“The office should seek the man, the man should not seek the office.” At least, that was a popular slogan soon after our nation’s founding. However, based on Albert Gore’s predisposition to distort the truth, he is a man seeking the presidency at any cost. As evidenced in Wednesday’s debate, despite his disclaimer, “I got some of the details wrong last week…. I’m sorry about that,” one is left believing that the only thing Gore is sorry about is the fact he got caught. His “integrity gap” has eroded into an “integrity gulf.”
Asked to explain Gore’s “misstatements,” Art Torres, chairman of the California Democrat Party, said, “I have no idea. I’m not a psychiatrist.”
In today’s analysis, we chose three of Gore’s central themes for closer scrutiny: values, civil rights and 2nd Amendment rights.
Still banking on “character fatigue,” Gore is hoping that the notion “character really does matter” will not catch up with his campaign. Taking a page from the “Clinton Chameleon” Files, Gore attempted to disguise himself as the “values candidate,” hoping viewers would exchange “core values” for “Gore values.”
“I see our greatest natural – national strength coming from what we stand for in the world. I see it as a question of values. … But our real power comes, I think, from our values. … We have to protect our capacity to push forward what America’s all about. That means not only military strength and our values…. But by itself, that, to me, can bring into play a fundamental American strategic interest because I think it’s based on our values. … And that’s why I think that we can embody our values by passing a hate crimes law. … So it’s not a question of his heart, it’s – as far as I know, it’s a – it’s a question of priorities and values. … This race is about values….”
Albert Gore, like his presidential mentor, regurgitates words like “values” regardless of the incredible ironies such words invoke. He has had eight years to promote values – instead he spent them promoting Bill Clinton.
For his part, Mr. Bush uttered the word only once. “I think the United States must be humble and must be proud and confident of our values….”
Not satisfied with his “values” clarification, Gore fancied himself a “corruption buster.” “I think one of the big issues here that doesn’t get nearly enough attention is the issue of corruption. … I’ve worked on this issue. It’s an enormous problem. And corruption in official agencies…that’s one of the worst forms of it.” This from the number two guy in “the most ethical administration.”
In the last debate, Albert Gore promised to raise more “issues important to African-Americans,” banking on his proven strategy of dividing people into special interest constituencies – in this case, hyphenated-Americans – and pandering to them. Black Americans and homosexuals are two of his most loyal constituencies.
Only minutes into the debate, Gore set his race bait. “It means addressing the problems of injustice and inequity along lines of race and ethnicity….” He continued: “ Well, I think we need tough enforcement of the civil rights laws. … So we’ve got to enforce our civil rights laws. We’ve got to deal with things like racial profiling. … Because – imagine what it – what it is like for someone to be singled out unfairly, unjustly…simply because of race or ethnicity. … I would pass a hate crimes law. … I just – I think that racial profiling is a serious problem. … And I think that racial profiling is part of a larger issue of how we deal with race in America. … And as for singling people out because of race…. And other Americans have been singled out because of their race or – or ethnicity. … I think we still need affirmative action.”
“Affirmative action”? Isn’t that just another way of saying “racial profiling?” Of course, Gore is too busy with “class profiling” to see affirmative action as the other side of the racial profiling coin.
Gore added some gender-bender bait: “I think that we should find a way to allow some kind of civic unions. … There is pending now in the Congress a national hate crimes law because of James Byrd, because of Matthew Shepard, who was crucified on a split-rail fence by bigots, because of others. … There’s a law pending called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. I strongly support it. What it says is that gays and lesbians can’t be fired from their job because they’re gay or lesbian, and it would be a federal law preventing that.” (Hello, Boy Scouts of America – and any other private organization or business.)
On the issue of homosexual “unions,” Mr. Bush said plainly, “I’m not for gay marriage. I think marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman.” Regarding special rights for homosexuals, Mr. Bush said, “I support equal rights, not special rights.”
On so-called “hate crimes,” Gore thought he had Mr. Bush cornered. “Well, I had thought that there was a controversy at the end of the legislative session where the hate crimes law in Texas…died in committee for lack of support. Am I wrong about that?” Indeed, he was wrong. Mr. Bush responded, “Well, you don’t realize we have a hate crime statute…. We happen to have a statute on the books…in Texas.”
Let us make this clear. Leftists like Gore-Lieberman have but one objective – the acquisition of power – and consistent with that objective – the registration of all guns as a prerequisite to confiscation.
Gore proclaimed: “I will not do anything to affect the rights of hunters or sportsmen. … But I am not for doing anything that would affect hunters or sportsmen, rifles, shotguns, existing handguns. … And I think that if you look at the situation as it exists here…it seems to me pretty obvious that while we respect the rights of hunters and sportsmen…. We do need…to stem this flood of guns that are getting into the wrong hands. … I think these assault weapons are a problem. … A photo license ID, like a driver’s license, for new handguns. … I don’t think that we can ignore the role played by guns. … Look, this is the year – this is in the aftermath of Columbine and Paducah….”
George Bush made a colossal blunder by not impressing upon Gore that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with “hunters and sportsmen.”
Gore et al. consistently promote the notion that crime is a “gun problem” rather than a cultural problem. Mr. Bush did clarify this point, saying, “Columbine spoke to a larger issue, and it’s really a matter of culture. It’s a culture that somewhere along the line we began to disrespect life.”
To understand where Gore’s “photo license ID” is going, consider the Handgun Safety and Registration Act of 2000 (S. 2099) sponsored by Gore’s Demo colleague, Sen. Jack Reed. This bill is described in the federal register as follows: “A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986…to require the registration of handguns in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record; provide for the sharing of registration information with Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies; and provide for the imposition of the five dollar transfer tax on handguns and a $50 tax upon the making of each handgun.”
In summary, when asked by the moderator about the issue of credibility, Mr. Bush replied, “I think credibility is important. It’s important for the president to be credible with Congress, It’s important for the president to be credible with foreign nations.” Clearly, Albert Gore lacks any modicum of credibility – but then he has learned from a master.
Start a conversation using these share links: