"I Stand by All the Misstatements I Have Made" Al Gore's Lying Lips

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Frankly,
that Kiss at the Democratic convention was a big surprise to me.
Not just for the sheer yuckiness quotient, but because I thought
the only thing Al Gore knew how to do with his lips was lie. The
vice president’s claims of the past two weeks as he flits about
on the campaign trail have certainly borne me out: I haven’t seen
any more kissing, but I have heard outright falsehoods practically
tripping over one another as they fight to make their separate ways
out of his mouth.

In
an interview with Sam Donaldson which was televised on August 1,1993,
Al Gore supposedly said, “I stand by all the misstatements I have
made,” and I have to say that I appreciate his candor. I’d like
to hold him accountable to that statement. Incidentally, that remark
has also been attributed to former vice president Dan Quayle, but
Quayle was more of an endearing master of malapropism than Gore,
who is the undisputed prodigy of prevarication. I therefore think
it entirely reasonable that this remark could be attributed to Gore,
no questions asked.

Al
Gore’s most recent lies have been about the cost of Lodine, the
drug his mother-in-law and his dog both take for their arthritis;
the look-for-the-union-label lullabye that his mother used to croon
over his cradle; and — most recently — the credit he has
unjustly taken for taking part in the project that established the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

“I’ve
been part of the discussion on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve since
the days it was first established,” Gore confided to reporters.
A strange thing to say, since the Washington Times pointed out in
short order that the oil reserve was “authorized and signed into
law in 1975 — two years before Mr. Gore was in Congress.”

Every
bit of all three of these lies was proven false practically immediately
by the mainstream media, who have obviously become so used to the
vice president’s offhand fibbing that they probably don’t even need
to type with two hands as they write their rebuttals.

So
we’ve all wearily toiled along with Gore through all his fake-outeries
— through his claims about working in the family’s tobacco
fields in Tennessee; his always-‘n-forever support of Roe v. Wade;
his reminiscences of guard duty on the perimeter in Viet Nam; his
awestruck disclaimer of the knowledge that the affair at the Buddhist
temple was a fundraiser…There have been so many stupid lies. And
up until this last week, the Democrats have marched along obediently
behind their Pinnocchio-nosed candidate with few words of censure.
It has only been recently when it finally — finally! —
occurred to them that perhaps their own fragile credibility was
being remorselessly undermined that they have begun to squawk and
flap their wings. Could Gore’s chickens finally be coming home to
roost? How it must gall the liberals to have to haul their Hope
for the Future up on the carpet after all their sycophancy of the
past six months.

The
good news is that Gore’s complete inability to stop already with
the self-aggrandizing behavior has led to an unexpected bounce in
the polls for George W. Bush. It has been a refreshing breath of
air to find out that honor and integrity apparently do still matter
in certain sectors, although I must say that by the time the mainstream
liberal media got around to feeling uncomfortable about publishing
Al’s “misstatements,” I had already irrevocably lost what limited
respect I had for them.

Although
George W.’s campaign committee firmly addressed the issue of Gore’s
dishonest meanderings, (Bush spokesman Dan Sullivan said in apparent
disbelief “[Gore’s] becoming the Hans Christian Anderson of American
politics” when commenting on the petroleum reserve debacle) I keep
wondering where the offended outrage is. I want people, not just
pundits to ask not only “Why?” but also “What in the world does
it all mean?”

It
seems that the “why” could be answered by simply saying that Al
Gore wishes to appear as a person who has accumulated vast stores
of gravitas. Maybe he secretly hopes that his little lies will pass
by without being challenged by the majority of the media, who have
undoubtedly been in collusion with the Democratic party for some
time now. Perhaps he is tired of feeling like a big frog in a small
pond and wants to move up to big-frog-big-pond status, but knows
that his own political record is as uninspiring as his Harvard transcript.
Or maybe he has the uncomfortable feeling that he has accomplished
all he’s worked for just because he’s his daddy’s boy. (Where have
we heard that before?) Of course, it could be that he is —
in spite of his status as second-in-command — a sad figure
of a man who is so unsure of himself that his lies have become a
way of whistling past the graveyard.

In
any case, the polls begin to show that this person, whoever he is,
is possibly not the person that American citizens want serving as
their commander-in-chief. Who could blame them? When such patent
dishonesty is offered without even an oops-a-daisy attempt at retraction
or apology, it starts to grow into something that looks like…instability.
Either that or a contempt for the voters, the media and his fellow
Democrats that is so deeply entrenched that he truly believes —
to mangle Erich Segal’s famous Love Story quote — that
“supporting Al Gore means never hearing him say he’s sorry.”

Don’t
believe it for a minute.

September
28, 2000

Shelley
McKinney is a political writer whose work regularly appears in several
Internet journals. She takes great pleasure in exposing the politically
correct for their lack of logical thought.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare