SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: American Spirit who wrote (1624)10/8/2000 6:05:16 PM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
I think those gaffes are mainly invented and promulgated by the political media (both news and PAC flavors) to symbolize content.

There should always be things that bug you about a candidate. If there isn't then you aren't examining their records closely enough. It's not like Gore isn't connected. This connection robs you of quality and weakens their character. Most politicians would sell out their mother to get elected. I think Jimmy Carter was a notable exception.

But Nixon, who I think was a better president than some Democrats would let you think, said "You wouldn't want the attributes in your children that makes for a good politician." I think this is an intelligent and accurate assessment.

When I participated in College Politics I was surprised by the self-serving nature of people. The very process of politics corrupts.

So I'd counter, that even though I may vote for Gore, that the things they say about him and the Clintons in regard to character are not ALL empty. There are things as a humanist or progressive that should really bother you about the Clintons. Gore is backed by the Clintons and was selected 8 years ago as his successor. If you doubt that in that 8 year period, he has not made tacit agreements, then you don't understand Washington politics. Please, be ever vigilant especially about those who purport to support your beliefs and show very little evidence. Support for women's rights? Where is the female VP? Support for minorities is somewhat better supported by them.



To: American Spirit who wrote (1624)10/8/2000 6:39:11 PM
From: Frank Griffin  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
I went over to the Vanity Fair site. I am not sure I found the article in question. Is this it?
"Feeling Your Pain": The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years



To: American Spirit who wrote (1624)10/8/2000 7:09:40 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
Al Gore Lies .....heres the proof with sources


DEBATING BUSH July 16, 2000; NBC'S Meet the Press
CLAIM: "I've accepted for two or three months now your invitation to debate on this program," said Gore on NBC's Meet the Press. "How are you going to persuade [Bush] to say yes, Tim?" Tim Russert: "Well, maybe you're helping today." Gore: "Well, do you think so? But what kind of approach — can you get Jack Welch involved?"

TRUTH: On the Today show on September 4, Gore refused to make good on this pledge. Matt Lauer: "I do want to remind you that back in July, you had already agreed to the Meet the Press debate with Tim Russert." Gore: "Sure." Lauer: "Why now reject it?" Gore: "I still agree to it. But first, let's do the commissioned debates."

SOFT MONEY March 15, 2000; CNN
CLAIM: "What I did yesterday was to call on the Democratic National Committee—and they'll comply with this—to not spend any of the so-called soft money on these issue ads unless and until the Republican Party does."

TRUTH: "The Democratic National Committee announced a $25 million summer ad campaign, paid for with soft money. The Republicans, so far, have not bought ads with soft money for Bush." (for full story, click here)

TEXAS GOVERNOR May 2, 2000; Washington Post
CLAIM: "You know [Bush] has never put together a budget. The governor of Texas is by far the weakest chief executive position in America and does not have the responsibility of forming or presenting a budget. He's never done that."

TRUTH: Texas law defines the governor as "the chief budget officer of the state" and orders him to distribute his budget to every member of the legislature. And Bush, in fact, has formed and presented budgets as governor.

BUSH CRIME RECORD May 2, 2000; Atlanta YWCA speech
CLAIM: "Under Bush, Texas' recidivism rate has increased by 25 percent."

TRUTH: Nobody knows what has happened to the recidivism rate under Bush because those figures haven't been published, due to extensive lag times in reporting. The most recent numbers are from 1994, according to the Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council.

BUSH DEBT PLAN April 25, 2000; Association for a Better New York speech
CLAIM: "He provides for no reduction in the debt — and no reduction in interest on the debt."

TRUTH: By promising to reserve excess revenues generated by Social Security payroll taxes for Social Security, Bush essentially promises to retire federal debt with this money.

BUDGET SURPLUS May 2, 2000; Washington Post
CLAIM: Describing the Clinton administration plan outlined in the 1999 State of the Union address to have the federal government invest some of the budget surplus in the stock market: "We didn't really propose it. We talked about the idea."

TRUTH: Page 37 of the Clinton administration budget submitted to Congress in February: "The President also proposes to invest half of the transferred amounts in corporate equities." From last year's budget: "The administration proposes tapping the power of private financial markets to increase the resources to pay for future Social Security benefits."

TOBACCO #1 March 1, 2000; San Jose Mercury News
CLAIM: “It’s not fair to say, ‘Okay, after his sister died, he continued in the same relationship with the tobacco industry.’ I did not. I did not. I began to confront them forcefully. I don’t see the inconsistency there.”

TRUTH: The same month Gore’s sister died in 1984, he received a $1,000 speaking fee from U.S. Tobacco. The next year, he voted against cigarette and tobacco tax increases three times and favored a bill allowing major cigarette makers to purchase discounted tobacco. In the 1988 campaign, Gore bragged of his tobacco background: “I want you to know that with my own hands, all of my life, I put [tobacco] in the plant beds and transferred it. I’ve hoed it, I’ve dug in it, I’ve sprayed it, I’ve chopped it, I’ve shredded it, spiked it, put it in the barn, and stripped it and sold it” (Newsday, 2-26-88).

TOBACCO #2 March 1, 2000; San Jose Mercury News
CLAIM: “My family had grown tobacco. It was never actually grown on my farm, but it was on my father’s farm.”

TRUTH: Gore had already admitted growing tobacco on his own farm: “On my farm, we stopped growing tobacco some time after Nancy died” (Cox News Service, 4-26-99). Also, Gore received federal subsidies for growing tobacco on his farm (Wall Street Journal, 8-10-95).

ABORTION #1 February 20, 2000; New York Times
CLAIM: Gore said he has “always, always, always” supported Roe v. Wade.

TRUTH: In 1977, Rep. Gore voted for the Hyde Amendment, which says that abortion “takes the life of an unborn child who is a living human being,” and that there is no constitutional right to abortion. He cast many other votes favorable to the pro-life cause and earned an 84 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

CROWD ESTIMATE February 4, 2000; New York Times
CLAIM: “We had a huge event with 3,000 people at Ohio State University.”

TRUTH: “Officials at that rally said the room where it had taken place did not hold more than 1,200 people, and, given the area needed for the staging erected for the occasion, they estimated the crowd at 500,” reported the Times.

NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY February 2, 2000; Good Morning America
CLAIM: “We won in every single demographic category” in the New Hampshire primary. TRUTH: Bill Bradley carried male voters and voters aged 18-29, according to exit polls.

BRADLEY VOTING RECORD January 8, 2000; Democratic debate in Iowa
CLAIM: “Why did you [Bill Bradley] vote against the disaster relief for Chris Peterson when he and thousands of other farmers here in Iowa needed it after those ’93 floods?”

TRUTH: Bradley voted for $4.8 billion in flood aid and opposed an amendment, also opposed by the Clinton White House until the last minute, to add $900 million in disaster compensation.

HUBERT HUMPHREY December 27, 1999; Washington Post
CLAIM: Gore has suggested that he contributed important lines to Hubert Humphrey’s acceptance speech at the 1968 Democratic convention. “Young Gore later often told the story . . . [A]s [he] sat in the convention hall and looked up at Humphrey in the spotlight, he thought he heard his own words coming back to him.”

TRUTH: When Gore’s supposed conduit to Humphrey denied the influence, Gore blamed his recollection on “Faulty memory. Faulty memory.”

RESIDENCE December 23, 1999; ABCNews.com
CLAIM: “I live on a farm today. I have my heart in my own farm.”

TRUTH: Gore lives in the vice-presidential mansion at the Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C. After making this farm claim, Gore said: “Yes, I live in Washington, D.C., when I’m working there”!

INTERNET PROTECTION December 17, 1999; Democratic debate on Nightline
CLAIM: “I helped to negotiate an agreement with the Internet service providers to put a parent-protection page up and give parents the ability to click on all the websites that their children have visited lately. That’ll put a lot of bargaining leverage in the hands of parents.”

TRUTH: Bartlett Cleland of the Internet Education Foundation, seven months earlier: “There was no Gore involvement. They hijacked this issue. He makes it sound like he led the project. I can’t imagine what he will invent tomorrow” (Washington Times, 5-6-99).

LOVE CANAL December 1, 1999; Concord High School, Concord, N.H.
CLAIM: “I found a little place in upstate New York called Love Canal. I had the first hearing on that issue.”

TRUTH: In October 1978, Gore did hold congressional hearings on Love Canal — which he apparently “found” two months after President Carter declared it a disaster area and the federal government offered to buy the homes.

HOME BUILDER November 30, 1999; New England Business Council, Manchester, N.H.
CLAIM: “I was a home builder after I came back from Viet-nam. . . . I know a good bit about how to make money that way. . . . To build this country is a great thing.”

TRUTH: A Gore family corporation, Tanglewood Home­ builders, built nine houses between 1969 and 1973 on property once owned by Gore’s father. “I believe he [Al Gore Jr.] came by a time or two, but not too often,” Jewell Dillehay, the contractor for the development, told the Orange County Register on February 20, 1988.

MCCAIN-FEINGOLD CAMPAIGN-FINANCE BILL November 24, 1999; New York Times
CLAIM: “Unlike Senator Bradley, I was a co-sponsor of it.”

TRUTH: Gore and Russell Feingold never served together in the Senate. Gore later admitted to the Times that his comment “was a mistake . . . [W]hat I meant to say was that I supported that.”

EITC November 1, 1999; Time interview
CLAIM: “I was the author of that proposal [the Earned Income Tax Credit]. I wrote that, so I say [to Bill Bradley], Welcome aboard. That is something for which I have been the principal proponent for a long time.”

TRUTH: The original EITC law was enacted in 1975. Gore entered Congress in 1977.

STIFF AND WOODEN October 23, 1999; Associated Press
CLAIM: “I never got that stiff-and-wooden rap in the House and Senate. It has been as vice president.”

TRUTH: Time, March 21, 1988: “A joke among the press corps is, How do you tell Al Gore from his Secret Service protection? Answer: He’s the stiff one.”

VIETNAM SERVICE October 15, 1999; Los Angeles Times
CLAIM: “I carried an M-16. . . . I pulled my turn on the perimeter at night and walked through the elephant grass, and I was fired upon.” In 1988, Gore told the Washington Post: “I was shot at. . . . I spent most of my time in the field.”

TRUTH: Gore never faced direct enemy fire, although several times he may have arrived on the scene shortly after fighting was completed.

TEST-BAN TREATY October 14, 1999; Gore ad

CLAIM: “I ask for your support, and your mandate if elected president, to send this treaty back to the Senate with your demand that they ratify it. I’ ve worked on this for 20 years because, unless we get this one right, nothing else matters.”

TRUTH: Gore indeed “worked on” this matter for many years, but often in opposition to a test ban. During his presidential campaign in 1988, he criticized his Democratic primary opponents for “the very idea of having a complete ban on all flight-testing of missiles when we rely on deterrence for the survival of our civilization” (Washington Post, 2-22-88).

INTERNET March 9, 1999; CNN interview

CLAIM: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

TRUTH: The Internet is an outgrowth of a Pentagon program established in 1969. In the 1980s, Gore supported legislation considered favorable to the Internet’s development.

CENSUS July 16, 1998; NAACP annual convention
CLAIM: “The Republicans know theirs is the wrong agenda for African Americans. They don’t even want to count you in the census!”

TRUTH: Most Republicans opposed the Clinton administration’s plan to conduct the census by statistically sampling the population rather than actually trying to count everybody.

BUDDHIST TEMPLE January 24, 1997; Today show
CLAIM: “I did not know that it was a fundraiser.”

TRUTH: A DNC memo prepared for Gore made plain that the event at Hsi Lai Temple in Hacienda Heights, Calif., was a fundraiser. A Secret Service document called it a fundraiser, Gore’s staff described the event as a fundraiser to reporters, and DNC chairman Don Fowler testified to the Senate that he knew “there was a fundraising aspect to this event.” Six weeks before attending the event, Gore met with temple master Hsing Yun at the White House with fundraisers Maria Hsia and John Huang. Later that day, Gore sent an e-mail saying that he couldn’t be in New York on April 28, 1996: “If we have already booked the fundraisers [in California], then we have to decline.”

ABORTION #2 January 22, 1997; NARAL meeting
CLAIM: “I reached out to individuals who are leaders on the [pro-life] side of this issue” to “make common cause” on reducing unwanted pregnancies. He went on to imply that Catholic pro-lifers’ opposition to birth control made it impossible for both sides join “together to make abortions rare.”

TRUTH: Despite many queries, no pro-life leader has ever said Gore approached him on this subject.

PEACE CORPS February 16, 1992; C-SPAN’s Booknotes
CLAIM: Gore said his sister was “the very first volunteer for the Peace Corps.”

TRUTH: Nancy Gore Hunger was a paid employee at Peace Corps headquarters, 1961-64.

SUPERFUND April 16, 1988; Democratic debate in New York
CLAIM: “I have written the law, along with one other principal author of the Superfund law, and amendments to the other major law in this area, which requires that companies improperly disposing of hazardous waste must bear the financial consequences of cleaning it up.”

TRUTH: Rep. Jim Florio, Democrat of New Jersey, wrote the first Superfund law in 1980. Gore was not a coauthor but merely one of 42 cosponsors in the House. Eight years before claiming authorship and praising the Superfund law, Gore criticized it for being “far too small to make a reasonable start on correcting this enormous environmental problem” (Congressional Record, 5-16-80).

HOMETOWN February 1988; two ads
CLAIM: “I’m Al Gore. I grew up on a farm,” and “growing up in Carthage, Tennessee, I learned our bedrock values . . .”

TRUTH: Gore, the son of a senator, grew up primarily at the Fairfax Hotel in Washington, D.C., in a suite of rooms overlooking Embassy Row. He graduated from the ritzy St. Albans National Cathedral School, also in the capital.

SCHOOL DAYS 1988 campaign video
CLAIM: Narrator calls him a “brilliant student.”

TRUTH: “His grades were uneven, never approaching the plateau of A’s and B’s that might be expected of one who possesses such a pedagogical demeanor,” reported the Washington Post (3-19-00).

MUSIC LYRICS November 3, 1987; Variety
CLAIM: “I was not in favor of the hearing” on music lyrics.

TRUTH: At the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on September 19, 1985, Gore said: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank you and commend you for calling this hearing. Because my wife has been heavily involved in the evolution of this issue, I have gained quite a bit of familiarity with it, and I have really gained an education in what is involved.”

INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER September 27, 1987; Des Moines Register
CLAIM: Gore claimed he “got a bunch of people indicted and sent to jail” as a reporter in the 1970s.

TRUTH: Two city councilmen were indicted; one was acquitted and the other given a suspended sentence. In an interview with the Memphis Commercial Appeal (10-3-87) a few days later, Gore admitted to “a careless statement that was unintentional.”

FEMALE STAFFERS August 22, 1987; Associated Press
CLAIM: Gore “said half his campaign staff were women, and he would make half of a Gore Cabinet women.”

TRUTH: “But pressed by reporters later to name women on his staff, he fumbled and then mentioned one name, which later turned out to be incorrect.”

ARMS CONTROL 1984 Senate ad
CLAIM: Narrator says Gore “wrote the bipartisan plan on arms control that U.S. negotiators will take to the Russians.”

TRUTH: Ken Adelman, director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency: “He had nothing to do with what we proposed to the Soviets” (Boston Globe, 4-11-00).

return to Deb's Excellent Political Pages



top of page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gore's dubious school record

By Jennifer C. Braceras, 9/7/2000

When will the liberal media stop treating left-wing ideology as a proxy for intelligence? For months the press has questioned the intellect of Republican candidate George W. Bush, while describing Al Gore as ''serious,'' ''intellectual'' - even ''wonkish.'' The basis for the media's unfair attacks on Bush's intelligence is his 30-year-old Yale College transcript (purloined last fall and published by The New Yorker). Yet The Washington Post's subsequent revelation of Gore's unimpressive academic record has done little to alter the media's false portrayal of Gore as ''the smartest kid in the class.''

It is a record that is worth reviewing, if only to debunk the myth of Gore as a serious student. Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's, including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science course, and a C-plus in another. ''In his sophomore year at Harvard,'' the Post reported, ''Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale.'' Moreover, Gore's graduate school record - consistently glossed over by the press - is nothing short of shameful. In 1971, Gore enrolled in Vanderbilt Divinity School where, according to Bill Turque, author of ''Inventing Al Gore,'' he received F's in five of the eight classes he took over the course of three semesters. Not surprisingly, Gore did not receive a degree from the divinity school.

Nor did Gore graduate from Vanderbilt Law School, where he enrolled for a brief time and received his fair share of C's. (Bush went on to earn an MBA from Harvard). But whereas the liberal press has described Bush's college days as a time of misspent youth, media accounts of Gore's undergraduate years are grossly fawning. (The New York Times: ''As Mr. Bush was frolicking around Yale, a young man named Al Gore was studying at Harvard''; ''Harvard nurtured the part of [Gore] that is in love with the world of ideas.'' The New Republic: ''At Harvard, Gore set himself formidable intellectual challenges.'') And then there is the laughable October issue of Psychology Today. As part of a cover story entitled, ''Gore and Bush on the Couch,'' the magazine reports the results of a spurious ''analysis'' of 10 of the candidates speeches and/or interviews. The authors claim that the study ''verifies'' the popular stereotype that ''Bush is not as deep a thinker as Gore.''

Two pages later, readers will be shocked - shocked! - to learn that the magazine's (no doubt scientific) study of the candidates' facial gestures reveals that Gore is the ''more serious, constrained, controlled, weighty, ponderous, [and] dominant of the two candidates.'' More ponderous, perhaps ... but, please, spare me the pop psychology. Biased reporters, however, are not the only ones to blame. Indeed, the vice president himself has cultivated this genius persona (one of many). Thus, he did not correct PBS News anchor Gwen Ifill when she referred to him as a graduate of Vanderbilt Law School. Even more significant was the line in Gore's convention acceptance speech in which he stated, ''I know my own imperfections. I know that sometimes people say I'm too serious, that I talk too much substance and policy.'' Poor Al, he's just too smart for the job. Of course, the stereotyping of conservative candidates as dumb and liberal candidates as ''brilliant'' is nothing new. During the 1950s, the media lionized Democrat Adlai Stevenson as an intellectual, while ridiculing Republican Dwight Eisenhower as an ineffectual simpleton. Back then, the members of the press knew full well that Stevenson attended Harvard Law School and, yet, had not received a degree. But the media gave Stevenson a pass. (Sound familiar?) Had resourceful journalists investigated, they might have learned (as we now know from Stevenson's biographer John Bartlow Martin) that Harvard Law School Dean Erwin Griswold had hidden Stevenson's transcript in a locked cabinet in his office. What was he hiding? Stevenson, the so-called ''thinking man's candidate,'' had, in fact, flunked out of Harvard Law.

In the end, neither intellect nor academic performance is an especially important criterion by which to judge our presidents. Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman were no scholars, but they rank among the best presidents in our country's history. And what about many liberals' favorite president - Franklin Roosevelt? Social, popular, and famously unserious as an undergraduate at Harvard, FDR had an undistinguished academic record. Yet, later in life, Roosevelt's charisma and his ability to persuade, compromise, and lead helped him to become a ''reformer with results.''

This election is not an I.Q. test; it is about which candidate has better judgment. And that is why, despite the media's love affair with the celluloid image of Al Gore the policy-wonk, it is the affable, authentic, and sensible Bush who would make the better leader. Jennifer C. Braceras is an attorney and research fellow at Harvard Law School. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If you want something to complain about in Mr. Gore's (economic) program, it's those tax cuts. For one thing, each cut gets touted twice - once as a tax break, then again as a part of a program to promote truth, justice and the American way. And it is an understatement to say that the tax breaks are complicated. As best I can figure, they are targeted on a middle-income widow with many children, all about to enter college, who does not receive health insurance from her employer, is enrolled in a training program, drives a fuel-efficient car and is about to inherit a farm. But I'm not sure I got it right."

- Columnist Paul Krugman, New York Times, 9/10/00



To: American Spirit who wrote (1624)10/8/2000 7:12:43 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Respond to of 10042
 
The Smooth Talker Ducks Hard Questions

There's a reason Al Gore is afraid of Tim Russert.

BY PEGGY NOONAN

Friday, September 8, 2000 4:22 a.m. EDT

Has George W. Bush bottomed out, and is he starting to come back? There is reason to think so, and not only because every newspaper in America has "Bush Done For--GOP Panics" stories on the front page which, considering your usual journalistic time lag, suggests his comeback is well under way. Mr. Bush's campaign this week took on an urgency, with substantive proposals on Medicare and education, and an aggressive look at Al Gore's programs. And the debate debate, which looked flaky at first, seems to deserve greater scrutiny, and bears the potential for dividends. I think this because I've been reading transcripts of "Meet the Press." Mr. Bush agreed to debate Mr. Gore in a prime-time version of NBC's "Meet the Press," hosted by Tim Russert, because he had to make a virtue of necessity.

Mr. Gore is a gifted debater--disciplined, seasoned by four national political cycles, possessed of a killer's instincts. Mr. Bush is not a great debater. He hasn't even shown himself to be a good debater. In the primary debates he looked like he was sliding down in his chair so teacher wouldn't notice him. And when he tried to speak candidly, saying for instance that Jesus was his favorite philosopher, he couldn't explain why except to assert that Christ had changed his heart, which seemed both believable and inadequate. So Mr. Bush is bad at debate and Mr. Gore is good, but the latter has reason to fear a grilling from a persistent questioner and the former doesn't. Mr. Gore wants to debate but not to be interviewed, and Mr. Bush wants to be interviewed but not to debate.

The brilliant answer: have a "debate" in which Mr. Russert, who has his own killer instincts, asks questions. That way Mr. Gore, who has the talent to dominate, will not be allowed to. It won't be Big Al versus the Shrub. It would be a moderator with two equals. Mr. Gore had clearly agreed to this format and venue. In an interview with Mr. Russert on July 16, he even pushed for the CEO of General Electric, which owns NBC, to get Mr. Bush to agree: Mr. Gore: I've accepted for two or three months now your invitation to debate on this program. Have you gotten a yes from Gov. Bush yet?

Mr. Russert: His campaign says he will debate you, and the request is under active consideration . . . Mr. Gore: "Well, how are you going to persuade him to say yes, Tim?" Mr. Russert: "Well, maybe you're helping today." Mr. Gore: "Well, do you think so? But what kind of approach--can you get Jack Welch involved?" But when Mr. Bush accepted the debate this week, Mr. Gore suddenly refused to take part. The media are letting him get away with it for several reasons, including (a) the other broadcast-network shows failed to get the debate and are not happy, and (b) the debate would be good for a competitor, and helping Tim Russert isn't their job.

It isn't mine either, but getting both candidates in a setting in which they will reveal things about themselves, their history and their thinking is. In the 40 years since John F. Kennedy debated Richard Nixon, presidential debates have declined as venues in which revelation and insight occur. They are now what was once said of flying--hours of boredom punctuated by a few seconds of sheer terror. ("Mr. President, are you saying that Poland is a free country?") Modern debates consist of a 90-second sound bite in which one candidate asserts, followed by 60 seconds in which another rebuts, followed by 30 seconds of answer to the rebuttal. It is rote, ritualistic, unrevealing. It is perfectly suited to Al Gore, the human Conair 2000, who opens his mouth, flips the switch and blows, and who also wrote a college paper on how presidential news conferences can be handled through prefab sound bites. But what has frozen and hardened in these debates could be broken up and made fluid again by the presence of a seasoned interviewer. Mr. Bush thinks Mr. Russert is tough but fair; Mr. Gore thinks Mr. Russert is--well, he thinks he's the man who put him through this: Mr. Russert: "I want to ask you a very simple question. Do you believe that life begins at conception?" Mr. Gore: "No. I believe there is a difference. You know, I believe that the Roe v. Wade decision wisely embodies the kind of common-sense judgment that most Americans share.

" Mr. Russert then showed a letter Mr. Gore had written in 1987, in which he said he consistently opposed federal funding of abortions because government shouldn't take part in "the taking of what is arguably a human life." Mr. Gore answered that he had changed his mind on that "10, 15 years ago." Mr. Russert: "But you did vote to define a person as including an unborn child." Mr. Gore said it was a "procedural vote." Mr. Russert: "When do you think life begins?" Mr. Gore: "I favor the Roe v. Wade approach, but let me just say, Tim, I did--" Mr. Russert: "Which is what? When does life begin?" Mr. Gore did not answer, but referred instead to changing his position on federal funding of abortions. The interviewer pressed again. Mr. Russert: "But you were calling fetuses innocent human life, and now you don't believe life begins at conception. I'm just trying to find out, when do you believe life begins?" Mr. Gore replied that Roe v. Wade "proposes an answer to that question." Asked what it is, he replied that there is "a developmental process during which the burden kind of shifts over time." He vowed to protect "a woman's right to choose."

Then Mr. Russert changed approach. Mr. Russert: "Should there be a restriction on minors getting abortions without parental consent?" Mr. Gore: "Difficult question, because there are all kind of circumstances where you have some children kind of raising themselves in situations where their families are fractured . . ." He added that the decision needs to "be worked out in the context of a woman's right to choose." Mr. Russert: "But a child needs permission to have her ears pieced." Mr. Gore: "I understand." Mr. Russert: "You don't want parental permission for an abortion." Mr. Gore said some proposals on this "have been a backdoor effort to eliminate a woman's right to choose." Mr. Russert asked why not support parental notification in which a judge could intervene in the kind of cases he refers to. Mr. Gore said, "Well, I'd want to look at that." So Mr. Russert changed approach again. Mr. Russert: "Right now there's legislation which says that a woman on death row--if she's pregnant, she should not be executed.

Do you support that?" Mr. Gore: "I don't know what you're talking about." Mr. Russert: "It's a federal statute . . . that if a woman is pregnant and she's on death row, she should not be executed." Mr. Gore: "Well, I don't know what the circumstances would be in that situation. I would--you know, it's an interesting fact situation. I'd want to think about it." It was stupendous, an hour of relentless and informed questioning on Social Security, the surplus, tax policy, and whether the Boy Scouts should be allowed to exclude gay members (Mr. Gore couldn't say). It was the most revealing presidential interview since Roger Mudd met Ted Kennedy in 1980 and showed us Mr. Kennedy's utter inability to make a case for his own candidacy. Mr. Russert is becoming the first indispensable television journalist since Walter Cronkite.

With his happy-killer mug, and his desire to bore in, he makes you think of what was said of Lenin: "He could exhaust you by listening." (Idiotic but defensively necessary note: I worked for MSNBC, which is part of NBC, during the political conventions this year; I also did a half-hour interview with Mr. Russert when my book on Hillary Clinton came out, and emerged exhausted though not horrified.) Mr. Gore has his reasons for not wanting to be subjected to another grilling; but the public might benefit greatly from it, as it would be what we want all such events to be: revealing. Mr. Bush, at this point, should speak frankly of his underdog status in whatever debates finally occur.

He should start making jokes about it, too, and making people laugh at the difference between his lack of gifts in that area and Mr. Gore's abundance of them. He might even come right out and declare Gore the winner going in. Mr. Bush should also explain frankly how you can be both best candidate and worst debater, the right man with the right ideas and the lesser talent for asserting them. Which brings us to the old empty-chair gambit. Mr. Bush says he'll show up at the debate time with an empty chair, put it down on the sidewalk and offer to debate. Some joker has already answered, "Watch out, the chair will win!" That is one great line, but it begs for a comeback, and perhaps if Mr. Bush meets with the press for an hour or two that night and takes all questions, the comeback will be his. Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "The Case Against Hillary Clinton" (Regan Books, 2000).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Panel Calls Gore Tax Breaks Vague

By CURT ANDERSON

WASHINGTON (AP) - A non-partisan congressional panel found that 19 of Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore's proposed tax breaks are too vague for an official estimate, leading to Republican charges that Gore isn't living up to his call for specifics on campaign issues. ``The vice president has talked a lot about the need for specificity and detail, but apparently he didn't mean it to apply to his own tax plan,'' said Rep. Bill Archer, a Texas Republican who chairs the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation, which estimates all tax legislation on Capitol Hill for Democrats and Republicans, released documents Friday showing that such Gore proposals as a health insurance tax credit, cuts in the estate tax and education tax breaks ``require additional specification'' in order to be estimated. Ari Fleischer, spokesman for Republican candidate George W. Bush, said, ``This is a classic example of Al Gore saying one thing and doing another. He won't even provide enough details about who gets the tax cuts, which suggests that not many people will get them.'' Gore has regularly chastised Bush for what he says are a lack of specifics in the Texas governor's ideas, leading Bush earlier this week to submit a detailed plan for a Medicare prescription drug benefit. On the tax front, however, the Joint Committee on Taxation was able in May to fully estimate Bush's 10-year plan centered on gradual reductions in income tax rates and elimination of the estate tax.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Great Exaggerator Strikes Again!

"Vice President Al Gore, reaching for a personal example to illustrate the breathtaking costs of some prescription drugs, told seniors in Florida last month that his mother-in-law pays nearly three times as much for the same arthritis medicine used for his ailing dog, Shiloh.

But Gore, the master of many policy details, mangled the facts, and late last week his aides could not say with certainty that Shiloh or Margaret Ann Aitcheson actually takes the brand-name drug, Lodine, that Gore said they do. "Even if they take the drug, Gore's assertion that his black Labrador retriever's monthly bill is $37.80 and Aitcheson's is $108 is wrong.

The Gore campaign admitted that it lifted those costs not from his family's bills, but from a House Democratic study, and that Gore misused even those numbers: They represent the manufacturer's price to wholesalers, not the retail price of the brand-name product. What's more, the costs Gore cited presume that his dog and mother-in-law take the same dosage - which could put 14-year-old Shiloh at risk for stomach ulcers. " ...

When they were asked last Thursday whether Aitcheson and Shiloh actually take the brand name of the drug, two of the vice president's aides were unable to say whether that was the case or how much the family pays for each. For Gore, who has a history of embellishing facts about himself and his family, the remarks he made in Florida are a blend of erroneous family detail and questionable statistics on an election issue of growing significance."

- Boston Globe, 9/18/00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BYLINE: John McCaslin;

THE WASHINGTON TIMES BODY:

GORE'S BEST FRIEND?

Inside the Beltway has learned that D.C. animal-control authorities recently received an emergency call from a guard posted at an entrance gate outside Vice President Al Gore's mansion on Massachusetts Avenue. The officer, apparently with the uniformed division of the Secret Service, told the authorities that a sick dog had been lingering around the vice president's property, and could they please send somebody out to pick up the pooch.

The animal-control people arrived and quickly determined that the dog, a poodle, required immediate emergency veterinary care. According to our source, who works in veterinary medicine, the dog was suffering from "maggot infestation of the muscles, resulting from an open, untreated wound." The dog, it turned out, belongs to the family of Vice President Al Gore. The dog was transported to Friendship Animal Hospital in the District, a 24-hour facility that provides emergency care under director Dr. Peter Glassman. "No, I have no comment," Dr. Glassman said when we contacted him yesterday. Earlier, an employee in Dr. Glassman's office said the staff was under "strict order" not to discuss the case.

"I told my staff not to comment on anything that goes on here," Dr. Glassman said when we repeated the charge. A D.C. animal-control official also confirmed our story earlier this week but said that agency is also "under a gag order." The employee said any official comment would have to come from Mary Healey, executive director of the Washington Humane Society. Reached yesterday, Ms. Healey confirmed: "We had received a call to pick up a dog in the vicinity of the vice presidential property and we responded to the call. We located the dog; I believe it was a poodle . . . named Coconut.

The dog was apparently injured in some way. "Our normal procedure . . . is to transport such an animal to Friendship Animal Hospital, and that was the end of the road for us." Ms. Healey said she didn't believe Coconut carried a name tag, but she confirmed that authorities were able to determine at the scene that the dog did have an owner and was not a stray. Our initial source said the guard who reported the dog's condition to authorities "claims not to have realized the dog belonged to the Gores, but the animal-control people think he was just trying to get the suffering animal some help without jeopardizing his job."

Tipper Gore, speaking yesterday afternoon through spokeswoman Sally Aman, said: "What happened is we've been having construction on the house and Coconut got out, and was missing for a couple of days. It's an amazing dog. She's 16 years old. It had been outside the grounds and found its way home, and that's when it was discovered." She said the dog, after its surgery, was nursed back to health by the Gore children. It could not be determined whether the Gores had reported the dog missing.

dittohead.org