most of em did not vote for him in 2000. they voted for nader.

  11. Of course they all would have voted for nader. These are the fringe elements that is anti-establishment. What one has to understand is – you need to be a part of the system to bring change. You cannot challenge the entire system just for the heck of it. You have to accept that certain things are working and certain things aren’t! Can’t stand people who just see things as black and white. Aren’t we done with that kind of world view with the current administration?

  12. Terrondont/Secret Politics: best evidence of big media bias? The New York Times. Todays headline alone says it all: Experience (Clinton) vs. Change (Obama). That dichotomy is highly misleading, so simplistic as to be worthy of Bush, that I have to believe it is purposeful. Here is how the issue should be stated if they were fair: Constructive Change Through Experience (Clinton) vs. Change Because We All Need To Get Along (Obama). Asking them to be fair on the issue is like asking a cat to bark. Why is that? Because they want to create a horse race to sell newspapers. Also, they have to cater to that nihilistic screech and Gefen groupie Maurine Dowd.

  13. to be fair the nytimes is one of the nore fairer major newspapers but i see your point. i get a big kick out of the anti-hillary forces when they make the aurgument “hillary has high negatives for the general election” or “or the polls show she is unelectable in the general election”. but at the same time for months she has been leading by double digits nationally or in the first states for the primary except iowa(its closing). they say polls don’t matter this early” wtf? the polls matter 17 months out but not 6 months out? makes no sense. can anybody explain this nonsense?

  14. Newsweek Obama article
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19651719/sit e/newsweek/

    The article, mostly is just another gushing piece from the press, but there’re two paragraphs that are quite revealing about our ‘authentic’ Obama…

    In March, he traveled to Selma, Ala., to mark the Bloody Sunday march of 1965–a turning point in the civil-rights struggle. There, Obama delivered a powerful speech about the need for his generation to overcome its apathy and take action in politics. But he also went too far in suggesting a personal connection to Selma, saying his parents “got together” because of the march, when he was actually born four years earlier, in 1961. A few blocks away, Obama’s main Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was making her own pitch for the African-American vote, drafting her husband’s public help for the first time in the campaign. Obama tells NEWSWEEK that his error was simply the result of “testing lines” without forethought; he denied with a wry smile it had anything to do with pressure from the Clintons and a heated competition for black voters.

  15. Newsweek article on Obama…

    In March, he traveled to Selma, Ala., to mark the Bloody Sunday march of 1965–a turning point in the civil-rights struggle. There, Obama delivered a powerful speech about the need for his generation to overcome its apathy and take action in politics. But he also went too far in suggesting a personal connection to Selma, saying his parents “got together” because of the march, when he was actually born four years earlier, in 1961. A few blocks away, Obama’s main Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was making her own pitch for the African-American vote, drafting her husband’s public help for the first time in the campaign. Obama tells NEWSWEEK that his error was simply the result of “testing lines” without forethought; he denied with a wry smile it had anything to do with pressure from the Clintons and a heated competition for black voters.

  16. Sometimes, the middle ground doesn’t hold between black and white, and Obama’s innate sense of caution and compromise can look like weakness. Just before his big announcement outside the old state capitol in Springfield–where Lincoln delivered his “house divided” speech–Obama abruptly changed plans and asked his pastor not to deliver the invocation prayer. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is the man who gave Obama not just spiritual direction, but also his signature phrase, which became the title of one of his books, “The Audacity of Hope.” But in the days before Obama officially launched his campaign, Wright was also caricatured as a “radical” for his Afrocentrism and his focus on black issues–a strange criticism, perhaps, of a preacher on the South Side. (The Reverend Wright is considered mainstream among African-American church leaders; Ebony magazine once named him one of the top 15 black preachers in America.) “Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” a clearly perturbed Reverend Wright told The New York Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”

  17. Obama says he was just trying to shield his pastor from harsh media attention. But the effect was to look like he wanted to distance himself from his own spiritual leader and community. “It’s conceivable that I might have been overprotective, and probably didn’t anticipate that he might feel hurt by it,” Obama concedes. “So we had a discussion about it and everything is fine at this point.” (Wright declined to talk to NEWSWEEK.)

  18. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19651719/sit e/newsweek/

    Most of the article is just usual fawning by the press. The last two paragraphs, however, revealed the real ‘authentic’ Obama. He, just like McCain, is just another MSM-made star.

    I can’t believe a guy who’s entire background is ‘voter registration’, ‘community organization’ is now running for president. This is truly ‘audicity of arrogance’ to its extreme.

  19. Wbboei – Yes, you are absolutely right about NYtimes. But as terrondt points out NYtimes is the least of all the evils who attack Hillary. You know in the 90’s they were the first to break the white-water story and when it was proved that Hillary and Bill did nothing wrong not just legally but even morally they couldn’t fault them – they sort of correct the inaccuracies they printed as a way of retracting.
    But I saw on Hillaryclinton.com – it said Experience + leadership = change! I thought they were very good in responding and they seem to know the trend. Good on the team!

    About the poll terrondt – please don’t get me started on that. You are so right in your observation that they outright dismiss any favourable poll results for Hillary and the polls that shows negative of Hillary is takes as a bible. Just gives us a break!

    Fox news today has accused Hillary as a socialist and a communist – can you believe that? Once she wins the nomination in the primary – only then will she and her campaign bother to direct their energies to fox’s crap.

  20. kostner,
    Thanks for posting about Obama. Quite interesting don’t you think? As wbboei pointed out Obama is a change candidate with the message – “let’s all just get along” Where as Hillary is a change candidate who is realistic and knows a good measure of what she can do and has a clear goal in her mind in every policy area.
    Go Hillary 2008!!!!

  21. mydd frontpaged Obama’s fundraising gimmicks. This guy, just like McCain, is manufactured by MSM. There’s zero chance he can win in general election. I can’t imagine Americans will elect a guy whose entire background includes only ‘voter registration’ …

  22. Good morning:

    Great discussion. The press made Dean last cycle and then took
    him down. The same will happen to Obama. It is just a matter
    of time. Hillary needs to keep on track and ignore the talking
    heads.

  23. Terrondt/Secret Politics: I agree that the New York Times has more credibility on the issue than the other big media outlets. They have done some good stuff on Hillary as well, so perhaps I should revise and extend my remarks, as they say in Congress. But the issue in this election is change. In my view, Hillary is the legitimate change candidate, because as you correctly point out: leadership + experience= change. Just so you know, I have not cancelled my subscription to the Times. As for Fox News, President Clinton’s pushback on Chris Wallace is a classic. I bet I have watched it 10 times, and each time it gets better. Matthews we have talked about, etc. Thanks for your feedback.

  24. i suggest everyone here who thinks the ny times is “fair” go read the daily howlers archives about Kit Seelyes coverage of Gore in 2000.

  25. timl – you are right NY times certainly are not fair but I suppose what people were trying to say is that they were the less of the devils. I have seen many anti-Hillary articles on NY times. I suppose they just don’t know how to deal with Hillary you know? Her phenomenal and meteoric rise is unprecedented. Perhaps as Hillary points out that she takes their attack as a perverse form of flattery – in the sense they consider her a huge threat to launch such a vitriolic and relentless attack. Nevertheless you are right NY times are by no measures balanced but in comparison to other publications – it is better I suppose. I wonder which News Corporation writes pro-Hillary news? Does anyone know?

  26. I agree on the nutroots perspective, especially on Daily Kos and Huffpost, they are so out in left field on Hillary. They just bash her with no substance, but they are the minority. They also seem to be pretty fickle about their choice and the Dem Party, they bash whoever is convenient at the time. They have bought Edwards’ rhetoric hook line and sinker and it simply amazes me. And they probably didn’t vote for Gore in 2000, now they think he’s the new savior. Those of us with our feet still planted on planet earth see Hillary as our true 44! Go Hillary!!!!!

Comments are closed.