The Blue State

A Day With Al

Al Gore is looking better to me everyday, and for that reason I decided todedicate a post to him...the country's pAL.

First lets take a look at Al's new book 'TheAssault on Reason'. The Guardian postedan edited extract from his book.

'A drive for global domination has put us in greater danger'- Moral authority, which is ourgreatest source of strength, has been recklessly put at risk by this willfulpresident

The pursuit of "dominance" in foreign policy led the Bushadministration to ignore the UN, to do serious damage to our most importantalliances, to violate international law, and to cultivate the hatred andcontempt of many in the rest of the world. The seductive appeal of exercisingunconstrained unilateral power led this president to interpret his powers underthe constitution in a way that brought to life the worst nightmare of thefounders. Any policy based on domination of the rest of the world not onlycreates enemies for the US and recruits for al-Qaida, but also undermines theinternational cooperation that is essential to defeating terrorists who wish toharm and intimidate America. Instead of "dominance", we should beseeking pre-eminence in a world where nations respect us and seek to follow ourleadership and adopt our values. Readon...

Time Online posted an excerptfrom 'The Assault on Reason'

Not long before our nation launched the invasion of Iraq, our longest-servingSenator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor and said:"This chamber is, for the most part, silent—ominously, dreadfully silent.There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the prosand cons of this particular war. There is nothing. We stand passively mute inthe United States Senate."

Why was the Senate silent?

In describing the empty chamber the way he did, Byrd invited a specificversion of the same general question millions of us have been asking: "Whydo reason, logic and truth seem to play a sharply diminished role in the wayAmerica now makes important decisions?" The persistent and sustainedreliance on falsehoods as the basis of policy, even in the face of massive andwell-understood evidence to the contrary, seems to many Americans to havereached levels that were previously unimaginable. Readon...

We constantly hear the broken record words of Sean Hannity trying to get anyoneand everyone to side with him that "Gore is a hypocrite" regardingGlobal Warming.

Joseph Palermo wrote on DavidBrook's Assault on Al Gore.

In today's New York Times, right-wing columnist and perennialyakking head, David (Bobo-in-Paradise) Brooks, trashes Al Gore's newbook, The Assault on Reason. Brooks labels Gore "a radicaltechnological determinist" because the former Vice President draws upon thescholarly work of Marshal McLuhan, Neil Postman, and others to conclude that theprinting press, radio, and television have had an enormous impact on ourpolitics. "Gore's imperviousness to reality is not the most strikingfeature of the book," sniffs Brooks, "it's the chilliness andsterility of his worldview."

Toward the end of his mushy-headed indictment of Gore, Brooks snivels:"Utterly at a loss when asked to talk about virtue and justice, [Gore andothers] try to shift attention to technology and methods of communication. Theyimagine that by altering machines they can alter the fundamentals of behavior,or at least avoid the dark thickets of human nature."

It's funny that someone like Brooks, who calls himself a"conservative" and an "intellectual" would be so downrighthostile to The Assault on Reason. After all, aren't people like Brookssupposed to admire the framers of the Constitution and other people who havecontributed to defining our nation's creed?...Readon...

It really doesn't matter if you like Gore or not, butit is difficult to disagree with his points of view both politically and environmentally.What once turned me off from Gore was his articulate, intelligent and almost condescendingattitude, is now something I embrace. He stayed the course and proved to us thathe really does care about the people, the country and the earth.

Gore Says Bush is an Un-American , Heretic

Al Gore 'The Assault On Reason' ~ Countdown w/Obermann Part1

Al Gore 'The Assault On Reason' ~ Countdown w/Obermann Part2

Al Gore ~ Religion/Founding Fathers - Larry King 5/22/2007

                   

Al's Home Page

Al's o8 Draft Campaign Page

Al's Inconvenient      Truth Page

Draft Gore Page

This post isn't a "The Blue State Supports Gore", this was solelyto condense a wealth of information in a single post about Al.. I am an Obama o8kinda guy, but would love a Gore/Obama ticket, and would like Richardson onGore's cabinet. If all goes well, perhaps an Obama 2012?

Helen Thomas: Media purveyors of Administration's propaganda

Cox News Service sat down to interview Helen Thomas.  The long-time White House Correspondent explained how the media has recently refused to do their job by asking the tough questions that every American wants to know about the real state of the union.  She also discussed her new book -- Watchdogs of Democracy?: The Waning Washington Press Corps and How It Has Failed the Public -- which so far is getting excellent reviews.  Here is the Q & A session with Helen Thomas:

Q. Helen, this is your fourth book, and, unlike the others, this is not a memoir.

A. No, this is just sort of a critique — some might say an attack —on the White House press corps, the Pentagon press corps and so forthfor laying down on the job. I feel they gave up their one weapon, whichis skepticism, in the run-up to the war. And they had plenty, plentynotice that we were going to war — two years, in fact.

Q. Why did you write the book?

A. I wrote it because I was outraged at what I felt was a deafeningsilence when the reporters should have been asking "You want to go towar, why? Give us the proof."

I was outraged because I believe that we have a role to play. We arethe protectors, really, of getting truthful information to the people.(Instead,) we were purveyors of their propaganda in the run up to thewar, everything has proved to be untrue. How can you face that?Basically the president was saying, "We're going to war," and nobodyasked why.

Q. How do you want this book to be read?

A. I want it to be read as a message, mainly to my own profession,that they have a job to do and they have to let the chips fall wherethey may, that we didn't go into this field for a popularity contest,to be loved. We went in to make sure that the American people areinformed, because that's the only way you can have a democracy.

Q. Perhaps the key paragraph of your book comes in the foreword,where you write that "the media let the country down in failing toadhere to its gold standard — the search for truth."

A. I really believe that. You see, we don't have the British system,where a prime minister goes before the House of Commons and isaccountable. We're the only institution in our society — it isn't inthe Constitution, but we're indispensable — where a president has to bequestioned and held accountable.

Q. Do you think better journalism could have prevented this war?

A. There's nothing like public pressure on officialdom, to make themback off, go back to the drawing board, wonder whether they cansucceed. I honestly believe we could have prevented the war.

Q. I know you didn't cover the Truman administration. But at hislast press conference he talked about how vital it was for a free pressto have regular, open access to the president of the United States. Howwould you compare that kind of "buck stops here" approach to whatyou've seen with the Bush administration?

A. It doesn't happen here. And one of the things Truman said is thatthrough our questions he got the feedback in terms of what is happeningin the country and what they're thinking and so forth, because they arepretty isolated. You're not going to find that here. Everything issanitized and the president comes in with a list of reporters he'sgoing to call on.

Q. You say in your book that you quickly became persona non grata inthe Bush White House. How long did you go without being able to askBush a question directly?

A. It was like three years.

Q. I think most Americans would be stunned to learn that the dean ofthe White House press corps was not able to ask the president of theUnited States a question for that critical period of time. How did youfeel about that?

A. It isn't me. Anybody could have asked any of those questions.Believe me, I want the questions asked and it doesn't matter who asksthem.

Q. But you do bring a certain institutional knowledge to this beat, that very few people have.

A. None of these people knew Vietnam, a war we conducted in thewrong place, wrong time, 58,000 Americans dead and then we pull out byour fingertips, clinging to helicopters.

Q. Do you think there's a generation gap in the White House press corps?

A. I think it hurts when young reporters don't have anyinstitutional knowledge and don't know what's in the Bill of Rights orthe Constitution and don't know anything about history. ... If they hadremembered anything or known anything about Vietnam they would haveasked much more important questions. I just feel that the education isremiss.

Also, just in case you missed it, here is a clip from last week of Helen Thomas on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

---------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: Politics and the Press, Whirled View, Dateline: Bristol, The Ubiquitous Flying Blue Blog, Lowell Democratic City Committee, Working Class Media, The End of Dave, Down with Tyranny, The Prodigal Liberal, Tiny Little Dots.

 

Video: Stewart exposes absurdity of flag debate

The latest Bloomberg Poll measured the 2006 race for Congress, and has Democrats comfortably leading Republicans by 14-points.  With things getting desperate as we get closer to election time, the Republicans have spent the last two weeks trying to ignite a culture war in an attempt to maximize their political base's voter turnout this November.

Republicans like Orrin Hatch, who authored the flag amendment that was rejected this week, still insist that this was not an election year ploy.  As Jon Stewart, host of the Daily Show, explained, no American is buying that line:

Click to watch video clip

---------- Partial Transcript ---------

STEWART: "In the end, the amendment fell one short of passing the United States Senate.  But as Senator Hatch explained, the motivation was pure."

(begin video segment)

SEN. HATCH: "Bringing it up at this time was certainly not an election year ploy.  We have Democrats and Republicans who feel very deeply about this.  It is bipartisan.  The last time we brought it up was in the year 2000."

(end video segment)

STEWART: "And that wasn't an election -- oh!"

Two weeks ago it was gays.  Last week it was flags.  Now expect guns and God to be next.  This year you have a clear choice to make.  Either you vote to continue the culture of fear, or you vote for a culture of reform.  Your choice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: Donkey Path, They Get Letters, WMFU's Beware of the Blog, Libertarian Librarian, Maine Democrats, DC Mr. Anthrope, I'm Taking my Country Back, Death of the Message Board, RJS Journey, Terry Cowgill, A Crank's Progress.

Video: Gore responds to critics

As a guest on the Daily Show, former vice president Al Gore was asked by host Jon Stewart about the small number of self-proclaimed "scientists" that are attacking him and his cause:

Click to watch video clip

STEWART: What about the scientists behind it?  There's some guys who say it -- are they typically obviously associated with fossil fuels, and that sort of thing?

GORE: Well, the scientific debate really is over on the principle points about this.  There are a few people who -- and some of them do get money from coal companies and oil companies.  But the essential debate is completely over.  That's why I wish President Bush would see the movie (audience laughter).  I wish that his Administration would see the movie.  He has people advising him.

STEWART: If you'd like, I'll put in a call.

GORE: That might help.  But he said yesterday it's a problem, but it's not clear that people have anything to do with causing the problems -- so let's just get past that debate.  Well, if you go to the doctor, the doctor doesn't say, "Well, let's don't worry about what's causing all these problems you're having.  We don't need to know that.  Let's, you know, give you an Aspirin and send you home."  It's a very similar proposition.

Al Gore is not running for president.  He will not be seeking any other political office.  What could possibly be his motivation other than the fact that he is passionate about this issue?  He has been giving this slide show for years.  He was inspired by those that taught him.  Is it a bad thing to want to be an activist?  Apparently some of his critics think so.
------------------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: Orange Penny Loafers, Blah Blah Blog, The S Factor, Now you Know, Spare Change, A Tableau of Crimes and Misfortunes, The Obfuscation Report, The last Ditch, Innovation Science.

Video: Helen Thomas on Daily Show with Jon Stewart

On The Daily Show, Jon Stewart interviewed famous White House correspondent Helen Thomas, who has been attending White House press conferences ever since 1961 -- that's nine presidents in total!  The two discussed Bush's foreign policy doctrine, the lack of reporting after 9/11, and her recent confrontation with Tony Snow:

Click to watch video clip

---------- Partial Transcript ---------

STEWART: You're in a press conference I guess just this week.  He (Tony Snow) said, "Helen, you're heckling me." He said, "It's rude, I'm the teacher" -- I believe is how he put it.

THOMAS: I said, "You're a Johny-come-lately," basically.

STEWART: Did you really?  Very nice.

THOMAS: Now, I asked him if we were going to have permanent bases in Iraq.  And at first...he said no, we weren't going to.  And I decided to revisit the question in the afternoon briefing because I was sure he was off base.  I asked him again.  I said, "Would you like to reconfirm, and I want to revisit this question: are we going to have permanent bases in Iraq?"  He said, "It depends on what you mean by permanent."

STEWART: How do you not --

THOMAS: I don't.

STEWART: It must be difficult not to throw something.

Conservative pundits such as Ann Coulter have attacked Helen Thomas a lot ever since 9/11 for asking the tough questions.  But she has done this for every president -- all nine of them that she has covered.  Regardless of what some say about her, she is definitely one of the greatest journalists of our time.
---------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: My Mad Existence, Shentou, Simply Appalling, Religious Grounds, Jay Melee.

Kennedy to appear on Daily Show

Thursday's episode of the Daily Show should prove to be an entertaining one.  The office of Ted Kennedy announced that the Massachusetts Senator has accepted an invitation to appear on Thursday's show:

"Senator Kennedy has been waitingfor the right invitation," said Stephanie Cutter, a Kennedy adviser."He's a huge fan of Jon Stewart and he's very much looking forward tothis."

You can bet that the issues of immigration, wiretaps and prewar intelligence will be touched on.

Speaking of Kennedy, yesterday he made Time Magazine's List of America's Top-10 Senators.  Six of the ten on the list were Republican.  This could give hope to anyone with political aspiration, since all a Senator has to do now is just rubber stamp whatever the President wants and then claim to be an effective lawmaker.  How noble.

Video: The insurgency against Rumsfeld

The way Daily Show Senior Military Correspondent Dan Bakkedahl sees it, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is having to deal with two insurgencies: the one in Iraq, and the one against himself:

Click to watch video clip >>> (Windows Media Player)

JON STEWART: "Dan, but the criticism is what the generals are saying is that they did anticipate the Iraqi insurgency."

DAN BAKKEDAHL: "No, no.  What Rumsfeld didn't anticipate was the retired generals' insurgency.  The Iraq insurgency?  Now, a dead man could have see that coming.  In fact, a blind, retarded dead man."

As Ret. Gen. John Batiste said this week: "We certainly had the troops necessary to win the fight to take downSaddam Hussein, but we in no way considered the hard work to win thepeace. There was 10 years of good, deliberate war planning by U.S.Central Command that was essentially ignored."  With the intelligence ignored, the conclusion that a dead man could have seen this insurgency coming is not that far from the truth.