AlGore Video: Bush (41) Lied, People Died — 1992 edition

posted at 2:25 pm on June 12, 2007 by Bryan

If the MSM actually cared about past statements by possible presidential candidates, this clip would be among the juiciest on earth. The MSM would get Al Gore on camera to explain his transformation from reasonable hawk to hard left anti-war screecher. But the MSM won’t. We will.

Let’s set the stage.

The year is 1992. Sen. Al Gore had been picked up by Gov. Bill Clinton as his running mate for the White House. The pair of Southern Democrats were up against President George H. W. Bush, who had seen his 90+% approval rating after the Gulf War plummet thanks to a souring economy and a tax increase that Bush had told us –”read my lips”– would never get past his desk. Gore had been picked to offset Clinton’s obvious bimbo weaknesses and relative inexperience in foreign policy. Clinton’s most notable achievements in that field up to that point had been decrying the Vietnam war while on British soil, making a trip to the USSR in 1969 that he never quite explained, and deploying the Arkansas National Guard to help out in local crises.

Gore, by contrast, had served in Vietnam. He was a stable family man. He was regarded as a centrist Democrat, a foreign policy expert and a Blue Dog hawk on national security. And at that time, in that campaign, he delivered the following speech to the Center for National Policy on September 29, 1992. The point of the speech was to dent Bush 41′s unrivalled foreign policy credentials by making him look weak in the face of threats. That was no small task, given that the Gulf War was just about 18 months in the past and the US was still enforcing the no-fly zones over Iraq. Bush 41 had also ordered the 1989 invasion of Panama to deal with dictator Manuel Noreiga, a successful military operation that went off almost without a hitch.

The thesis of the Gore speech: Reagan-Bush had looked the other way and let Saddam Hussein become a terroristic menace and a WMD developer. They had ignored Saddam’s many operational ties to terrorists over the years so they could maintain relations with him and offset the threat from the mullahs in Iran. Reagan-Bush and then Bush 41 on his own had shown weakness in the face of the threat from Saddam’s Iraq, a weakness that was not offset even by the 1991 Gulf War victory. Gore’s speech was intended to make an issue of Republican weakness in the face of terrorism, and in the face of Saddam’s hard and verified connections to terrorism in particular.

Just so we’re clear on this, the 1992 version of Gore accused Bush 41 of lying by minimizing the threat that Saddam posed to the US and the world. The current version of Gore accuses Bush 43 of lying by overstating the threat that Saddam posed to the US and the world. A competent MSM would ask Gore to explain why he’s such a Goldilocks on such a difficult issue, if naked politics can’t explain it.

Now some of Gore’s charges may even be true. The pre-9-11 world was very different from ours with respect to how we view countries that harbor terrorists. President Reagan had even decried Israel’s 1981 raid on the Osirak reactor. But this is Al “he played on our fearrrrs” Gore we’re talking about. This is the same man who, in February 2002, promoted a “final reckoning” with Iraq only to turn against that same reckoning on the eve of its launch. This is the same Al Gore who in 2004 intentionally conflated the abuses at Abu Ghraib with official US policy to confuse the issue and undermine the war. This is the same Al Gore who denounced US war policy in in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia last year. This is the same Al Gore, 1992 and 2007, only…totally different. He’s grown into his own bizarro doppelganger as political sands have shifted from Democrats positioning themselves as credible hawks to isolationist doves.

This is, in short, Al Gore: a craven opportunist who will say whatever he deems to be the most useful thing for the political moment, without regard to truth or principle or consequences, other than one — that the consequences include making Gore relevant. That’s the one principle that he obviously cares about a great deal.

(h/t Rush Limbaugh)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The Goracle crystal balls again!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on June 12, 2007 at 2:33 PM

“Where’s your God now, Moses KosKidz?”

Matticus Finch on June 12, 2007 at 2:42 PM

If only the MSM would do a little research, they would be able to inform us all…I wonder why they don’t.

right2bright on June 12, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Wow! Gore looks pretty human there…and young, not that I look 15 years older now, either.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on June 12, 2007 at 2:49 PM

A deeply disturbing look at a blatent disreguard for brutal terrorism…

I would say that his statement pretty much sums up the Clinton admin…

Babs on June 12, 2007 at 2:50 PM

it should be noted, that legally the 2003 Iraq war was a continuation of the first gulf war, as Saddam violated the cease fire agreement multiple times. Its all in the Iraq war resolution they voted on, right down to the terrorist ties.

jp on June 12, 2007 at 2:52 PM

Wow! Gore looks pretty human there

Are you kidding? I could have sworn that was Darrell Hammond doing a parody of Gore. Instead, it turns out it’s just Gore doing Gore.

Editor on June 12, 2007 at 2:56 PM

they also, in the Iraq War Resolution, referenced the 1998 Regime Change Policy of Clinton’s in addition to the first gulf war…

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq’s continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in “material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations” and urged the President “to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations” (Public Law 105-235);

without the media the Dems are a permanent minority…

jp on June 12, 2007 at 2:56 PM

Who the heck is that man?

Brat on June 12, 2007 at 2:58 PM

Al Gore: a craven opportunist who will say whatever he deems to be the most useful thing for the political moment

Reminds me of another daisy (sarc) running for President that seems to slant which ever way the wind blows.

Nice post Bryan but we all keep forgetting that the Dems don’t care about the Facts, as long as they can hide them from the sheeple.

abinitioadinfinitum on June 12, 2007 at 3:03 PM

President Bush at presser, “Now I know that you all have been, uh, not so understanding about my statements concerning Iraq and Saddam Hussein and the global war on terror. A few have even recently stated that the global war on terror is nothing more than a slogan for a bumper sticker. Alright, alright; I can see that. Perhaps I have not made the case as clearly as I could have–I’ll be honest–clarity is one of my weak suits. So, to make the point more forcefully, and to be bi-partisan, I’ve brought film from a colleague whom you all will certainly recognize, and whose credentials I expect you all respect. Without further ado–Dana, roll the tape will you?” Then this clip plays. Hey, I can dream can’t I?

smellthecoffee on June 12, 2007 at 3:04 PM

Those mannerisms! Ya think he and clint*n had the same media trainer/speech coach?

RushBaby on June 12, 2007 at 3:08 PM

They are absoultely wetting themselves over at Kos about this. Pretty funny.

JackStraw on June 12, 2007 at 3:09 PM

You lose, good day sir!

Jeeze I love technologies like YouTube (if not YouTube itself).

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 3:09 PM

That video has to be fake. The Bush administration must have created an Al Gore robot, recorded this and put it on the internet. Truther that.

V15J on June 12, 2007 at 3:12 PM

OT: shep smith looks like he got himself a perm from 1978

abinitioadinfinitum on June 12, 2007 at 3:17 PM

The Bush administration must have created an Al Gore robot

Wouldn’t that be kinda redundant?

JackStraw on June 12, 2007 at 3:18 PM

The Bush administration must have created an Al Gore robot…

I’m afraid Mr. Gore did that all by himself.

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 3:18 PM

This is, in short, Al Gore: a craven opportunist who will say whatever he deems to be the most useful thing for the political moment, without regard to truth or principle or consequences, other than one — that the consequences include making Gore relevant. That’s the one principle that he obviously cares about a great deal.

I’d say that sums it up pretty well.

thirteen28 on June 12, 2007 at 3:26 PM

This is so important, that it deserves to be completely ignored by every media outlet.

benrand on June 12, 2007 at 3:29 PM

Oh, I recognize him now! It’s that guy who claims to have invented the internet, now being exposed as the “craven opportunist” he really is by the very internet he claims to have invented because this will never be shown on CNNCBSNBCABCPMSNBC.

Brat on June 12, 2007 at 3:32 PM

…as early as 1985, Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle warned about the suspected diversion of U.S. exports of dual-use technology to the Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

Dual-use technology meaning the type of tech that is required for both military AND non-military nuclear applications, and whose exports are, while still heavily controlled, less so than military-only bits of tech.

Of course, AlGore and BillyJeff were completely trustworthy in the military technology department.

Freelancer on June 12, 2007 at 3:38 PM

Ahh, the same old lispy, condescending dork we all know and love.

Malpaso on June 12, 2007 at 4:00 PM

Hymie the robot Candidate.

This was back when he and his hippe wife were going after EEEEEVVVVIIIILLLL rock music like Frank Zappa and Twisted Sister.

GRAVITAS!

benrand on June 12, 2007 at 4:20 PM

I have to say, the part where he gets all facetious and sarcastic about the sanctions imposed on Iraq is particularly sweet.

And from Rush to Drudge/Breitbart…seems like it’s going to get at least some play.

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 4:39 PM

I think Gore was misled.

Hey that would make a great speech for a Republican candidate at a Presidential Debate. Don’t give the name of the speech giver until the end of reading it.

Drtuddle on June 12, 2007 at 4:40 PM

Wouldn’t that be kinda redundant?

No

V15J on June 12, 2007 at 4:47 PM

Fifteen years and 50 pounds ago, The Goracle spoketh…

JammieWearingFool on June 12, 2007 at 4:51 PM

Algore the Poli-Pimp looks a little hot under the collar.

Must’ve been Early Onset Global Warming.

(EOGW for those who care …too much.)

I can’t wait till they find the video of Syria trucking Saddam’s WMD’s over the Iraq/Syrian border in February 2003.

profitsbeard on June 12, 2007 at 4:54 PM

I don’t get it. I watched the whole thing expecting Gore to support regime change, but the entire tirade was aimed at Reagan era anti-Iranian policies. Where in there does Gore support either the overthrow or invasion of Iraq?

NPP on June 12, 2007 at 5:00 PM

NPP on June 12, 2007 at 5:00 PM

What part of “ZOMG THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FAILED MISERABLY BY NOT TAKING MORE AGGRESSIVE ACTION ON IRAQ WHICH IS A TERRORIST STATE WITH DESIGNS ON WMD’s!1one!eleven!!!!” did you not understand?

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 5:06 PM

That’s why I have soured immensely on Gore ever since 2003. The guy is clearly very intelligent, all the more reason to dislike him for conspicuously being intellectually dishonest.

Seixon on June 12, 2007 at 5:08 PM

And from Rush to Drudge/Breitbart…seems like it’s going to get at least some play.

Oh, yeah, Citizen Duck. And once in a while, just eeeev’ry so often, something gets so much play on the blogosphere that it becomes newsworthy. Not the story itself, of course, but the story of how the story became newsworthy, you know, the converage of the coverage. But as long as the u-tubes don’t deem it “inappropriate,” it might just leave a mark on the Gorebot. Nothing compared to what’ll be in a few years, when the Inconvenient Truth becomes a very inconvenient movie. That will be a blast from the past that will make this gem look trivial.

smellthecoffee on June 12, 2007 at 5:18 PM

What part of “ZOMG THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FAILED MISERABLY BY NOT TAKING MORE AGGRESSIVE ACTION ON IRAQ WHICH IS A TERRORIST STATE WITH DESIGNS ON WMD’s!1one!eleven!!!!” did you not understand?

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 5:06 PM

and the only way to be anymore aggressive in first gulf war would be to take saddam out.

jp on June 12, 2007 at 5:19 PM

smellthecoffee on June 12, 2007 at 5:18 PM:

Nothing compared to what’ll be in a few years, when the Inconvenient Truth becomes a very inconvenient movie. That will be a blast from the past that will make this gem look trivial

I already envision Global Warming’s place in introductory science textbooks next to an explanation of the scientific method, along with cautionary tales of perpetual motion machines and Rube Goldberg devices.

jp on June 12, 2007 at 5:19 PM:

and the only way to be anymore aggressive in first gulf war would be to take saddam out.

Exactly. Which is what I thought should have been done in the first Gulf War. I actually agreed with Gore back then that GHWB hadn’t done enough to check (i.e. overthrow) Saddam.

Problem is, I still hold that position, and Mr. Gore has been blown hither and yon by the shifting winds of partisan political advantage.

Citizen Duck on June 12, 2007 at 5:34 PM

An inconvenient truth, hey Al?

fogw on June 12, 2007 at 6:42 PM

Anyone else having trouble listening to him? Just his voice and speech pattern is putting me to sleep. He’s like the opposite of the Hillary shrill.

Tuari on June 12, 2007 at 7:21 PM

Uh, Gore didn’t really talk about the Gulf War. He talked about our support to Saddam in the 1980′s and criticized that. It seems to me that’s much different from supporting an invasion and regime change.

Certainly Gore has changed his tune and his tone for political reasons, as most of the Democrats have done, but I don’t see any evidence in that video that Gore supported either an invasion or regime change.

NPP on June 12, 2007 at 8:02 PM

good grief, the whole speech is about the first gulf war and to look at things “before and after the war” and the terrorism links, and how Bush didn’t take them seriously enough

Gore Debating in 1992 on this

plus he’s on record in 1998 “Regime Change” policy and in 2000 I beleive on the need to remove saddam.

jp on June 12, 2007 at 8:32 PM

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:csTEPGv0VdYJ:commrnc.grassroots.com/resources/goreiraqspeech.doc+Al+Gore+1998+regime+change&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&client=firefox-a

September 23, 2002: Gore Blamed The Previous George H.W. Bush Administration For Prematurely Abandoning Its Military Effort Against Iraq And For Allowing Saddam Hussein To Stay In Power. “Now, back in 1991, I was one of a handful of Democrats in the United States Senate to vote in favor of the resolution endorsing the Persian Gulf War. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration’s hasty departure from the battlefield, even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Shiites and Kurds, groups that we had after all encouraged to rise up against Saddam . . . . Now, a mere two years later, after we abandoned Afghanistan that first time, Saddam Hussein launched his invasion of Kuwait. And our decision, following a brilliant military campaign, to abandon the effort prematurely to destroy Saddam’s military allowed him to remain in power. Now, this needs to be debated and discussed by the Congress. You know, what this tells me is that the Congress should require as part of any resolution that it considers some explicit guarantees on whether or not we’re proposing to simply abandon the Iraqi people in the aftermath of a military victory there, or whether or not we’re going to demand as a nation that this doctrine of ‘wash your hands and walk away’ be changed so that we can engage in some nation building again and build the kind of peace for the future that our people have a right to expect.” (Al Gore, Remarks To The Commonwealth Club Of California, San Francisco, CA, September 23, 2002)

jp on June 12, 2007 at 8:46 PM

The thought of having had to listen to this wax museum figure preach at me for 8 years (hopefully past) is very scary. In spite of all, I’m very thankful that, so far, I didn’t have to go through that trauma.

Only good for insomnia.

On his, and others’ flip-flopping, I hold the media and dummies who believe these elitists accountable for the inability to put it together and make them answer on the Sunday shows. Alas, I’m just dreaming…

Entelechy on June 12, 2007 at 10:49 PM