http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/duke/040922

Al Gore, stupidity and stereotyping

Selwyn Duke
September 22, 2004

It's hard to imagine Al Gore faring very well on the game-show Jeopardy. For sure, I haven't detected too many areas of expertise in Plastic Man's repertoire. I remember when Gore called Bosnians "Bosniacs" in a speech. I remember when he glanced at busts of the founding fathers during the inauguration and queried "Who are those people?" Then there was the time when Gore was scoring Bush the elder and said "A zebra can't change his spots."

But I wouldn't brand Gore as stupid simply because of his continual, elementary, bush-league [or should it be Gore-league?] mistakes regarding what is common knowledge to most home-schooled twelve-year-olds. It wouldn't quite rise to the level of labeling someone a dolt for misspelling the word potato, but it wouldn't exactly be fair either.

No, I call Gore stupid because he's . . . well . . . stupid.

Of course, Gore might be in his element on Jeopardy if the category were propaganda, but not if it was honesty or decency. Then again, he would be completely befuddled if the category were world religion or, more precisely, Christianity, but would proceed with aplomb if it were stereotyping.

All these contentions were borne out recently in an interview that Gore gave to The New Yorker magazine. Among other things, Gore impugned President Bush's faith, stating that it shared much with fundamentalist Islam and that it emphasized "vengeance" and "brimstone."

Now, I don't want to get bogged down in the minutiae of theology, so I'll content myself by saying that I guess it escaped Gore's notice that fundamentalist Christians don't believe in decapitating infidels or in conversion by the sword. They don't believe that a man has the right to bury his daughter in desert sands if she dishonors the family, or in preventing women from showing their faces. They also aren't the ones who don and detonate bombs or fly planes into buildings in the hope of going to a hereafter harem with seventy-two virgins.

But Gore's stereotyping is indicative of the superficial understanding possessed by liberals who brand any Christian with traditional views — a Christian who refuses to drink deeply from the cistern of political-correctness spiked Kool-Aid — as a "fundamentalist." They have no idea that fundamentalism originated with twelve small volumes titled "The Fundamentals," written by anonymous authors between 1910 and 1915. And they are oblivious to the fact that these writers espoused a literalism to which most Christians wouldn't subscribe. For instance, the authors stated that the Creation account must be regarded as being literal and not metaphorical. Now, while I take issue with neither perspective given our current state of knowledge, the fact of the matter is that most Christians aren't fundamentalists. Moreover, I tend to doubt President Bush is either.

None of this, however, stopped Gore from drawing a specious and invidious comparison between Islamic Fundamentalists and Christians of the President's stripe. He said, "It's a particular kind of religiosity" and that "They [the fundamentalist versions of Christianity, Islam and other faiths, as defined by Gore] have many features in common." Mayhap so, Al, mayhap so. But a learned person would understand that while similarities would have to exist, the differences between things could amount to either the completion of a formula or a poison pill. For instance, the Wright brother's invention bore an ever so slight resemblance to a bird, just like the failed heavier-than-air machines that preceded it. But the difference is that the bicycle mechanics' plane possessed what those gadgets did not: the elements it needed to soar.

To further illustrate the point, Al, you have many features in common with an honest man. You both talk, for example. But your lips speak not truth. You also have features in common with a wise man; that you both imbibe information is one of them. But he'll draw sage conclusions while you'll play the fool. And like an intelligent man, you eat, drink, sleep and your neurons fire with regularity. But you are not an intelligent man.

There's also a certain type of starkly stupid hypocrisy evident in Gore's sentiments. He and his ilk would be the first ones to preach the comparative religion error of the moral equivalency of all faiths. And on that basis they would bristle at the claim that the Christian faith is morally superior to the Muslim one, but would then claim that their modernistic, waste-from-distillate Christian faith is superior to the two-thousand year old one.

This is just another reminder of how lucky, to use modernistic terminology — or blessed, to use that of traditionalists — we were that the liberals weren't able to steal the two-thousand election. I suppose it was what Gore might call dodging a leopard or . . . er . . . lodging a bullet . . . or, well, you get the idea.

What a disgusting piece! Why write something like this just to call someone stupid? I suppose they consider Gore a potential 2008 threat so they are getting their digs in early.

This is one of the nastiest things I've ever read about anyone anywhere.

Selwyn Duke. With a name like that, he has to be stupid. :rolleyes:

Selwyn Duke is a stupid retarted idiot. I wonder if the piece of s**t is related to David Duke another puke. These kind of ignorant and useless people make me sick.

I fail to understand why this forum continues to give these right wing nuts who write this garbage publicity in this forum.

Gore2008--We print these things as a basis for discussion and argument. Otherwise, there's little point in being here. Also, we print these things to make our members aware of people we should contact to set them straight about what they've said.

This is a total waste of time and energy. This group shouldn't be wasting it's time with these right wing lunatics whose minds aren't going to be changed anyway. This publicity only helps to spread the lies of these right wing extemists in the first place and it prevents this group from putting it's efforts into reaching many more mainstream, open-minded people. You're playing right into the hands of these right wing nuts.

You say po-tah-toes, we say po-tay-toes.

So it hols some truth in your opinion. Or else his article is the truly stupid thing.

That is an awful thing to say. :bad:

No, O'Smiley, I don't think the article holds any truth. It was all skewed lies, and there were some incredibly nasty things in there. I don't have a problem when people criticize someone as long as they back up their criticisms with legitimate facts and don't hit below the belt. Then I can take a more open and honest look at what the person's saying and see if maybe there isn't a grain of truth in it. I know Gore's no saint, and there are legitimate criticisms to be made of him (uh oh, gotta duck--here comes Gore2008!). Phew. That was close. Anyway, I just think this kind of article belongs in the waste bin along with the rest of the Republican-spewed garbage about Gore, Kerry, and anyone else.

As for my cheap shot about the guy's name, yeah, that wasn't nice. But he made me mad! :mad:

The whole reason for the Media Watch Group is to refute what some of those in the media are saying about Al Gore so we can email them or write letters to them to set them straight. If Gore's name is included in an article or someone is saying something about Gore we want to know about it. It does NOT mean we agree with the article.

I for one have nothing nice to say about anyone who speaks lies about my PRESIDENT AL GORE or says anything against him. These people are no damn good and deserve to be condemmed. I don't give a damn who they are. I hate loathe and despise every one of them.

Here you go again earthmother with another attack on Al Gore and without any evidence to support your position. This is why I keep challenging you. You keep spreading this garbage about Al Gore that has no basis in fact.

Well, see, Gore2008, if you could point out even ONE WORD in my last post that attacked Al Gore, you might have a little more credibility around here. He's a human being. We're allowed to disagree with some of his positions on things. But I have more respect for him than ANY OTHER PERSON ON THE POLITICAL SCENE. I think he's the absolute best, the cat's pajamas, our legitimate President, a hunk, and one helluva guy. Obviously, you can see my hatred for him spews out from every pore of my being. :rolleyes:

PRESIDENT AL GORE is by far the greatest, most intelligient, most decent, most honest man walking on the not so great planet. And yes, he is a hunk.

You must've not read her post. :huh:

Thank you, O'Smiley. :clap:

:good:

I'm really tired of earthmother tryig to pass herself off as an electi campagn expert when the truth is, she's never workrd on an election campaign and she doesn't have a clue.I'm also really tired of earthmother's atacks on Al Gore and anyone who dares to defend im because her attacks have no basis in fact. I think I have every right to pint this out.

I'm tired of you constantly attacking people. Why don't you shut up and go someplace where you won't bother true patriots and Gore supporters like Earthmother.

Many thanks for your support, James. I'm tired of fighting this one. :wacko:

James, your describing yourself and earthmother as true patriots and Al Gore supporters has all of the accuracy of someone describing swampland as oceanfront property. You're anything but Al Gore supporters All you do is constantly attack Al Gore and anyone who dares to defend him. I'm really fed up with having to waste so much time defending Al Gore and real Al Gore supporters against your attacks. You're the one who needs to go find a Kerry or a dem party leadership web site to post in instead of your constant disruption of this web site which is for Al Gore supporters and people who believe in the democratic principles our country was founded on. You don't agree with these facts so you're the one who doesn't belong in this forum.

For the record (and it's not something I should need to be explaining since it was all explained long ago, while you were on this board, Gore2008)--I am not a Kerry supporter per se. Kerry is not my ideal candidate. But he's okay, pretty darn good, acceptable. And he's got two things going for him that will make me support him in November: 1) He's not George Bush, and ; 2) He's a candidate who's actually running for the presidency, whereas Al Gore, sadly, is not. I will stay up all night with you extolling the virtues of Al Gore (as long as you stop falsely representing my beliefs). Al Gore is HANDS DOWN the best, most qualified person to be President. I worked my butt off for the man in 2000 and again in the hopes of a 2004 run. My heart bleeds for the man and for the country (and world) that was cheated out of his leadership. BUT HE IS NOT RUNNING IN NOVEMBER. There's no way to vote for him. So, we become realists, recognize that the threat of another Bush term is so evil that there's no way we can afford to allow him to be President again, and we do what we have to do to get him out. It's that simple. Continuing to focus at this point on all the wrongs and injustices and irregularities and crimes that took place in 2000 distracts us from our mission, which is to get George Bush out of the White House for good. If Kerry loses in November, then we can go back to examining all of what went wrong and try to channel it into a positive and successful run for Gore in 2008. Until that time, it would be irresponsible of us to ourselves, our families, our country, and the world to do anything other than see to it that Bush is defeated--again--and that he isn't permitted to remain as an illegal resident of the White House.

Earthmother, your own words speak for themselves. You've once again falsely attacked Al Gore in this thread and once again you refuse to provide any evidence to support your latest attack. You fail to note that it was the sweep the stolen 2000 election under the rug dem party leadership who blocked Al Gore from running n 2004 in the first place. You're also oblivious to the reality that once again all of the votes won't be counted as was the case in 2000. Kerry has shamefully swept the theft of our democracy in 2000 under the rug and wasted too much time impersonating the election stealing repugs. I think it's time to be realistic and look at the facts. The Bush election stealers know they can get away with sealing an election and they're going to do it again in 2004. You need to stop attacking Al Gore and come to grips with these ugly facts. It's time to start developing a new plan for the restoratio of democracy in America.

So the question remains . . . why do I bother? :rolleyes:

Sarthother, you're the one who keeps falsely attacking Al Gore and anyone who dares to defend him in this forum. You have yet to explain why you're continuing to do this.

You have yet to explain why you continue to make psychotic rambling posts that accuse fine Gore supporters like EM of saying things they never said.