Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Tue

27

Feb

2007

It’s Got to Be Gore: Part V– What Gore Should Do
Tuesday, 27 February 2007 14:10
by Andrew Bard Schmookler

This is the last of a series of five essays promoting the idea that Al Gore is the man best suited to provide America with the leadership it now needs. To this series, many have responded with enthusiastic support, and many have also expressed disagreement. The disagreements have mainly been of two kinds. Some do not believe that Gore has the moral and rhetorical power to do the job. Others argue that, whatever his assets, we ought not look to Gore because he’s not going to run.

While my main purpose in this last series is to propose the approach I think Gore should take, I hope also along the way to address satisfactorily those two criticisms.

I began this series with the notion that America needs two things from its next leadership: to help the American people understand the meaning of this era of the Bushite abuse of power, and to set about repairing the damage to American and to the world inflicted by this present regime.

With respect to the first of those two jobs, Gore can make an important contribution whether he runs for the presidency or not. And either way, here is what I would suggest he do in the coming months.

THE BASIC IDEA

Gore should make public speeches dealing directly with those pressing issues that are front and center in America at that given moment. He should weigh in on the side of what is right and what is true and what should be done NOW.

By addressing CURRENT issues, he makes his comments topical and newsworthy, part of a story that’s already being told.

But each time he speaks about such topical matters, he should also go beyond the current issue to place the matter at hand into THE LARGER CONTEXT OF WHAT AMERICAN VALUES NEED TO BE RESTORED.

By connecting the specific issues of the moment to the pattern of damage this evil regime has been doing, he can educate Americans about the larger meanings of this dark era.

FOR EXAMPLE

For example, in countering the bogus arguments the Bushites are throwing out to prevent rational deliberation about our options in Iraq (cf. the piece at www.nonesoblind.org/blog/?p=486), Gore can go on to talk about the whole pattern of dishonest statements with which the Bushites have sought to manipulate the American people. And he can take the next step and speak of the need to re-establish a culture of truthfulness in our democratic processes.

For example, in supporting the efforts to tie the president’s hands from single-handedly launching a whole new war (this time against Iran, cf. the piece at www.nonesoblind.org/blog/?p=442), Gore can go on to talk about the whole pattern of usurpations of power by these Bushites, and speak out for the restoration of our constitutional system of checks and balances.

For example, in talking about the challenge of climate change, he can go on to talk about the larger pattern of Bushite policy in which national policy has been twisted to enrich their cronies at the expense of the long-term health of our nation and the planet.

THE MORAL AUTHORITY QUESTION:

If I’m right about Gore’s ability to project moral authority –and a couple of talks Gore gave more than a year ago that suggests I am– then such speeches can have a powerful impact on the country whether he’s a candidate or not.

If his voice has no such power, he simply will not catch hold with the public—no harm done. We have nothing to lose from testing the hypothesis.

As for the idea that he’s crippled by what Americans think of him from the past, I would suggest: IF HE STANDS UP AND PLAYS THE ROLE POWERFULLY, THE PAST WILL QUICKLY BECOME IRRELEVANT.

Consider Keith Olbermann. Who was he, after all, before he began to speak with a voice of moral passion? He was a smart-alec TV guy, a bright and clever former sports reporter with a funny and glitzy news-oriented, semi-tabloid show. But then Olbermann stood up and did something remarkable. He faced the camera and told it like it is. And suddenly, there he was: a prophetic voice, a special presence on the national stage.

Do you think that if Gore stood up and spoke the moral truth with moral conviction, it would be any different for him. Instantly, I propose, Gore would be a prophetic force to be reckoned with.

In other words, it doesn’t matter if millions of people do not right now see him as a leader for our times: if he speaks with power, their minds will change virtually overnight.

And it doesn’t matter if he’s determined not to run: he can still play a major leadership role.

TO RUN OR NOT TO RUN: EITHER WAY, IT WORKS

The right path for Gore to take in the coming months is the same whether he wants to run or not. Either way, he should just speak the moral truth about the path America has been on and the path we are called to take instead.

Even if he wants to run, I recommend he make no such announcement anytime soon. As a reader on NoneSoBlind aptly put it: “No talk of the presidency, just BE ‘presidential.’” Act like a leader, and let America come to him.

America does not need a conventional politician right now, it needs a leader. It would be best for America if Gore can be seen as answering a call and not, like most people running for the office, pursuing an ambition.

If, on the other hand, Gore is entirely clear that he does not want to run for public office, there are two courses of action to consider. One is indistinguishable from the previous scenario: he acts like a leader, but never announces and, if the country comes to him, he says thanks but no thanks. In the other course of action, Gore makes a Shermanesque, wholly unambiguous declaration that he will not run in 2008, will not accept a draft, etc.

The advantage of the first is that the media will likely pay more attention if they think that Gore might be part of the horserace, which the media always prefer to cover rather than anything substantial like the fate of the nation.

The advantage of the second is that Gore would thereby transform himself into something beyond politics. The cloud of suspicion that comes with the perception of ambition would be dissipated. And removing himself from the competition for power would also cleanse Gore of much of the taint of “partisanship” that interferes so much nowadays with effective political communication, especially across the divide of our polarization would be cleansed away.

I lean toward the latter approach, but really don’t know which set of considerations should be given more weight.

GORE’S THE MAN TO GIVE US BACK OUR COUNTRY

Remember that “Saturday Night Live” piece Gore did last year, pretending to be President Gore addressing the country after having been in office for almost six years? It was hilarious, and heart-breaking.

Hilarious because of how exaggerated was the implicit comparison he was making between the country being imagined under his presidency and the grim reality that we, the viewers, all know has actually unfolded under those Bushites who snatched the presidency from him down in Florida in 2000. And painful because, exaggerated though the contrast was, the reality of the difference is stark and striking enough.

The saddest words, the poet says: “it might have been.”

Deep down, the country recognizes in Gore the image of a better future America might have had back in 2000. This, too, is part of what gives Gore a special standing in America at this unhappy time. (It was the intuitive understanding of that meaning of Gore, as a figure, that underlies the genius of that “Saturday Night Live” skit.)

Over 70 percent of the American people now tell posters that the country is “on the wrong track.” The combination of this sense of the wrongness of the present with Gore standing there as a vivid symbol of the path that America SHOULD and COULD have taken provide Gore with an almost mythic possibility to touch and to move the American people.

This, too, is part of the potential power of Gore as our NEXT leader. Beneath the level of pure rationality, he can offer America a sense of the possibility of undoing. “OK. This has been a nightmare. Let’s wake up. OK, we botched that version. Let’s go back and take it from the top.”

If Gore’s apparent new growth as a man, if his new capacity to speak with authority, if his unique standing as the alternative to the Bushite path, can all be brought together, a powerful and positive political force can be unleashed in America.

[As I indicated in the first installment of this series, part of what might help this scenario to unfold is for as many people as possible to seek ways of forwarding to Gore and those around him whatever ideas you find –here or elsewhere—that they think might help either to persuade Gore to answer the call or to guide him in providing effective leadership at this crucial moment in our nation’s history.]
 
For Parts I & II click here - Part III can be found here and Part IV here
 
 
More from this author:
The “Prophetic Social Movement”: Then and Now (6792 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler On Election Night of 2004, as I lay in bed much of the night awake and miserable, I found myself teetering on the...
The Dems’ New Power: Investigative Hearings Done Right (5922 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler On Election Day, America took a step that history may show to have been absolutely crucial in saving this republic....
Waging Battle, Building Peace: The Paradox Confronting the Democrats (6104 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler Confronting the Paradox The goal is no less than to defeat the evil that, in recent years,...
The Dems’ First Step on Iraq: The Kind of Hearings We Need (6424 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler WHERE CHICKENS COME TO ROOST The Democrats need to achieve two things with respect to the mess in Iraq: 1)...
When Failure is Better than Success: What Americans, and the World, Owe to the Disaster in Iraq (9313 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler There can be no doubt that the failed American invasion of Iraq has been a terrible thing. Because of...
Related Articles:
You and What Army? Bush Legions Starting to "Unravel" (12154 Hits)
Is it possible the largest and most advanced military in the history of the universe is ready to bust? According to General Barry McCaffrey (ret.)...
What Vote-Theft Conspiracy? (7610 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff, The big losers on Election Day were of course President Bush and the Republican Party, but there was another loser too: the...
What do we do now? (5957 Hits)
by Frank Pitz In the 1972 movie The Candidate, newly (and surprisingly) elected candidate Bill McKay – played by Robert Redford –...
So the Democrats Won – What About the American Empire? (7466 Hits)
by Shepherd Bliss The Democratic Party prevailed in the Nov. 7 midterm elections. "We’ve just moved out of a straightjacket," a...
Congress Should Immediately Terminate the 2001 AUMF (9035 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff Forget Nancy Pelosi's "100 Hours" agenda for the new Democratic Congress. The first thing Democrats need to...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (2)add comment

a guest said:

0
Just Another Bloody Opinion
The notion that a single man can save America or , indeed the world , is at best hopeful and at worst , naive. Isn't' it the case that the United States followed by the rest of the world have to :

a) Learn to live in a sustainable way (and therefore less ) whilst :
b) Innovating new efficiencies of existing energy supplies through the application of science/innovation.

America , you just are taking too much - you need to change.

Polite greetings from Australia
 
February 27, 2007
Votes: +0

a guest said:

0
Of course one man can't save the world, but....
that's a straw man.

In the first place, one man does not get himself into the Oval Office. What sense would it make for me to try to persuade people of a possible positive scenario unless it would take a veritable popular movement to make it happen?

In the second place, if it ever should be clear that it matters just who it is who sits in that Office, now is the time. If anyone thinks that the situation now is the same as it would have been if Gore had taken office in 2000, that person must be enmired deep into fatalism. So it does matter --even if it doesn't all on its own either save or destroy the world-- who that one person is.

As for America taking too much and needing to change, you will get no quarrel from me. But then, this is precisely the issue that is closest to Gore's heart, isn't it-- from writing EARTH IN THE BALANCE in the early 1990s to making AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH now.
 
February 27, 2007 | url
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top