Paging Al Gore: Answer the white courtesy phone

Open Letter to Al Gore:

Dear Al,

You need to pick up this call.  You have been perhaps the greatest victim of voter disenfranchisement.  A man ready to be President.  The highest office in the World at your fingertips ripped away by people who did not wish to count all the votes and did everything in their power to discourage some Florida voters from voting.

You know it, I know it, we all know it.  You were screwed in 2000, first by local state political hacks in Florida headed up by Jeb Bush, and then by hacks appointed to the US Supreme Court.

Al, we respect the fact that you have found your highest calling in curing the ills of Planet Earth.  The Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth, the Nobel Peace Prize, your bestseller An Assault on Reason, and all the other accolades you have garnered were well deserved.  And we even respect your decision not to run for President of the United States, again.

But this situation... one where Democrats are trying to keep Democratic voters away from the polls... this can not stand unchallenged.  We love Patrick Leahy and John Kerry for standing up and speaking out about this.  But right now there is no greater voice for democracy in the entire world than you, Al Gore, Jr.

We need you to set your former White House colleagues straight.  Bill and Hillary might be family friends of yours and Tipper's, but they need a stern warning from you in their backing of attempts at disenfranchising voters.  No one says you have to endorse Obama.  No one says you have to endorse Edwards.  Hell, you can even go ahead and endorse Hillary.  But the Clintons' current tactics are not to be borne.

The phone is ringing.  You're being paged.  Answer the call, Al.  

•  Tips

  Anyone have 50 cents for Al to make a payphone call?

  by rustydude on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:56:30 AM PDT

  •  I will tip anything that invokes The Great One.

    I wish Al would just tell me who to vote for so I don't have to guess which one he likes.

    by Wisper on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:58:22 AM PDT

    •  LOL

      I have to confess, I'm with you on that one.  I pretty much will back any one of these candidates that Al endorses.

      by rustydude on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:59:37 AM PDT

    •  Gore for the nominee of a deadlocked

      convention.

      I realize it's a long shot, and I'm content to work vigorously to elect whoever wins our party's nomination. But unless Gore makes a Shermanesque disavowal of the presidency, I'll continue to hope for a Gore-Obama ticket.

      by another American on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:07:52 AM PDT

      •  That would make me

        very happy.  And would unite the party like nothing else.

        by bear83 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:18:40 PM PDT

  •  He can use my cellie

    and shouldn't worry about the minutes!

    by 2ajpuu on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:01:39 AM PDT

  •  Sorry, But Al had his chance...

    And when he stabbed the CBC in the back, that's when I had it with him. What a wimp! What a pilsbury dough boy! Fine if he did not want to sign the petition that the CBC presented to him on Jan 6, 2001; however, when he asked other senators to not sign it, that was the kiss of death to this nation.

    For those who have no idea as to what it is I'm referring to, please rewatch Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. Here is a man who actually won the presidency and then was not MAN ENOUGH to fight for it. Hillary has way bigger cajones then Al! Imagine how much better the whole world would have been if the petition was signed, the recount was done, and then Gore would have been POTUS!

    So let him continue his vanity tour - and enjoy his WELL-DESERVED rewards. But he put his own sense of "image" and "being a gentleman" above the needs of the majority of the voters who elected him and anyone who is so short-sighted and self-centered does not deserve our consideration.

    TurnDaPage and MoveOn!

    by DaNorr on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:23:33 AM PDT

    •  That's bullshit. SCOTUS shot Al Gore down

      illegally.  Rehnquist and his ilk.

      Al Gore had no higher institution to appeal to... the anger in the nation was palpable.  The outcome would have been tragic, most likely.  So Gore took a bullet for the nation.

      Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

      by bronte17 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:38:19 AM PDT

      •  Exactly

        SPEAKER: ALBERT GORE JR., VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

        Good evening.

        Just moments ago, I spoke with George W. Bush and congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States, and I promised him that I wouldn't call him back this time.

        I offered to meet with him as soon as possible so that we can start to heal the divisions of the campaign and the contest through which we just passed.

        Almost a century and a half ago, Senator Stephen Douglas told Abraham Lincoln, who had just defeated him for the presidency, "Partisan feeling must yield to patriotism. I'm with you, Mr. President, and God bless you."

        Well, in that same spirit, I say to President-elect Bush that what remains of partisan rancor must now be put aside, and may God bless his stewardship of this country.

        Neither he nor I anticipated this long and difficult road. Certainly neither of us wanted it to happen. Yet it came, and now it has ended, resolved, as it must be resolved, through the honored institutions of our democracy.

        Over the library of one of our great law schools is inscribed the motto, "Not under man but under God and law." That's the ruling principle of American freedom, the source of our democratic liberties. I've tried to make it my guide throughout this contest as it has guided America's deliberations of all the complex issues of the past five weeks.

        Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity of the people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.

        a mere politician might have not considered these things or acted so selflessly. But we're speaking of Al Gore here!

        by valadon on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:36:24 PM PDT

    •  Troll rating is not the correct response

      As much as I like Al Gore, I defend anyone's right to air opinions about candidates or former candidates.  Troll ratings should be reserved for 2 things:

      1-Personal attacks on other Kossacks.
      2-Obvious Republican talking points.

      DaNorr's comment didn't fit into either.  The DailyKos rules also allow troll rating for ad-hoc attacks on politicians but even there I'm not sure DaNorr treads that line.  It's merely a strong opinion against a guy that many of us love.  Exercising of free speech.  I think even Al would appreciate that.

      My personal response to DaNorr's comment was to ignore it until it was troll-rated.

      by rustydude on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:34:07 PM PDT

      •  Thanks, but...

        I can take it...after all, I'm sure that none of the people who trolled me ever voted for any member of the CBC, nor do I think that they understand just what it is I'm referring to. SCOTUS had nothing to do with the fact that the Senate has to approve the presidential vote count. And Al, as President of the Senate in charge of the validation, just rolled over and played "but I care about the rules..."

        Look, I've voted in every presidential election since 1972, and never have I voted for a RepubliKlan! Indeed, except for a time or two when I voted for the SWP candidate, I always voted for the Democrat. Yet in all these years I never felt better about voting for someone then when I voted for Gore in 2000. So maybe I'm just not in the forgiving mood.

        Opps. Guess I'm gonna get trolled again! If I keep this up, I'm gonna get booted from DailyKos, I guess. Fine with me. I'm not into the cult of personality thing anyway.

        by DaNorr on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:27:51 PM PDT

        •  I can understand the misplaced anger DaNorr

          But it is inaccurate to say that Gore "had his chance" or that he did nothing to counter the bush machine. Everyone of those infamous five Justices should have been impeached. Gore did what a Statesman should do...but where was our outrage at the Supreme Court? Or with the injustice of their decision? For the first time in our history we allowed a branch of government to supersede the will of the people.

          We'd probably agree on the effects of bush's stewardship of this nation at least. To say it has been pitiful is an understatement, but one thing is certain; it is the second time we've allowed overreach or downright usurpation of the people's will by executive fiat.

          by valadon on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:05:28 PM PDT

    •  Your comment is a defamatory lie

      "when he stabbed the CBC in the back"

      This is a defamatory lie because of (5) below:

      Facts about FL'2K

      1. Gore fought for 35 days: link.

      2. The rightwing meme "Gore is/was cherry picking districts" is false. The Gore campaign asked the Bush campaign to join them in requesting a statewide recount which the latter refused. This link provides the details.

      3. This CNN poll shows that 79% of Americans wanted Gore to concede should the SC ruling go against him. link.

      4. After the verdict, likely signaling that the establishment was abandoning Gore, DNC Chair Rendell publicly called on Gore to concede: link.

      5. Daschle and other senate Democrats had a power-sharing agreement with senate Republicans which was the reason that no Democratic senator signed on to join the CBC in challenging the certification of Florida's electoral college votes (contrary to some impressions seemingly left by Fahrenheit 9/11 movie's opening scene). excerpt.

      6. Democrats.com analysis: Gore won Florida.

      Gore had nothing to with the decision by senate Democrats not to sign on to CBC's challenge of FL ECV certification. He was merely delivering his duty as VP when overseeing the certification, after having fought hard to get the votes counted in FL (through due process) despite weak support from the establishment.

      by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:18:11 PM PDT

      •  It Cannot Be A Lie!

        Even if it is defamatory, because I am not willfully telling a falsehood. It may well be WRONG, but stating something that is wrong is not the same as lying!

        I believe that you are wrong that "Gore had nothing to with the decision by senate Democrats not to sign on to CBC's", but I'll have to prove it with links just as you proved your convincing case with them.

        But I have no reason to lie about, nor do I have a desire to defame, Gore. To this day, my vote for him in 2000 was the only time I felt GOOD about VOTING FOR someone for POTUS, and not merely voting to keep a RepubliKlan from winning. And I've voted in every presidential election since 1972...

        by DaNorr on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:07:31 PM PDT

        •  I was going to post an update

          to clarify that unless you knew about it beforehand, it wouldn't be a lie.

          My use of "lie" was sort of generic anyhow because I have seen that repeated far too often.

          by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:49:14 PM PDT

          •  No Problems, Mon!

            It took me a while to find a "progressive" source for my contention that Gore did indeed intervene to prevent Senators from joining in the CBC petition to reject Florida's Electorial votes. I really do hope that you can invalidate this, as that would mean I am WRONG about this "fact"
            Link
            
            The relevant "quote" from said source..

            Staff from the office of the late Sen. Paul Wellstone have said Gore told those Senators inclined to join in that he would not recognize them if they tried. Senator Hillary Clinton told the Free Press Editor that Gore "begged" her not to sign on to such a challenge.

            There is nothing worse in life than being stabbed in the back by a friend - witness the Clinton's withering support from African-Americans - and that is how many of us in AA community felt about Gore when the grapevine had it that he asked Senators to ignore the CBC petition. You also have to realize that AA have, from the founding of this nation, been held back by rules that have benefited others. So, perhaps we are a tad bit over-sensitive when "rules" are thrown in our face.

            Nevertheless, as for the 79% of Americans who wanted Gore to concede - could they be the same 79% of Americans who wanted to go to war in Iraq when over 80% of AA opposed it? Sometimes the minority is right no matter what the majority thinks!

            Except, of course, the majority of voters who elected Al Gore President in 2000!

            BTW I realize that even if the CBC had been successful, the House would have been tasked with picking the Pres. As the Repubs were in control at that time, Bush would in all likelihood still had been anointed. But any delay might have given Gore's supporters time to convinced the majority of voters that Bush should not be allowed to ascend to the throne; however, you know what they say about "IF".

            I guess its time for me to TurnDaPage on my animosity towards Gore and MoveOn...

            Thanks to one and all for forcing me to check myself before I wreck myself...

            by DaNorr on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 04:55:06 PM PDT

            •  Response: part 1

              I won't take HRC's word on this, and unfortunately Sen. Wellstone is not around to confirm or deny the claim made by those authors. The authors (based on the article and Wasserman's apparent ties to the anti-Democratic party Naderite crowd that doomed Gore in 2000 to start with) and HRC both had reasons to keep Gore from running in 2008 hence the sources in your blockquote are not what I consider to be beyond reproach.

              It's also possible that senate Dems asked Gore call the senators on their behalf, which may or may not have been a "set up" for Gore.

              In 2004, Boxer did sign on and challenge the certification of OH ECVs. Nothing came out of it.

              "But any delay might have given Gore's supporters time to convinced the majority of voters that Bush should not be allowed to ascend to the throne; however, you know what they say about "IF"."

              GOP would have killed it in the house. It would have failed in the senate as well because the outgoing senate also had GOP in majority. Therefore, nothing would have come out as you are suggesting here.

              Further, did you know that Michael Moore was strongly pulling for Gore to run in 2008? Irony aside, I am sure that Michael Moore, who met Gore a few times in the recent years, must have asked Gore about eaxctly what happened in Jan'01. That should give us confidence that Gore has a perfectly reasoned rationale and explanation of the events surrounding that certification.

              I'll respond later at greater length, if time permits.

              "I guess its time for me to TurnDaPage on my animosity towards Gore and MoveOn... Thanks to one and all for forcing me to check myself before I wreck myself..."

              You're alright, Mon! :)

              by NeuvoLiberal on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:16:41 PM PDT

              •  Please, There's no need to Respond...

                Your responses have been more than even-handed. And I agree that my "source" can be suspect. But there is no need for you to continue waste your considerable talents on me - I am convinced that your position is a strong one. So please continue to fight the good fight cause in the end all I want is for the Democrats to gain the control over the government and to set the tone of the political discourse in this country for the next "forever" years! I'm a YellaDawg, and proud of it!

                by DaNorr on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 08:21:58 AM PDT

        •  You don't know what you are talking about man

          Gore had no power to change the outcome.

          Even if the Senate had challenged the electoral college  under those circumstances the house picks the president and the Senate picks the vice president.

          Guess who controlled the house?

          The CBC wasted their time as they also knew what would happen if they could get at least one Senator on board.

          Partisan elements who only listen to their emotions like you think that fighting for the sake of fighting makes sense. It does not. If the goal simply cannot be reached only an idiot fights.

          BTW the Senators not Gore were  responsible for what they did or didn't do so if you have some problem trash them not Gore.

          by elender on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:17:25 AM PDT

          •  Like The Goal Of Equal Rights...

            It has only taken how long... 200 years or so.
            I am a member of a group of emotional people who have continued to fight the good fight when all odds, and the majority of Americans, have been against us. So yea, I am a partisan. Imagine, after Plessy v. Ferguson, if we AA said "Oh Well, we'll never get equal rights now. So why waste our time tryin".

            And I do know who was in control of the House in 2000. But I guess the idea that white americans could have been convinced to take a further look at how SCOTUS F*ked all of us (or at least the majority of voters who voted for Gore) if the fight would have continued longer is idiotic. After all look how quickly they agreed to go to war in Iraq when we AA again wasted our time tryin to prevent it. So if you believe that a "goal simply cannot be reached" please get out of the way of the idiots who lack the common sense to give up!

            by DaNorr on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 06:41:06 PM PDT

•  I'm hoping if he doesn't do it publically

  he's at least doing it privately.  Not that I think it would do any good, mind you.

  by sqz23 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:01:44 AM PDT

•  Brokered Convention nomination?

  What if we get to the end of the primary, with a broken democratic party? Union against Union? Dirty Tricks and politics used on our own.

  It doesn't look promising, Thanks Hillary.

  by Tadly on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:35:51 AM PDT

  •  Could it be a Gore /Kerry ticket?

    We could see none of the nominees that have gone through the process of Primary at the head of the Ticket.

    Howard Dean owns the delegates for Michigan and Florida.....

    Are you running Howard?

    by Tadly on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:38:33 AM PDT

    •  Gore is way too smart

      to pick Kerry.

      by bear83 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:20:35 PM PDT

      •  It may not be Gore... It could be ....

        Insert a name here. Especially if Bloomberg gets in.

        by Tadly on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:23:01 PM PDT

•  How I will heartily laugh at the Disbelievers

  when Al Gore becomes our nominee. Actually, I'll hold it in and look real serious, and go, "It's odd, but there really was no other way, was there?" - I'll be stroking my chin between thumb and fingers and fake-acting really dark and pensive.

  by revenant on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:42:19 AM PDT

  •  Savor that thought!

    there is still no other I can in good conscience vote for...I would have been willing to bet that had Dodd had a better showing he may have gotten Al's endorsement. I guess there's no way to know that now, but thanks for that nostalgic hope against hope.

    P.S. I miss the Gore diaries!

    by valadon on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:25:52 PM PDT

•  They are not his friends. And Hillary never was

  his friend.

  by elender on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:07:57 AM PDT