The Power of Myth and Al Gore

[Uncle Joe]

Remember the Titans!

Bill Moyers had several excellent interviews with the late Joseph Campbell regarding his book "The Power Of Myth". In it Campbell speaks of the commonality of all the world's religions and mythologies, even when they are separated by time and distance. He goes on to state that there are many lessons and much wisdom to be learned from myth, they're stories passed down from generation to generation to teach lessons about humanity. Here in Nashville (The Athens of the South), the home of the only full scale replica of The Parthenon of the Acropolis, mythology is never too far away.

What does this have to do with Al Gore? The lesson of what happened to Al Gore has repeated it self throughout history and myth. A hero or leader comes to the aid of the people and the ones in power trash him for it. When I think of Al Gore, I think of Prometheus. Prometheus, the son of the Titan Iapetus who took pity on the misery of mankind, huddling in the cold and dark, so Prometheus stole fire from heaven for their benefit. Zeus (Jupiter), enraged at this loss of power caused Prometheus to be chained to a rock on Mount Caucasus, where a vulture each day devoured his liver, which was made whole again each night, this was supposed to go on for all eternity.

Al Gore, the son of Tennessee Titan Al Gore Sr. took pity on the American People as they were fed scraps of information on the vital issues of the day. Al, while he was in congress believed the people should have equal access to the same information as the rich and the powerful. Al Gore recognized ahead of the curve (as he usually does) that for democracy to flourish, the people should have control over the flow of information that will ultimately control their lives. Information is power, influence and money so Al decided to become the primary champion of the relatively new technology (now known as the Internet) controlled by the defense dept. and some universities and to open it up for everyone. CNN recently held a poll as to the most revolutionary creation of the 20th century and the Internet won hands down. So one might expect praise for such vision, service and dedication to the people, however that would be forgetting the lessons of Prometheus.

The Mass Corporate Media were enraged at this loss of power, how dare he! They wanted to remain the sole gatekeepers to the truth so that they could regale us with great stories of O.J. Simpson’s trial, Michael Jackson, Brittany Spears, Paris Hilton, runaway brides, missing pretty white women, shark attacks and various other lurid tales, etc. they could continue to do this for all perpetuity. The MCM wanted to create a fictitious bubble or Matrix for the American People to live in and Al Gore had endangered their project.

Why would "American Journalism" want to do this to the American People? Because if you’re ignorant, you are more easily controlled, and this is all about power. So Al had to be punished for empowering the American People. The MCM had no taste for liver with the possible exception of pate de fois gras (goose liver), so they decided to slander, trash, ignore and demean him in every way possible. It still goes on to this day to some degree.

The trashing of Al started in earnest in 1999, although I believe that the witch hunt against Clinton was in truth a back door way for them to hurt Al's chances of coming to power. The “War Against Gore” began in 1999 with a Wolf Blitzer interview; in it Blitzer asks Al what separates him from Bill Bradley? Blitzer asking Al of and Al is speaking of his record in congress. As anyone would do in a job interview, Al speaks of his achievements, primarily in helping to bring about the creation of the Internet as we know it today, which in fact is the truth; nothing is said by Blitzer at the time because he knows this is the truth.

One or two days later Dick Armey begins spouting his Republican Talking Points slamming Al for his hubris, and the MCM begin goose stepping in unison and take up where Dick left off. The MCM says that "Al Gore claims to have invented the Internet" which of course is a lie, and it does not end there. "Al Gore claims to have discovered Love Canal" another lie, although he held hearings on toxic waste in Toone, Tennessee which expanded to include Love Canal. The MCM said that Al Gore was wearing earth tones, so he must be a fake, the Heathers of the MCM claimed he wasn't his own man because he hired a capable woman; Naiomi Wolf as an adviser, besides being stiff and boring, etc. etc. Al Gore has led a remarkable life and sometimes it reads like fiction such as being an inspiration (along with Tommy Lee Jones) for the lead character in the book "Love Story" but it’s the truth. The MCM even did a 180 after the 2000 debates overruling their own focus groups and changing their reporting as to who won those debates over night, someone had apparently heard him sigh (I didn't). The only time terrorism was ever brought up during those debates, Al Gore mentioned it. With the MCM, the vital issue of the day, and keep in mind this was after Osama Bin Laden had declared war against us attacking the World Trade Towers the first time and bombing two of our embassies in Africa, was who would you rather have in your home for a beer? The nation has been drunk ever since.

The result of all this slander, demeaning and trashing of our best and brightest is the Pottersville that we’re currently living in today. But think how much more difficult it would have been for us to get the truth out regarding the Iraq War, the Downing Street Memos, Gannon/Guckert, supporting Cindy Sheehan and or the peace movement, keeping in touch with your family or friends stationed in Iraq/Afghanistan, aiding the victims of Katrina, getting the truth out regarding Bush/Cheney's policy of wiretapping the American People with out judicial approval, or Bush/Cheney’s policy of enabling torture, and the current administration’s overall corruption and incompetence etc. without the internet. Think how much more difficult it would be for you to put your opinions out for the masses or praise your favorite leader’s virtues if we didn't have the Internet. Even the Freepers and Bush owe Al, they’re just too clueless to know it. It’s for these reasons and many more that I will always support Al Gore for President.

P.S. For a historical refresher, click on link below and Google “War against Gore” or “2000 debates”

http://dailyhowler.com /

Update, for anyone believing the MCM has changed after 6+ years of catastrophic, corrupt, incompetent Bush/Cheney rule, I submit the following small samples of the current state of American Journalism.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200705010003?f=h_side

Summary: On his radio program, Glenn Beck stated that Al Gore is using "the same tactic" in his efforts to fight global warming that Adolf Hitler used to vilify Jews in Nazi Germany, but Beck said that Gore's "goal is different. The goal is globalization. The goal is global carbon tax. The goal is the United Nations running the world. That is the goal."
<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7052402685...

Al Gore possesses a skill that no other American politician can match -- or would want to. He has a consistent ability to express fundamentally reasonable sentiments -- often important ones -- in ways that annoy the maximum possible number of people.

<snip>

Couldn’t find the links to the Brooks or Milbank reviews of “The Assault on Reason” but they can be eye opening as to much of the MCM’s cynical opinions of the American People's capabilities or intelligence.

" With our backs turned to the place in nature from which we came, we sense an unfamiliar tide rising and swirling around our ankles, pulling at the sand beneath our feet." From Al Gore's Earth In The Balance

[opihimoimoi]

1. Just think of what Al Gore woulda done with America if he was the Prez...

No Iraqi crap, no massive debt, no Fear, no pessimism, no poor decisions, no Pub Crap, no major mistakes.....he is the MAN....

Bush is such a LOSER.....Only now more and more are seeing the TERRIBLE MISTAKE made in 2000

[IndyOp]

2. Don't miss Dana Milbank's profound insights about Al Gore...

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:


From an article by Bob Parry....

“Imagine the Iowa hog farmer cracking open Assault on Reason, and meeting Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Paine, John Kenneth Galbraith, Walter Lippmann, Johannes Gutenberg, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Jefferson and Marshall McLuhan – all before finishing the introduction,” (Dana) Milbank wrote.

“Reading Gore’s book, or listening to his speeches, may remind some supporters what they liked least about him the first time he ran, in 2000. Gore is usually smart and sometimes prophetic – but, all too frequently, pedantic,” Milbank wrote.


Robert Parry goes on to comment:

Of course, The Assault on Reason might not remind Gore supporters of any such thing. Indeed, many Americans might be in the mood for a leader who actually knows stuff after six-plus years of listening to Bush speak in his trademark ill-informed didactic prose – and watching, in horror, the consequences.

But Milbank, like many Washington insiders, sees average Americans as stupid know-nothings who would be offended by know-it-all Gore.

In that line, Milbank reflected the elitist disdain toward the “Iowa hog farmer” and other common folk. But who knows? Maybe the great unwashed masses are smart enough to find Gore’s commentaries not only reasonable and engaging but respectful of their own intellects, that Gore is speaking up to them, not down to them.

The key point in Parry's article: "It turns out that the written word can be as irrational as the content of any TV show."

Robert Parry - "Gore attacks media complicity. Media proves him right - again."

[Uncle Joe]

4. Thanks for the addition IndyOp,

this is exactly what I'm speaking of, not only does Milbank in his zeal attack Al Gore, he attacks the American People, just as I believe the rest of the MCM attacked Al Gore precisely because he empowered the people, when he championed the Internet.

[KoKo]

12. Milbank often appears on "KO" and seeing him in person ...one can understand

how much of a "paid columnist" he is at the WaPo. WaPo likes to spread disinformation that Milbank got trashed for some bad comments about Bush just after the Selection and that the Bushies hounded him.

Every time I see Milbank or read his new "column" at WaPo...I think about how much the WaPo did to salvage him as a RW Operative who loves to "dish crap" against Dems in a lesser witty way than Maureen Dowd does at NYT's. Difference in them is that Dowd is often funny in a very dark way...but Milbank isn't able to get over his "caution in his vitriol" of Dems. So he comes off as inauthentic compared to Dowd who has skewered all of them (rightfully or wrongfully..her viciousness attacks with a sharp knife).

Milbank is so weak ...he comes off as smarmy and snarky. :shrug:

[Raksha]

23. The main reason phonies like Milbank call Al Gore "pedantic"

is because they are hoping to dissuade readers from ever buying or reading his books. They are trying to substitute their own snarky misleading propaganda for the author's actual words.

Anyone who has actually read The Assault on Reason knows it's the complete opposite of pedantic! I thought the writing was unusually crisp and clean and direct, probably the result of careful editing as well as the author's desire to communicate an important truth about American culture to as wide an audience as possible.

I read Earth in the Balance immediately after The Assault on Reason. I know it's his earlier book but I had never read it before. The sentences are a little longer as a rule, but hardly convoluted or "pedantic."

I don't know who Milbank's mythical "Iowa hog farmer" or average American is, but it obviously isn't me because his column is an insult to my intelligence and reading comprehension. And if Al Gore is annoyingly pedantic and talks down to the American people, then so were the founding fathers and ESPECIALLY that annoying pedantic elitist Thomas Jefferson!

One thing that comes through loud and clear in An Incomvenient Truth is that the American system of representative democracy was SUPPOSED to be comprehensible to the average literate American citizen, and not only comprehensible but ultimately controlled by those citizens in their totality.

[FloridaJudy]

42. Here, here!

I'm reading Assault on Reason right now, and it's fascinating. I normally go through about a book a day, but I've had to take my time with this one: after every few pages, I have to close the book and think about what I've just read. I'm undoubtedly what the wing-nut pundits call a "pointy-headed intellectual", but it feels good to exercise my brain for a change, instead of feeling the visceral revulsion the MSM usually induces in me.

I also find myself wistfully imagining what this country would be like today had the election of 2000 not been stolen. I can't go there too often: it makes me furious.

BTW, who did come up with that "pointy headed intellectual" slur? I've Googled it, and some say it was Spiro Agnew, while others claim it was George Wallace. How sad that words like "intellectual" and "liberal" are now considered insults by the majority of Americans. I've always thought of them as high praise, but then I'm usually regarded as eccentric myself.

[Raksha]

57. I'm glad I was able to get my point across, just as Al Gore tries to do

with every sentence of The Assault on Reason. Milbank and his ilk are trying to tell people: "See, I've read the book so now you don't have to! And take my word for it, it's boring and pedantic and Gore talks down to you just like he always does."

I can only hope the punditocracy has lost enough credibility over the past 6 1/2 years that nobody takes his word for anything, especially not when it concerns Al Gore.

I'm reading Assault on Reason right now, and it's fascinating. I normally go through about a book a day, but I've had to take my time with this one: after every few pages, I have to close the book and think about what I've just read.

It was a slightly different but similar experience for me. I read it fairly quickly, but when I finished it I wanted to go straight back to the introduction and read it again. It's not that I didn't get it the first time, but I wanted to read it again and get it at a deeper level of comprehension. And it wasn't because there was anything murky or convoluted or pedantic about the language. It's the concepts that require a deeper level of comprehension than we're used to.

In a way it reminded me of the experience of reading Robert Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, one of my "sacred" books which I have re-read many times. Far from thinking for a minute that the author was "talking down" to me, I felt complimented that he took it for granted that I would understand what he was talking about, and not only understand but care. That was the real compliment...that he expected me to actually care how the ancient dichotomy of Apollonian vs. Dionysian manifested in our contemporary world.

It's the same thing with The Assault on Reason and was the same with the Founding Fathers. They also assumed Americans would understand and care what they were talking about. And they were right! It's the slick, cynical, "sophisticated" propaganda peddlers like Milbank who insult us by assuming the opposite.

I'm undoubtedly what the wing-nut pundits call a "pointy-headed intellectual", but it feels good to exercise my brain for a change, instead of feeling the visceral revulsion the MSM usually induces in me.

Same here, obviously. But I also think the punditocracy is badly misunderestimating us. Maybe not SOME of us (not the Freepers anyway), but a lot more of us than they think.

[Uncle Joe]

58. Now that you mention it, this also reminds me

of the way television reports what our political leaders tell us. The anchor will get with the reporter about whatever speech or statement a political leader makes, if your lucky they'll show five seconds of the politician's actual words and then spend a minute or longer telling you what their interpretation of it was, and too many times, their interpretation is at odds with what was actually said.

[Raksha]

60. Where they are the absolute WORST that way

is right after one of the high-profile presidential debates. You listen to the debate and afterward you have a pretty good idea of who scored points and who didn't, who made an ass of himself and who didn't, etc.

Then the pundits come on with their own unique spin that doesn't resemble any normal person's thought processes, and they TELL you what you "really" thought and why you thought so! And then the next day they repeat it with variations, over and over again.

Obviously, this doesn't work with everyone but it can work with enough people to swing a close election.

[Uncle Joe]

61. We're in total agreement on this.

:thumbsup:

[Uncle Joe]

53. Well said Raksha

:patriot:

[LongTomH]

48. Note the link to Parry's earlier "War on Gore" op-ed

This article is worth reading: U.S. News Media's 'War on Gore'

When historians sort out what happened to the United States at the start of the 21st Century, one of the mysteries may be why the national press corps ganged up like school-yard bullies against a well-qualified Democratic presidential candidate while giving his dimwitted Republican opponent virtually a free pass.

[glitch]

3. Excellent! Everything seems epic at times of great turning. Even Bush (not in a good way) K & R nt

[Uncle Joe]

7. Thanks for the post glitch. n/t

[arendt]

5. Never connected those dots before - Al stole media power by promoting the net n/t

[Uncle Joe]

6. For me to do it, was a combination

of my own memories of the totally one sided MCM coverage of Al Gore and Bush, which seemed, to put it in Mr. Spock's words "illogical" how could this be explained? These vivid memories were confirmed by the Daily Howler's excellent record keeping of political events, debates and general coverage. And to top it all off, was viewing Moyer's excellent interviews with the late Joseph Campbell telecast on P.B.S. when it occurred to me that maybe myth held an answer.

[Uncle Joe]

8. Final kick for the evening crowd, have a good weekend everybody. n/t

[AtomicKitten]

9. thanks for the kick (because I missed this before)

Further proof that Gore has the nachos to go toe-to-toe with the bastards.

On edit: K&R!!!!!

[ellisonz]

10. God forbid a leading political figure be a little bit pedantic...

:sarcasm:

[AtomicKitten]

17. love your graphic

tried this?
http://www.hempworld.com/shop/cannabisexpo_com/volcano01.htm

[ellisonz]

30. Yep.

Good stuff...pricey piece of equipment though, one day...I've got to say though that I definitely do enjoy kicking back with a pipe and a good book with some righteous tunes on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=r8H1rAHdoa8&mode=related&search=

:smoke::smoke:

[KoKo]

11. K&R...and interesting post...Thanks...will bookmark to read later for links

and though.

[babylonsister]

13. Thank you, Uncle Joe!

:thumbsup:

[polichick]

14. Sure hope he takes pity on us again...

Run Al run!

[AtomicKitten]

18. my sentiments exactly

:toast:

[bread_and_roses]

15. K&R (n/t)

[stlsaxman]

16. Thanks, Uncle Joe! kick-

I have been following Gore speeches since 2002 and here they are all masterfully edited ,updated and placed in a book.

Only now I'm not sure I'll vote in 2008 without one hand holding my nose closed unless Al runs.

btw- I'm at chapter seven of the audiobook and- even though it's not his voice- it is undoubtedly Gore. Do America a blessed favor and buy the book for those you love.

[illinoisprogressive]

19. The power of myth is Gore. Many are building him up as the grass is greener guy

much the way the repub are doing with Thompson. gore was a politician. he is a great guy.
But, he is still the same guy as he was in 2000.
Because he is not running is why people are fawning over getting him to. And if he does look at how many will drift away to the next wish candidate who is not running.

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. Well, that's just the point.

He is the same guy as the winner of the 2000 election.

[Uncle Joe]

49. I do hope he runs or is drafted, however I've always supported Al Gore

I mean no slam against any of our other candidates, I just believe Al Gore is head and shoulders above the rest, regarding his vision and capabilities.

What I'm trying to say is, I believe I'm on the side where the grass is greener.

[Raksha]

20. If anyone deserves the comparison with Prometheus,

it's Al Gore, and for exactly the reason you say. In a very real sense, the Internet "stole fire from the gods" and it gave to the people, just like the invention of the printing press, which was deplored by the Powers That Be for exactly the same reason.

[rosesaylavee]

21. Uncle Joe,

You live down there right? Can you just walk on down to his house and ask him to please give us a sign that he will run in the fall? You know, a finger to the side of the nose... a subtle wink... that sort of thing?

Thanks for connecting the dots - this was a fine read. I met him briefly this week as he signed my book... if you can call that meeting him. Ok, I had my 10 seconds with The Man. Was impressed that he gave a fresh and authentic greeting to each person standing in front of him as he signed his name. Multiply that by 1000 people that day alone. Was struck with what a genuinely nice human being he appeared to be and then thought, 'man, you will be exhausted by the end of the day'. And he does this several days per week.

Uncle Joe, when you talk with him, tell them he has probably several thousand volunteers waiting to help him campaign and then help him turn the country around after his inauguration.

[Uncle Joe]

65. When

I see him, I will be happy to pass your message on rosesaylavee, although I don't know when that will be.

Thank you for the post and have a good night.:hi:

[jobycom]

22. I got mixed feelings about this post, I'm afraid.

I like Gore, and I'm glad to see people exposing the slanders against him, but to claim this is some sort of Promethian punishment for the Internet is far too extreme, for me. First of all, the first such slander against Gore was about "Love Story," not the Internet, and that attack came in 97, when the Internet was still a mystery to many people. Second, the attacks on him came after the attacks on Bill Clinton, so to claim they attacked Clinton to keep Gore out of power is meritless. Clinton was being slandered before he chose Gore as his running mate, and many in the media saw his choice of Gore as smart, because Gore was loved by the media back then. If anything, Gore was attacked by people trying to end Clinton's influence, much as is happening with Hillary now. They attacked Clinton because Clinton was unbeatable on the issues.

Next, Gore's reputation as a spotless prophet has only developed since he dropped out of the 2004 race. Before then, he was blasted by the right and by the mainstream media as a serial, delusional liar, and he was blasted by liberals as a DLC sellout. My earliest posts on DU were defending Gore against liberals and progressives who portrayed him in EXACTLY the way they are portraying Hillary Clinton now. That's one reason I'm so aggressive at defending Hillary--not because she's my candidate (I haven't decided yet), but because I hate to see that type of slandering take hold, because I remember it happening to Gore.

Gore only became the Great Liberal Prophet when he announced he wouldn't run in 04. Suddenly, the exact same people who had been castigating Gore as a "DLC sellout" and a "DINO" began lamenting that the DLC had destroyed the last true liberal in the race.

I love Al Gore--hence my strong defense of him--but he is a politician and not a prophet. He is not Prometheus, or, if he is, he is one of many Prometheuses trying to guide America back to sanity. Gore at the moment is outside the political process, so he does not have to craft his statements carefully to appeal to the moderates of the world. He is free of the shackle that binds Hillary, Obama, and Kerry, in other words, although Kerry, too, got more aggressive when he decided not to run for president again. Gore is smarter than average, Gore has always been a visionary, and Gore has been on the forefront of the most important issues in our nation for the past thirty years (Energy, telecommunications, the environment, the Internet, and a lot of wonkish stuff about how to streamline government and make it more effective). But your post makes him as much a myth as the attacks on him.

Also overlooked is just how good a beauracrat he was. His work streamlining government, especially FEMA, and creating a system to allow the federal government to work better with state and local government (after Reagan made it his goal to destroy the old system), is one of the main reasons Clinton's administration was so effective. Not to sell Clinton short--he was an impressive wonk, too.

The same thing that happened to Gore is now happening to Hillary, and if Obama takes the lead, will happen to him. He was attacked on both sides, but conservatives who were frightened by his moderate to liberal policies, and by liberals, who frankly bought a lot of misinformation from the right and began to believe he was a corporate sellout (thus, Nader). Looking through all the mythology, Gore, like Hillary now, was a damned good leader, a damned good pragmatist, a damned good politician, and a damned good person. THAT's why he was destroyed. Not because of some Promethean gift that upset the media, but because he could defeat the Republicans, and the corporate owners of the New Media wanted all the tax cuts the Republicans were going to give them. Bill Clinton was slandered and attacked because he was too effective--if the Republicans tried to defeat him on the issues, they would never hold power again. Gore was slandered and attacked for the same reason. Hillary is being attacked because the Republicans have gotten so much into the habit of it they just don't know how else to campaign.

I guess what I'm thinking is that this deification of Gore does a disservice to him, to other Democrats who are going through the same thing right now, and to the whole cause that we are all working on, because it creates a standard Gore or our side in general cannot hope to live up to.

One more thing, on his prescience concerning the Internet--Gore deserves a lot of cudos for freeing the Internet from government control, where it would have likely grown much more sluggishly, if at all, but Gore did not envision what it would become. Expert after expert have witnessed to the fact that the Internet would not be what it is today with Gore's involvement, which went way beyond simply writing legislation based on other people's ideas. Gore got actively involved, learned the full range of possibilities of the Internet at the time, and helped develop the whole plan that freed the Itnernet. However, Gore's comments at the time the Gore Bills were being enacted show that he saw it as a useful tool for scientific and educational research, not as some great populist tool to free the masses. Remember, back in 89 when Gore was doing this, there was no World Wide Web (that's the thing we are all using now, and it's what most of us think of now when we think of "Internet"). The Internet (and for those who don't know, it's written with a capital I because there was more than one network at the time, so there were, actually, "internets.") was email and FTP type file transfers. Gore's speeches about the "Information Superhighway" talked about transfering research and information quickly from researcher to researcher. It's questionable whether he imagined the massive communications, business, and public information tool we commonly use now.

I agree there is a great lesson in the way the media destroyed Al Gore, but I don't agree that the myths they created were retribution for creating the Internet. The mths were the same types of things they did to Clinton, to Kerry, and are now doing to Hillary. Those in Texas will remember BushCo doing the same thing to Ann Richards and Garry Mauro. And Jim Hightower. Their sin, the same as Gore's, was being too electable. If we miss that message, we will let the same thing happen over and over. Hillary now. Obama when she's done. Whomever is next. (And I'm not saying anyone has to vote for Hillary or even like her, I'm just pointing out that her image is being subverted in the same way that Gore's was, and is.)

I guess I've thrown enough words at the computer. No one will read this far anyway, unless they just skip to the conclussion without reading the rest. :)

[Raksha]

24. I disagree. Sometimes, the desperate need of the age evokes the hero.

Not just the "image" of the hero but the actuality. The call goes out to the Universe, and the person who is qualified answers.

[jobycom]

25. I don't follow.

I mean, I know what you said, I don't see how that's a disagreement with my post.

[Raksha]

67. I'm sorry. I was tired and didn't really feel like typing

so I just spoke in generalities and didn't address the substance of your post. Essentially, the reasons for my disagreement are similar to the ones sandnsea brought out so well in reply #32:

I don't think Keillor was saying Gore was being attacked specifically as a backlash because of the internet. Rather the internet is a sort of metaphor, it generated a venue for the people to speak and gets attacked, in the same way and for the same reason as Gore gets attacked.

Regardless, my beef with your post is the comparison to Hillary because there isn't any.

Al Gore was attacked as DLC by the left until he came out against the war (supposedly), but more importantly, for Inconvenient Truth. Not to mention several speeches in between where he railed against Bush and the violations of the Constitution, etc. Has Hillary done any of that? No way.

Basically, I see the Internet as BOTH a specific issue and as a metaphor for speaking up for the people in other ways, especially on the issue of global warming.

[RestoreGore]

26. And imagine what those who are deifying him would do should he not live up to expectations

He has stated many times that he is not a hero. Heroes put on pedastals tend to be knocked off by the very same people who placed them there when they do not live up to the expectations placed on them. I would surmise that is one reason why he has fallen out of love with politics. I think what he is doing now is of immeasurable and long lasting value to this planet as a whole, but he is man, a good decent man who deserves to live his life now as he sees fit. I do believe his pushing for the Internet was his way of advancing communication and a Democratic dialogue because he is a visionary, and the media would have gone after him regardless of that.

[raging moderate]

29. Al Gore, Raging Moderate

Al Gore doesn't have to craft his message in any special way to appeal to the moderates of the world. THIS moderate has supported him for several decades, BECAUSE his opinions ARE moderate, reasonable, and honest. "Raging Moderate" is, in fact, taken from an early speech of his, in which he suggested that it was the moderates of the world who would have the greatest justification for losing their tempers because of the messes created by rigid doctrinaire radicals on both sides of the political spectrum.
As for the Iowa farmers who were imagined by the neocon writer to be incapable of comprehending Al Gore's erudite writing style, please forgive me if I take personal exception to that statement, since some of my ancestors WERE Iowa farmers who had learned a little Latin and Greek and had read not only the entire Bible but also some of the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, plus the New England Transcendentalists and William Lloyd Garrison and Abe Lincoln too, as quickly as they could get copies of his speeches. They could see that, although he couldn't say it outright in those days when Lovejoy and others were being killed for antislavery agitation, Lincoln loved liberty (real liberty) too much to allow slavery to continue.
I suspect that many of the current Iowa farmers are descended from people who were my ancestors' friends and neighbors, and share the same proud heritage of hard work combined with active brains and warms hearts. I believe they will know what to do about people who insult their intelligence. You watch them. You'll see.

[chervilant]

39. We The People

I really do appreciate your post, Raging Moderate. I have been monitoring the messages I see on the most popular of the various 'political' websites (DU being one of many), and I recognize that I am (thankfully) among the growing number of activists (including Al Gore) who are using "WE THE PEOPLE" to designate the ENTIRE citizenry of this United States. We The People ARE erudite, we ARE paying close attention, and we ARE working diligently (as activists and in various other roles). Some of us may not be as learned as others, but we're ALL capable of rational thought, and we ALL care deeply about our nation--indeed about the entire planet.

I'll grant you that there exists a measurable number of our fellows who are drinking the kool-aid, but I have to assert that "there but for the Grace of God, go I" (in other words, I am confident that we've all found ourselves 'fooled' at various times in our lives). And, regardless of how much any among us embraces the "neocon" agenda, ALL of us deserve the activism that is necessary to insure that the rabid corporatists usurping our nation are stopped before their power grab is complete.

Also, I suspect that Mr. Gore protests the 'hero' moniker because he recognizes that the adamantly defended yet wholly arbitrary social structure we call hierarchy is the basic underpinning of the corporatists' behavior. The myriad dangers of our arbitrary social structure are oft ignored and its adamant supporters will rapidly denounce anyone who points out the problems inherent in the structure. The biggest problem? In order for ANYONE to climb the hierarchy ladder, countless others of us must be relegated to the "lower" rungs. Ironic, isn't it, that we--who must put our pants on one leg at a time and ultimately return to the dust from whence we came--think that ANYONE among us ranks higher or lower than ANYONE else?

Thus, some of us recognize that--just as it's important to address discrimination of the 'least' among us--it is EQUALLY important to stop putting the heroic among us on a pedestal. There is an essential difference between applauding heroism (behavior inherent in ALL of us) and applauding a 'hero.' Perhaps in our lifetime, our species will come to understand this fact.

I think Firesign Theater said it best: "We're ALL bozos on this bus." It's vital that we realize this, since we can't get off this bus at the next galaxy. (Also, recall the words of Joan Osborne's popular song: "What if God was one of us? Just a slob like one of us? Just a stranger on the bus, trying to make His way home..." Indeed...

[Raksha]

62. Sometimes, that's precisely what makes a person a hero.

Being "just a slob like one of us," only doing it better than anyone else...and getting a platform and a hearing. Al Gore is the true representative and embodiment of We the People. That's what makes him a hero.

Edited to add: The same thing with Cindy Sheehan. She also is "just a slob like one of us" and a hero for very much the same reason. Unfortunately, she had to start from NOWHERE, being what she never wanted to be and still doesn't want to be, i.e. the mother of a dead soldier killed in a senseless war. Al Gore OTOH had a head start, being the son of a senator, and born and educated as a member of the elite.

[chervilant]

63. Hmmm...

I think you miss my point. "Better than" is just another way to inflict hierarchy. Sad that we remain so entrenched in such a hypocritical social structure--said hypocrisy being inherent when we assert so vehemently that 'all men (sic) are created equal...'

[Raksha]

64. "Better than" in this context simply means that he's published three books

and I haven't. He's also traveled all over the country presenting his slide show and I haven't, and he has won an Academy Award and I haven't. It's not that his I.Q. is "inherently" any higher than mine, but he also doesn't suffer from ADD...and I do. Plus he has advantages of birth and financial AND emotional stability in his early life that I can only dream about.

Trust me, NOBODY is more aware of the failings of hierarchy as a way of organizing a social and political system! I just don't think we're going to be able to replace it in time for the 2008 election.

[chervilant]

69. Your 'better than'

is informed by a hierarchical framework, inevitably. We are all tarred by the hierarchy brush. But, another way to make your assertion without using the hierarchical framework might sound like this:

"I admire and appreciate that Mr. Gore has been successful disseminating his essential message regarding global warming."

Please, excuse my pedantic tendencies. I do agree that hierarchy will be with us for quite some time. However, actively practicing alternatives to hierarchy could hasten its decline.

[Uncle Joe]

52. I totally agree with your post, thank you

and I like your handle as well.:thumbsup:

[sandnsea]

32. No no no

I don't think Keillor was saying Gore was being attacked specifically as a backlash because of the internet. Rather the internet is a sort of metaphor, it generated a venue for the people to speak and gets attacked, in the same way and for the same reason as Gore gets attacked.

Regardless, my beef with your post is the comparison to Hillary because there isn't any.

Al Gore was attacked as DLC by the left until he came out against the war (supposedly), but more importantly, for Inconvenient Truth. Not to mention several speeches in between where he railed against Bush and the violations of the Constitution, etc. Has Hillary done any of that? No way.

Would the Clintons actually sabatoge a Democrat in order to hang on to their power in the Democratic Party? I didn't used to think so, but having observed Carville, Begala, McAuliffe, et al; oh yes they would. If they thought Al Gore would hurt Bill's plans to be a major international influence, or Hillary's plans to become President - they would throw him under the bus in less than a second. They did it to Kerry, I don't know how many times. But I know for a fact that Hillary made a calculated decision to side with the right wing and distort "the joke".

Certainly the right wing smears all Democrats, horrifically, no question. But that doesn't mean all Democrats being smeared are equal. There are legitimate reasons that people should be leery of the Clintons, most importantly because of the compromises they make that end up hurting people, which they remain oblivious to. But it's also true that they don't do the exact thing you think you're doing in your OP - they'd never stand by you the way you're standing by them, not if it got in the way of their ambitions. And that's the difference between them and Gore and Kerry and Clark and many other Democrats - and why they should never be put in the same category when discussions such as this one come up.

[jobycom]

33. Proving my point

If you don't get it, you don't.

[sandnsea]

34. I get it

I'm afraid you don't. The Clintons are bad news. I will never stand by and let the right wing smear her if she's our nominee, but I sure as hell am not going to pretend that she's in the same class as Al Gore or John Kerry. Not in a million years, no way, she just isn't.

[Uncle Joe]

68. I didn't pick up on this the first time,

I read your post, but who is Keillor?:shrug:

[jenmarie]

37. Oh, I did.

Read your post to the end, I mean. It is brilliant, and I agree with you. Thank you for taking the time to put this together.

I liked the OP a lot, but there was something about it that just didn't "hit" me, and it was reading your post that cleared up for me why. And of course, as always, this is just mvho and not meant to discredit the OP in any sense. It too, is a brilliant piece of thought/writing.

Edited to add: after reading further in the thread, I will say that I do think Clinton's are in the same league with Begala, Carville, and other Democrats who are too close and cozy to corporate powers that control way too much in the world for any good to trickle down to "common man/woman."

Sandnsea's post #32 made me realize that while I agreed with and appreciated jobycom's post #22, the comparison to HRC wasn't included in my overall opinion of the comment.

Threads like this make this place a treasure. Thanks to all.

[sorechasm]

43. K&R - I agree with you jenmarie

The wide range of healthy opinions on this thread is refreshing. Al Gore would love it. (Everything except the idolizing.) I've shaken his hand too. The humble Al bowing to cheering audiences is very sincere.

"I'm not a good politician" = You're praise is welcome, but I'd rather you listen to my ideas.

[Uncle Joe]

50. The order of the slanders have nothing to do with it,

whether Love Story came first or the Internet. It's the sheer magnitude and scope of the trashing which I found to be not only astonishing but illogical as well.

While I agree with you in that the Internet in 97 was still a mystery to many people, I don't include the owners and CEOs of the MCM in that group, and yes the Internet slander actually began in 99. But that's primarily because of the Blitzer interview, and the media saw this as their opening.

Regarding Al Gore's vision of the Internet, the man thinks decades ahead, as in Global Warming, so I have no doubt he knew what the Internet could become, I highly suggest reading his book "The Assault on Reason" and you will see his vision.

Personally, I don't fall neatly in to any idealogical camp, I guess the closest camp would be equivalent to the handle another poster on this thread uses, RagingModerate and I began believing Al Gore was ahead of his time back in the 80s.

I'm not trying to deify Al, I don't believe he's the Messiah, I know he's just a human, but in my opinion, in the world of politics, he's the best human. And what the MCM did to him and by extension to the American People was unconscionable.

[Straight Shooter]

27. I do believe Joseph Campbell would appreciate your analogy, Uncle Joe.

However, you probably used too many polysyllabic words for Dana Milbank. :)

:thumbsup:

[Uncle Joe]

56. That warms my heart Straight Shooter,

Thanks for the kick. I will also try to type slower for Milbank.:)

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

28. Great minds think alike!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=57650&mesg_id=57650

I thought so too!

Noticed how this thread gets hikacked on response 37 by "Al Gore's Greatest Fan"

[kiteinthewind]

47. Always there, the One and Only Keeper of his Flame of Truth!

:eyes:

[Uncle Joe]

51. Thank you Phoebe, I'm sorry,

I missed your thread.

I also believe the Internet when properly used, facilitates synergy, creating a higher intelligence, everybody has their own strengths they can bring to the table.

[byronius]

31. Al Gore is the Quintessential American President.

For all time. He who was not allowed to serve, has become he who must serve.

[CoffeeCat]

36. We will see more attacks on Al Gore...

...because the "establishment" is worried about his popularity. The Republicans
and the DLC-types are quaking in their boots--because Al Gore is drawing quite
a fan base.

I live in Iowa, and I get numerous poll calls, asking me for whom I plan to caucus.
I say "Gore" every time.

When they say, "But he's not running yet, can you pick one of the other candidates who
has declared their candidacy", I say, "No I can't.

I'm sure there are many Dems out there who are just as sick of the status-quo, as I am.

I will work tirelessly---day and night--to help Al Gore become pResident. I believe he's
the best candidate to pull us out of his heinous, sickening mess that we find ourselves
in now.

[chervilant]

40. I too will work tirelessly

Day AND night, to help Al Gore get his message out, first and foremost, and to help him if he finds a way to run that won't get him Paul Wellstoned.

It's past time that We The People recognize the enemy, and of what they are capable.

[lildreamer316]

46. WOW. Reading my mind, today.

This is the second post of yours in this thread that I have been in total agreement with.

Funny you should say that about being Wellstoned; husband and I were just talking about that being a factor in Gore's strategy at the moment. I think it is of a possibility than I previously realized.

[Raksha]

59. Wellstoned...I worry about that too. A LOT!

There's just no way Al Gore isn't constantly aware of that possibility, and no way it can't be a factor in his decision-making. Unfortunately, the possibility of martyrdom is also part of the mythic hero territory...inevitably.

As long as he's a private citizen, the PTB are willing to humor us peons by allowing us our "naive" hero-worship, but as soon as he gets a shot at the levers of actual power and is in a position to make the revolutionary changes he knows are necessary, it's a whole different story.

[twenty4blackbirds]

38. k&r n/t

[mdelaguna2000]

41. thank you - the media quest to characterize Gore falsely was outrageous

[jwirr]

44. I was born and raised in Iowa, I think Dana Milbanks is

in for a surprise. Even high school graduates know what is going on in the world. My brother who has dyslexia reads anything he can get his hands on through audio books. To think that rural people are dumb is a really bad mistake. Unfortunately farmers often do not have the time to set around reading or listening to the radio and churches have big influence in their lives. But they were smart enough to elect a Democratic governor so I would not count them out yet.

[dalaigh lllama]

45. As someone who lived in Iowa for 15 years

I would venture to guess Milbank pi$$ed off more than a few Iowans. I think they have one of the highest literacy rates in the nation, and the Iowans I knew were all pretty darn sharp and knowledgeable. They were also mostly Democrats. Don't know about now, but back in the day the Des Moines Register was one of the top papers in the country. Bet they had a few choice words about Milbank's slurs.

[KoKo]

54. "Why would 'American Journalism' want to do this to the American People?

Dead on Uncle Joe...what you say:


Why would "American Journalism" want to do this to the American People? Because if you’re ignorant, you are more easily controlled, and this is all about power. So Al had to be punished for empowering the American People. The MCM had no taste for liver with the possible exception of pate de fois gras (goose liver), so they decided to slander, trash, ignore and demean him in every way possible. It still goes on to this day to some degree.

The trashing of Al started in earnest in 1999, although I believe that the witch hunt against Clinton was in truth a back door way for them to hurt Al's chances of coming to power. The “War Against Gore” began in 1999 with a Wolf Blitzer interview; in it Blitzer asks Al what separates him from Bill Bradley? Blitzer asking Al of and Al is speaking of his record in congress. As anyone would do in a job interview, Al speaks of his achievements, primarily in helping to bring about the creation of the Internet as we know it today, which in fact is the truth; nothing is said by Blitzer at the time because he knows this is the truth.

[Uncle Joe]

55. Thank you, KoKo

:hi:

[KoKo]

66. A...

Backatcha! :hi: