Gore’s call to arms

I expected today’s speech from Al Gore to be good, but I didn’t appreciate what a sweeping and powerful condemnation it would be of the White House, Congress’ perfidy, and what Gore described as a wholesale rejection of constitutional principles. It was, in a word, devastating.

Raw Story has the text of the speech as it was written, though Gore strayed from the text a bit during delivery. C&L and PoliticsTV will have video of the speech fairly soon, but in case they only make portions available, I’d recommend reading the whole thing. Gore’s been on a roll lately, but this was the former Vice President at his best.

Clearly, Bush’s warrantless-search program was the impetus for Gore’s remarks, but the scope of his denunciation went considerably further.

“Can it be true that any president really has such powers under our Constitution? If the answer is ‘yes’ then under the theory by which these acts are committed, are there any acts that can on their face be prohibited? If the President has the inherent authority to eavesdrop, imprison citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can’t he do?”

There were too many areas of discussion to explore in detail here, but there were a couple of points Gore raised that warrant additional attention. First, Gore is the latest to try and explain why the White House’s description of the NSA surveillance is incomplete.

“The President and I agree on one thing. The threat from terrorism is all too real. There is simply no question that we continue to face new challenges in the wake of the attack on September 11th and that we must be ever-vigilant in protecting our citizens from harm.

“Where we disagree is that we have to break the law or sacrifice our system of government to protect Americans from terrorism. In fact, doing so makes us weaker and more vulnerable.”

Gore also put our current challenges in a helpful historical context.

“Is our Congress today in more danger than were their predecessors when the British army was marching on the Capitol? Is the world more dangerous than when we faced an ideological enemy with tens of thousands of missiles poised to be launched against us and annihilate our country at a moment’s notice? Is America in more danger now than when we faced worldwide fascism on the march-when our fathers fought and won two World Wars simultaneously?

“It is simply an insult to those who came before us and sacrificed so much on our behalf to imply that we have more to be fearful of than they. Yet they faithfully protected our freedoms and now it is up to us to do the same.


On a related note, Gore added:

“There have of course been other periods of American history when the Executive Branch claimed new powers that were later seen as excessive and mistaken. Our second president, John Adams, passed the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts and sought to silence and imprison critics and political opponents.

“When his successor, Thomas Jefferson, eliminated the abuses he said: ‘[The essential principles of our Government] form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation… [S]hould we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty and safety.’

“Our greatest President, Abraham Lincoln, suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. Some of the worst abuses prior to those of the current administration were committed by President Wilson during and after WWI with the notorious Red Scare and Palmer Raids. The internment of Japanese Americans during WWII marked a low point for the respect of individual rights at the hands of the executive. And, during the Vietnam War, the notorious COINTELPRO program was part and parcel of the abuses experienced by Dr. King and thousands of others.

“But in each of these cases, when the conflict and turmoil subsided, the country recovered its equilibrium and absorbed the lessons learned in a recurring cycle of excess and regret.

“There are reasons for concern this time around that conditions may be changing and that the cycle may not repeat itself…. [W]e are told by the Administration that the war footing upon which he has tried to place the country is going to ‘last for the rest of our lives.’ So we are told that the conditions of national threat that have been used by other Presidents to justify arrogations of power will persist in near perpetuity.”

Also interesting was the fact that former Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), a far-right lawmaker and one of the Clinton impeachment managers, agreed to introduce Gore before his remarks. Now, as it turns out, there was a technical problem and Barr couldn’t deliver his introduction, but that doesn’t change the fact that Barr effectively endorsed Gore’s condemnation. It helps highlight the division between Bush conservatives (whose principles are malleable depending on polls and political circumstances) and actual conservatives (who believe in limited government power no matter which party controls Washington).

And what of the media? Gore’s speech was largely ignored. Because of the Dr. King holiday, all of the TV news outlets are taking it pretty easy today. As my friend Peter Daou noted, the networks had other things on their mind this afternoon.

A former Vice-President of the United States delivers a major speech accusing George W. Bush of breaking the law. What do all three cable news nets cover under the “Breaking News” banner? An overturned tanker truck on a New York highway.

I can appreciate the differences between sitting and former constitutional officers. If, in 1998, Dan Quayle was condemning the Clinton administration, I would not necessarily be surprised if the remarks garnered minimal attention from the TV media and none of the networks carried the speech live. Once in office, presidents and vice presidents have a bully pulpit; once out, generating media attention is a challenge. Bush can give the same “major speech” over and over again with live coverage because he’s in office; Gore can’t because he isn’t. Fine.

Having said that, we’re talking about an hour on a holiday in which the news networks had nothing else to do. Just five years ago, more people voted to elect Gore president than Bush, and today Gore, with support from a high-profile Republican, not only delivered a devastating critique of Bush’s presidency, but also made a little news, calling for “the appointment of a special counsel to pursue the criminal issues raised by warrantless wiretapping of Americans by the President.”

This deserves more than the 12 seconds it will get on Headline News later this afternoon.

Thanks for posting on this speech. The mainstream news media is not paying enough attention to it – YET. I am convinced that this speech will go down in history, however,

I’ve posted the audio of the speech on my web site – Irregular Times. Every American should listen to this. It is our generation’s Gettysburg Address.

  • Three cheers, CB!

    You covered this major event, a former Vice-President exposing much of Bush’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” even if the mainstream didn’t. And you mentioned the support of former represenative Bob Barr, a leader in the impreachment of Gore’s boss, Bill Clinton … a stunning sidelight. You also cited Gore’s reference John Adams whose loathesome insistence on being treated like a king seems almost trivial compared to outright usurpation by the regal moron George W. Bush.

    I can’t wait until Americans, regardless of party or religion, begin to realize that social life — outside such throwbacks as the medieval church, the taliban, and today’s Republican party — involves/requires some give-and-take, wins and loses, compromise. Not that we have to weaken our principles (in fact, we need to learn how to fight for them) but that we realize that, for our country to survive beyond its 230 years, we have to return to Thomas Jefferson’s “system of checks and balances”. So far, Gore and Barr realize that, and you reported it. Good job.

  • Thank God for the blogosphere. They (and by extension we who read them) make public what the great powers would rather not see the light of day.

    Yay, us!! 🙂

  • Gore: “We have a duty as Americans to defend our citizens’ right not only to life but also to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

    I say Al, that was a great speech. Now do your duty and run for President. If you can’t do that for some reason, no disrespect intended, but shut the hell up. If the nation’s integrity and our liberties are at stake, what’s your excuse for not running?

    What?

  • By any measure, it was a superb speech.
    What a tragedy for America that he is not
    the sitting president. Even worse, that what
    he had to say will be ignored and forgotten.

    I doubt he’ll even merit a Swiftboating.

  • I watched part of the speech via C-Span’s streaming video. Not only was the content first rate, his delivery was magnificent. While watching it, I had the same thoughts as CB about the irony of Bush’s stale old speeches getting major coverage and this important speech not receiving much attention at all.

    There is no real surprise in Bob Barr’s outrage over the NSA spying scandal In 1999 he has added a provision to the fiscal 2000 intelligence budget that requires the NSA to report within 60 days on its legal standards for intercepting communications in the United States and abroad.He did this in response to revelations about ECHELON. According to a 1999 Washington Post story,

    .
    “Echelon gives every appearance of a program that is far broader than it ought to be and poses serious questions about constitutionality,” said Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), who sponsored the reporting requirement.

    Barr, a former CIA analyst, said no one in Congress has asked the NSA hard questions about electronic surveillance since 1975, when a committee headed by then-Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) revealed that the government had improperly intercepted Americans’ telegrams for 30 years and had unlawfully eavesdropped on domestic dissidents in the 1960s.

    “What we have here is an operation that has been ongoing for many years that nobody really seems to have a handle on,” said Barr, adding that the House Government Reform Committee, of which he is a member, plans to hold hearings on Echelon early next year.

    The ball started rolling on this when Porter Goss asked for internal documents from the NSA about FISA compliance because,”he thought NSA lawyers were too cautious in approving new surveillance programs.” This is the man who now runs the CIA, but still chaired the House Intelligence Committee when Bush authorized the extra-FISA spying. Consequently, we can assume that he was one of those briefed on the program and wholeheartedly agreed with. it. Back in 1999, it was the NSA stonewalling of his request for documents which trigger the showdown with Congress. Here is how the Post article puts it.

    When the agency declined his request on grounds of attorney-client privilege, Goss erupted, saying the committee had never been stonewalled in such fashion. Barr immediately joined the dispute from the opposite flank, suggesting that the NSA had refused Goss’s request because it was violating Americans’ privacy by indiscriminately vacuuming up communications.

    Well Barr has shown himself to be a man of principle on this issue. Will Goss do the same and help Congress get all the information it needs to get a handle on the Bush NSA spying scandal?

  • I would take issue with Gore’s assertion that previous generations “faithfully protected our freedoms.”

    The fight for freedom has always been a struggle. To portray our forbears as being without fault is destructive.

    Internment camps, Habeas Corpus suspension, Jim Crow laws, The Julius and Ethel Rosenberg Trial, Nixon’s wiretaps, Communist blacklists, the confiscation of native land,the installation of the Shah in Iran …

    The list of mistakes made by previous generations is long.

    We would do well to remember.

  • From the speech:

    The constricted role of ideas in the American political system today has encouraged efforts by the Executive Branch to control the flow of information as a means of controlling the outcome of important decisions that still lie in the hands of the people.

    The Administration vigorously asserts its power to maintain the secrecy of its operations. After all, the other branches can’t check an abuse of power if they don’t know it is happening.

    Great speech with loads of clarity and historical context and appropriate admonishments to do the right thing before the great flusher pushes the handle down.

    Whatever Al’s political plans are, I’m happy to have him out making wake-up speeches to smack a little color into the cheeks of our flatlining country. His ideas can and should be picked up and carried by anyone who gives a damn from any political persuasion. There should be 50+ Al Gores out there making the same speech. Maybe he needs the freedom of not running for office to take such a clear and confrontational stand. I’d like to see his whole message adopted by an entire party and then used to bash the other party into oblivion rather than hope that Al Gore is going to step out of a phone booth with a big red “S” and save us all. If he can make speeches as a former V.P. that shame and educate people into doing the right thing, Well, Go Al!

    Maybe he can deliver the rebuttal to the SOTU. Are there rules about who can do that?

  • Racerx says, “I say Al, that was a great speech. Now do your duty and run for President. If you can’t do that for some reason, no disrespect intended, but shut the hell up.”

    Are you for real? Here we have some one with the credentials to call out the “Regal Moron” (thanks, Ed, for that title!) for his incompetently unconstitutional behavior, and does it with passion, clarity, and eloqence — and you want him to “shut the hell up” because he has the temerity to decline to run again for President? Nothing personal, but that is just plain idiotic! We have Biden, and Hillary, and too many others who WILL run who don”t have a clue of how to fire up the base (let alone the rest of America) and take down this Regal Moron. And you want to shut down the one who has the best “give ’em hell” mojo since Howard Dean? Good Lord… have you been paying attention to what passes today for a “real”
    Dem? Aaaggggggghhh!!!!

    We are blessed that Gore still gives a damn, and does it so well. I guess that maybe, Racerx, you need to go to work for Faux Nooz or Marshall Whitmann at the DLC — you sound like just the type of Democrat they think deserves to speak for the rest of us liberals and progressives. Well, you sure as hell don’t speak for me!!

  • Perusing your blog, specifically, “The Carpetbagger Report”, I have arrived at what I believe is a defensible inference. Both you and your readers would welcome news of in-your-face overt opposition to your “smirking chimp”, my “dum’ya botch”.

    In plainer terms, I want to run for Representative for Pennsylvania’s 10th Congressional District on a platform calling for the impeachment of President George Walker Bush.

    Incidentally, I deliberately referred to your blog, to indicate that I visited your blog as an individual, and not as a spammer. Yes, that last is an illustion to a “pre-deconstruction” chick flick with a rating of two and a half hankies.

    Oh, alright (!) already, I’ll own up to it. I owe getting my message out to so many bloggers to COPY/PASTE … gim’me a break … will’ya puh-lease! I got to get the word out somehow.

    Ah, before you click on any of the enclosed hyperlinks, please read the entirely of my comment. For example, the three planks I nailed together in my platform out to get me elected. “impeach bush” is the first plank. The second is “impeach bush”. The third is like the second, “impeach bush”.

    To continue, the first hyperlink below leads to the opening salvo of my campaign.

    http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/danger-senator-specter-danger.html

    As for the second hyperlink, it leads to evidence that my candidacy is about more than opposition solely for the sake of opposition.

    http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/dispelling-stench-in-oval.html

    toodles
    ……\
    .he who is known as sefton

    oh, by the bye, it’s a good guess you’ll find what I have to say in PROMETHEAN COMMENT interesting to the point of startling. In that segment, I advance the case that the mere nomination of Judge Alito is tantamount to treason.

  • Regarding “Bush conservatives” and “real conservatives”…

    We need to get this clear, and to make it crystal clear wherever and whenever we can: Bush and his supporters ARE NOT CONSERVATIVES!!

    They are far right revolutionaries, dedicated to the overthrow of the Republic and its replacement with a fascist dictatorship.

    Real conservatives, real liberals, real progressives, real anybody, need to understand these people are dedicated subversives, far more dangerous than domestic Communists ever could have been.

    As Sinclair Lewis said: “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

    The term we need to use is “The Bush far right” – we should never let them use the word honorable word “conservative” to disguise their treason.

  • I was in among the 3,000 people today in Constitution Hall (where my high school graduation was held, incidentally), and I was encouraged to hear Gore be so forthright in condemning the administration and the Congress that has allowed it to run amok. I was a little disappointed that he never used the word “impeachment” — he might as well have, since the right-wing attack on him as being an unhinged moonbat (and the similar but slightly toned-down treatment in the media) will occur regardless.

    I was also sorry that technical problems prevented Bob Barr from being able to introduce Gore. Repellent though the man has been, he is on the right side on this issue, and he is far more consistent in his principles than the Republicans we have today. It was good that Gore included this:

    I endorse the words of Bob Barr, when he said, “The President has dared the American people to do something about it. For the sake of the Constitution, I hope they will.”

  • The time is ripe for a leader to rise up and do great things.
    We have a wonderful country that is disasterously adrift because of corrupt and subversive leadership, and no current democratic contender seems able to mount a compelling challenge because of a failure of charisma, courage and vision.

    But now Gore is saying the words I want to hear. I hope he has returned to the spotlight enhanced by personal growth and knowledge about national politics, transformed by his tumble into the abyss… like Gandolf the grey in the Lord of the Rings.. God knows we need somebody with some magic, and sooner the better.

  • I’m with Analytical Liberal and burro – I think Al Gore has the luxury of “giving ’em hell” in his present capacity…a luxury he would lose if he runs for office.

    Thanks, Al, for your selflessness…and, BTW, sounds like there were some magnificent rhetorical hooks in his speech today (glad that he has finally compared the threat of nutcase hijackers armed with boxcutters to “an ideological enemy with tens of thousands of missiles poised to be launched against us”)…I doubt if Al’s barrage will ruffle the petit bourgeois lifestyles of the discreetly scripted MSM tho…

  • In terms of in-the-moment realpolitik, David Corn and other liberal/Dem voices who warn that impeachment is a political non-starter may have a point. Not only is the deck stacked against them in Congress, but the Dem leadership has given the GOP/White House precious little to fear over the past six years.

    But hell, how high does the bar have to be set for impeachment? What a damnable juxtaposition and precedent we have with the President and Samuel Alito today. The executive branch lies and breaks laws, and the judicial branch nominee lies to Senators and promises to be a water-carrier for executive over-reach.

    And the legislative branch response? The occasional tut-tut and finger wag. What a proud legacy this Congress shall bestow upon democracy.

  • I was a little disappointed that he never used the word “impeachment” – KCinDC

    At this point it sounds pretty knee-jerk to the sleeping masses. Just blows by as short-circuiting rhetoric. Not that it isn’t justified. But more groundwork needs to laid so the word doesn’t lose it’s impact before it can really be useful.

    On the whole, Gore came across sounding forceful and well prepared without sounding bombastic. At least it reads that way to me. That’s not easy. Throwing in impeachment would have reduced credibility and impact I think.

    Hopefully!!!, it’s time will come.

  • Snoopgate Update:

    Two leading civil rights groups plan to file lawsuits Tuesday against the Bush administration over its domestic spying program to determine whether the operation was used to monitor 10 defense lawyers, journalists, scholars, political activists and other Americans with ties to the Middle East.
    […]
    “We don’t have any direct evidence” that the plaintiffs were monitored by the security agency, said Ann Beeson, associate legal director for the A.C.L.U. “But the plaintiffs have a well-founded belief that they may have been monitored, and there’s a real chilling effect in the fear that they can no longer have confidential discussions with clients or sources without the possibility that the N.S.A. is listening.”

    One of the A.C.L.U. plaintiffs, Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, said that a Stanford student studying in Egypt conducted research for him on political opposition groups, and that he worried that communications between them on sensitive political topics could be monitored. “How can we communicate effectively if you risk being intercepted by the National Security Agency?” Mr. Diamond said.

    Also named as plaintiffs in the A.C.L.U. lawsuit are the journalist Christopher Hitchens, who has written in support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; Barnett R. Rubin, a scholar at New York University who works in international relations; Tara McKelvey, a senior editor at The American Prospect; the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Greenpeace, the environmental advocacy group; and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the country’s largest Islamic advocacy group.

  • We need more Democrats, and in particular those who are currently serving in elected positions, to get up and put their collective butts on the line and push this thing forward. This president, and others, absolutely MUST be held accountable. Anything less is a cop out and an abdication of their position as a representative of the people.

    Have some balls!!

  • Good delivery, excellent content. What I don’t understand is why nobody addresses the fact G.W. Bush committed treason when he flew the Bin Laden family out of the US right after 9/11: None of us could fly anyplace!
    If we had kept the Bin Laden family here, no wars would have had to be fought. Bin Laden would have had to come forth.
    Unfortunately, the corrupt people running our government had profit-based motives to move our army into the Middle East. Blood for oil. To hell with American lives, there was money to be made. Never mind the fact we are now seen as war criminals around the world.
    I am sick of words, it is time for people to wake up.

  • Analytical Liberal says: “We have Biden, and Hillary, and too many others who WILL run who don”t have a clue of how to fire up the base (let alone the rest of America) and take down this Regal Moron. And you want to shut down the one who has the best “give ’em hell” mojo since Howard Dean?”

    I guess I could have written that better, but in answer to your question, no, I don’t want to shut Gore down. I want Gore to reconsider whatever previous reasoning he used to refuse to serve his country, given that it is in severe danger as he so rightly says. If we’re as screwed as he says we are (and I think we are) then “temerity” is not what we need. We need a known leader to take the helm.

    Biden and Hillary voted for the war, in case you didn’t notice. They still think its winnable. And that says a lot for them. Of the rest, who do you think has Gore’s name recognition? You can’t just pull such people out of a hat.

    I never said I spoke for you, “Analytical Liberal”. Do me a favor and learn to read.

  • Comments are closed.