June 25, 2004

Gore's Gone Wild

I take a look at Al Gore's lastest speech in a new AmSpec column today.

Update: Nice of Instapundit to link to the column, even if he did give away the ending.

Posted by John Tabin at June 25, 2004 12:48 AM


I am always eager to read your pieces in AmSpec, but today's missive was particularly brilliant. "Brown Shirts"? For God's sake, what is he thinking? It just showcases such an embarassingly poor grasp of history. No one who has read William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" or any other book with a comprehensive look at the Nazi would make such a comparison. It demeans the suffering of those who had to live through such barbarity.

You're by far one of my favorite political analysts.

Shawn Macomber

Posted by: Shawn Macomber at June 25, 2004 08:38 AM

"How odd that Gore, who endorsed Howard Dean, should object so strongly to Internet political activism."

Indeed. And besides, if Gore hadn't invented the darn thing in the first place, we VRW conspirators wouldn't be so tempted to abuse it. Best, J.L.

Posted by: Jake Laksin at June 25, 2004 01:56 PM

Does "Godwin's Law" apply to Al Gore as it does to Usenet discussion groups?

As in, when Nazi analogies are thrown in to an Internet discussion, (unless the discussion is World War Two history), the discussion is over and the person invoking the Nazi analogy has lost the argument?



Posted by: arf at June 25, 2004 03:25 PM

Thanks, Shawn. The admiration is mutual.

Posted by: John Tabin at June 25, 2004 03:53 PM

Mr. Tabin,

There's a delicious bit of irony in Gore's use of the term 'Brown Shirts'. Is he not the original 'Earth Tone' candidate?

Posted by: Ran at June 27, 2004 10:59 AM

So did the Kerry flacks who complained about Bush's "wild-eyed" internet ad get an apology from Gore? Wait - they did ask for one, right? I haven't really followed the news.

Posted by: Dave Weigel at June 28, 2004 01:46 PM

It seems like a lot of the people commenting didn't read the speech. In context the comment seems mainly to mean "brownshirts of the current (that is digital) age" rather than a specific comment on digital activism. It seemed to be a gratuitous throw away line inserted to liven a dull part of the speech. I was surprised by all the protests about a throw away line in an obscure speech by a washed up politician. I conclude that either the brownshirt remark or more likely the substance of his speech about recent usurpations of rights struck too close to home for some supporters of the administration.

Posted by: Rich at July 3, 2004 05:41 PM

Oh, please, Rich. If you don't understand why a reference to "Brown Shirts" is inflaming, go read up on what the Brown Shirts actually did.

And yes, I read the speech. You can believe Gore's rant demanded a response only because the "substance" was so incisive if you like, but at least consider the possibility that you might be too facile in dismissing the cultural significance of a man who four years ago won the votes of half the country.

Posted by: John Tabin at July 4, 2004 12:28 PM

Sure, the Gingrich principle teaches us that nothing livens a debate like a little inflammatory rhetoric. That seemed to be the purpose of the remark--to get people to pay poor old Al a little more attention.

I notice that you still didn't respond to the content.

Posted by: Rich at July 5, 2004 12:59 AM

I'm selling this site on Ebay if anyone is interested, I have a great idea for the site.

Posted by: Julie at July 15, 2004 10:23 PM

Hope it works this time, sorry.

Posted by: julie at July 15, 2004 10:25 PM