« Fred Thompson Continues To Impress Conservatives
This Week’s Democratic And Republican Presidential Debates Could Change Races »
Gore: Too Reasonable for Politics
Jun 3rd, 2007 | 7 responses
Former US Vice President Al Gore believes that he is too reasonable for politics.
For months, Gore has said repeatedly that he probably won’t run for office again, but wouldn’t say that he would never run for office again. He reiterated that stance on Friday, but downplayed the possibility of another campaign…
“It may be easier to fix it from the outside,” he said. “Again, I haven’t ruled out for all time thinking about politics again. It’s just that the way it works now, I don’t think that the skills I have are the ones that are most likely to be rewarded within this system. It’s like a washing machine that is permanently set on the spin cycle. It doesn’t stop spinning. That creates real problems for a politics based on reason.”
In other words, he’s still the same smug, preening douche he always was, but that’s only because he’s so reasonable and ahead of his time. And so it follows that anyone who votes for him is voting symbolically to replace our benighted style-over-substance ethic with a new golden age of rule by philosopher kings.
Now, as all of you know, I am conservative and do not agree with Gore on quite some issues, but… he has a good point. It is true that politics today is all about spinning and soundbites. It is less about the intelligent debate, and more about making the other person look bad. Fear is, indeed, in many ways exploited. As I wrote at my own blog, my only problem with Gore is that he seems to believe that proof of whether someone is ‘reasonable’ or not, is whether that person agrees with him on everything. Perhaps, by the way, he does not believe that, but it is the feeling he gives one when one listens to what he says.
America would benefit if it would listen to Gore on this issue. Enough with the soundbites.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
7 Responses to “Gore: Too Reasonable for Politics”
Ah Michelle Malkin and her “privileged holier than thou” New York Post verbiage.
what’s the difference between a journalist and a sensationalist “pundit”.
Class.
Does the writer at Hot Air realize that he is earning his blog’s title and proving Gore’s point with this?
I’m appalled that any blogger would call someone a douche.
What has Al Gore done to deserve this description by Hot Air? When you can’t argue with the substance of his positions its ok to denigrate Mr. Gore in an ad hominem attack? I think he has a lot that is worthwhile to say, but we won’t hear him if he is judged as “a smug preening douche” or someone who has become a hysterical fanatic. There have been very few days over the last 7 years that I haven’t wished that the activist judges on the Supreme Court had let the state of Florida resolve its own voting problems in 2000. Everything might look a lot different right now. But, my point is if Gore’s right concede that point, instead of proceding with an undeserved attack on his style.
Perhaps if Hot Air had made that statement in the comments section here, which bans name calling and personal attacks, they would be banned instead of linked to. Ironic, no?
Michelle Malkin also makes killer cheerleader videos.
The only thing that Al Gore has to do to earn that kind of name-calling from Hot Air is not be Republican.
Thanks Micahel you proved Gore 100% right by using that crappy slam piece from Hot Gasbag, and your own snottiness towards him for being right ALOT more often than you yourself, or the gasbags you link to are on your best days.