(published 1/19/00)
No More Gore
 by Mischa Gelman
 
 The primary season is almost upon us. While Republicans have a wide
range of choices, us Democrats only have two - and the choice is made
easier by the nature of one of the candidates. Al Gore, career politician
and son of a career politician, a man who stands for nothing and boasts
about his religion while not remaining true to it, bears an eerie
resemblance to Republican candidate George W. Bush with those
characteristics.
  This is a man sure to turn the stomach of those who believe the
Democrats are the party of the people rather than of corporate elites. He
attacks a conservative health plan proposed by Bill Bradley as being
supposedly too far to the left. He offers sob stories of what the tobacco
industry did to his family, then hires tobacco lobbyists to work for his
campaign. While Bradley condemned welfare reform's failure, Gore was
silent. Remember the Willie Horton ads aired by the elder Bush in '88? The
idea originally came from the vicious Gore campaign in its anti-Dukakis
mudslinging.
  Gore claims to be an environmentalist. Friends of Earth, though, has
endorsed Bradley, whose environmental record in the Senate was far better
according to the League of Conservation Voters. For all his talk (and it
has been more than extreme enough - Republicans rightfully compare parts
of his book to the Unabomber's Mainfesto), he has done nothing. The
prominent environmental writer Mark Hertsgaard devoted pages of his
wonderful book Earth Odyssey criticizing the vice president's lack of
action. Now even automakers claim Gore is starting to "get it" according
to the latest issue of E Magazine. If the auto industry thinks Gore is
right on pollution laws, I think Gore is losing it rather than getting it.
How much environmental legislation has Gore pushed in EIGHT years as veep?
The silence in response to that question is deafening. Where has Gore been
on every environmental issue other than global warming, as in the recent
fight against genetically engineered food? Out of sight and out of his
mind. One environmental journalist wrote, "[Gore] is hot air and dangerous
too, because the perception of him is not the same as reality." 
  Part of my distaste for Gore could be the result of the time I had the,
um, joy of hearing him in person. Way back when in my first semester of
undergrad (1995), the vice-president visited Pitt and spoke. Now, I've
heard other politicians speak - usually they offer the same empty
platitudes, with some substance on the side. Mario Cuomo even managed
substance without any hollowness, but perhaps retired pols feel less of a
need to hide themselves behind a front. Gore, though, spoke and spoke and
spoke without saying a single darn thing. All I gained from the speech
were a few good Al Gore jokes told by the man himself - and an
understanding of what Gore is about. He is merely another Clinton, as his
lack of a stand on any issue makes evident.
  As we moved closer towards the platform at the speech, we were asked,
"No protest signs? No guns?" Nice to see the Clintonites think protest
signs are a more terrifying thought than any kind of weapon. Of course, a
group of environmental protestors still managed to get in their protest
signs, criticizing Gore's lack of backbone in response to a nuclear power
plant's construction. The fact that Gore was no friend of the planet was
evident even by then to those who were concerned about the continuation of
our world for future generations. Gore did not have the guts to address
the criticism, just as he has not throughout his career and now his
campaign. Instead of addressing substantive issues, he lies about his
record, lies about Bradley's record, attacks Bradley the same way he did
Dukakis in '88 and asks for advice on style from his slew of advisers.
Style over substance after all has always been at the heart of who Gore
is, especially in his trying to pass off himself as an environmentalist
pioneer when he is less of one than most Americans.
  Bill Bradley is a highly flawed man. He idolizes a president, Reagan,
who ruined our country's finances by spending us further and further into
debt. He backed bloody reactionary movements abroad. His work on the tax
system in the 80s created as many problems as it fixed. Still, he's a
greater friend of the planet than Gore is. He's a stronger friend of both
labor and business. He wants to deal with problems of poverty and racism
rather than ignore them. In the primary, he's going to get my vote. I hope
other Pennsylvania Democrats vote likewise.

  Mischa Gelman's going to vote for Ralph Nader in the main election but
for now, against Al Gore in the primaries.