Al Gore Resurfaces for the DSCC...(Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee)

Meanwhile,
Al Gore Resurfaces for the DSCC...(Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee)

http://tinyurl.com/3m4mvz

The other day I was contemplating doing a post wondering what Al Gore was thinking about the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting's indefensible actions on May 31. My thoughts were that Gore must be reflecting on how his own party was disenfranchising voters, which probably be painful for him. I remembered his stirring speeches on the media and the Bush trashing of the Constitution that he did in cooperation with MoveOn and felt he surely would disapprove just on an intellectual level as well.

Today I got a letter marked with "Vice President Al Gore" at the top left. Inside, with the same title on the letterhead, was a two-page missive detailing the horrors of the Bush Administration. There was also a little brochure:

   Our nation is adrift.

   Our world is threatened.

   Our future is in jeopardy.

It unfolds to offer a text and photo rundown on "The Scope of the Damage" inflicted by the Bush Administration and how the effect is felt all over the world.

A picture of a serious Gore peers out from the donation form. "Yes, Al Gore, I want to undo the damage!" is what it reads..."Elect More Democrats-and End the Assault on America."

While Gore has kept (wisely) mum on a presidential endorsement, it looks like he's re-entered the world of party politics on behalf of Senate Democrats. The same group that couldn't muster up one of their members to contest the Electoral College vote in 2000. Will it convince me I should donate? Probably not. I'm less forgiving than Gore at this point, especially after what happened over the weekend with the RBC, which I consider to be a pretty big "assault" on America by Democrats.

My attitude may change if the Obama-enabling comes to a halt. If we have a serious, experienced candidate to lead the party in November, I'll reconsider. But if I'm expected to fall in line and vote for a nominee who is inexperienced, overly arrogant, and seems to have no respect or places little value on older voters, women, and working folks, then Gore and the Senate crowd for whom he's fundraising won't be getting anything from me. Frankly, I think most of them should be out of office...

Sorry, Al...I'd rather give my money to the World Wildlife Fund or an envrironmental group...



Display:


Some tunes... (none / 0)


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:26:32 PM EST

It sounds like... (2.00 / 1)

It sounds like you don't have a problem with the party, but with the people who voted for Obama.

The fact of the matter is that if you throw out party involvement, meaning superdelegates, he is winning based on the votes of the people.


by PSUdan on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:28:43 PM EST

WWF is a good cause (none / 0)

Seriously, you should give to Koko and Michael and the pandas.

I'm sure we'll get lots of people who won't hold their contributions as blackmail if their favored candidate doesn't get nominated, especially to races that are uninvolved.

So don't worry about it.  

So, in Koko-speak: TELL YOU HURRY KISS


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:31:53 PM EST

Take it elsewhere (none / 0)

The time has come for MyDD to unify behind the Dem nominee. Please be productive, or be gone.


by PhilFR on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:32:09 PM EST

Re: Take it elsewhere (2.00 / 2)

the time has come?  OMG.

It is going to TAKE time to heal.  Forcing people RIGHT AT THIS INSTANT is only going to cause folks to drag their heels more.

If Obama states something I disagree with, can I complain about it?  Or is that "taboo" now?

jesus christ.

what is wrong with you?


by colebiancardi on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:37:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Take it elsewhere (none / 0)

sorry, I know this diarist might be a troll, but I am talking in general.


by colebiancardi on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:38:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Take it elsewhere (2.00 / 1)

Fair enough Cole. This diarist is almost certainly a troll but still people should be able to say what they don't agree with, especially as it pertains to policy positions. It is just the needless trashing of Obama, as exemplified by this diary that is unwelcome.

You are always well-reasoned it what you write and I am sure that whatever disagreements you might have with Obama in the GE can be hashed out here without fear of castigation. This is and should be a site that fosters discussion and certainly discussion requires a variety of viewpoints. Thoughtful pro-Hillary posters like yourself are an integral part of this site.


by wasder on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore Resurfaces for the DSCC...(Democratic (none / 0)

Your RBC "assault" was the Florida Democratic Party and Michigan Democratic Party came to resolutions which the Obama campaign agreed to and the Clinton campaign did not.  Obama could have rammed his position on Michigan through the RBC but he chose instead to go with the compromise the MDP worked out among themselves.  The only people "assaulting" the RBC was Clinton folks.  


by Piuma on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:36:27 PM EST

Trolltastic (2.00 / 1)


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:38:14 PM EST

Re; OP (2.00 / 3)

Gloria - You do know that Obama actually had the votes to split the Michigan delgates 50-50, but instead decided to go for the split in her favor as a show of unity, right?

And I'm sorry , I have to call B.S. on this staement:

"But if I'm expected to fall in line and vote for a nominee who is inexperienced, overly arrogant, and seems to have no respect or places little value on older voters, women, and working folks, then Gore and the Senate crowd for whom he's fundraising won't be getting anything from me"

What the hell?
If you switch out "Black" for "Women" and "young" for "older", the exact can be said for Hillary. I thought we were all past this. Obama never compared himself favorable to McCain at Hillary's expense. And arrogance is Why she didn't plan to campaing past Super Tuesday and ran out of money.It was Hillary who had no respect for little places, because if she did, she would have campaigned in the SMALLER CAUCUS states and probably have beat Obama.  But no she put all her money into the big states OH, TX and PA. Who carea about the little places then?

I know most Hillary supporters don't think like you, but you need to give it a rest.

You don't have to love Obama to vote for him. But you should want to vote for your own self-interests and not for the guy that wants to overturn Roe vs. Wade:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/ 2007-02-19-mccain-roe_x.htm

Hell, I'm pro-life (mostly) and I'm not voting for McCain; WHY SHOULD YOU?


A PROUD Hopium user!
by xodus1914 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:58:47 PM EST

Whatever... (2.00 / 1)

It is not a perfect world.

If you don't support The Democrats, you (by omission) support The Republicans.  Sit and spin on your loftly ideals and sore feelings all you want, but it basically comes down that that.


by rf7777 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 04:58:51 PM EST

Re: Whatever... (none / 0)

sorry charlie, but that type of talk don't fly.

many people don't support the two tiered parties.  They aren't automatically republicans because of that.


by colebiancardi on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:06:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Whatever... (2.00 / 1)

I repeat.  It is not a perfect world or a perfect system.  I don't particularly like the two party system.  I would love to have real alternatives.  We don't.  If you don't vote to put the Democrat in, you are basically giving the Republican one net vote.  It is that simple.


by rf7777 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 05:11:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.