Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | News Flashes | Scoop Features | Scoop Video | Strange & Bizarre | Search

 


Al Gore Attacks "Right-Wing Religious Zealotry"

Al Gore Attacks "Right-Wing Religious Zealotry"


By David Swanson


Click For Photo Gallery with 24 photos

Former Vice President Al Gore gave a lengthy speech on Wednesday on the topic of Republicans' attempt to eliminate the right to filibuster in the Senate.

The event was organized by MoveOn.org, and MoveOn member Sarah Landon introduced Gore. Landon pointed out that Gore had worked in an administration that saw more judicial nominees blocked by Republicans than the current one has seen blocked by Democrats. We hear about activist Democratic judges, Landon said, but Gore "knows from personal experience that if anything the opposite is true."

That line, a reference to the 2000 election, got a big reaction from the crowd in a large hotel meeting room in Washington, D.C.

Gore's opening comments didn't play quite as well. He talked about his swift agreement to the Supreme Court decision that stole the White House from him by halting the counting of Floridians' votes. Gore had done so, he said, "to reaffirm the bedrock principle that we are a nation of laws, not men."

Gore might have picked a better example to make that point, just as he might have picked a better title for the speech than "An American Heresy" - a reference to the Republicans' power grab, but a title at odds with a speech focused on the danger of religious dogmatic extremism in politics.

"[I]f the judges who formed a majority in Bush v. Gore," Gore said, "had not only been nominated to the court by a Republican president, but had also been confirmed by only Republican senators in party-line votes, America would not have accepted that court's decision. Moreover, if the confirmation of those justices in the majority had been forced through by running roughshod over 200 years of Senate precedents and engineered by a crass partisan decision on a narrow party-line vote to break the Senate's rules of procedure - then no speech imaginable could have calmed the passions aroused in the country."

After quoting Hamilton's and Madison's thoughts on the need for an independent judiciary, Gore presented a summary and compilation of recent quotes from prominent Republicans encouraging violence against judges, or advocating stripping funding from courts or mass impeachment, or proposing that the President can simply dismiss judges, or claiming that the idea that the judiciary should be independent is a "misunderstanding."

"They even claim," Gore said, "that those of us who disagree with their point of view are waging war against 'people of faith'. [see http://www.davidswanson.org/columns/apress.htm]

"How dare they?

"Long before our founders met in Philadelphia, their forebears first came to these shores to escape oppression at the hands of despots in the old world who mixed religion with politics and claimed dominion over both their pocketbooks and their souls. This aggressive new strain of right-wing religious zealotry is actually a throw-back to the intolerance that led to the creation of America in the first place."

That statement won Gore a standing ovation. Gore then laid out what he saw as "an American heresy - a highly developed political philosophy that is fundamentally at odds with the founding principles of the United States of America." Our rights, Gore said, are given by God, but "unlike our inalienable rights, our laws are human creations that derive their moral authority from our consent to their enactment." In contrast, Gore said, religious zealots want to "subordinate the importance of the rule of law to their ideological fervor."

Gore said this in a much more longwinded manner, but having read the prepared speech more than once, I still can't make perfect sense of it. When women were given the right to vote, was that God's work or humans'? When an Enron writes laws for secular but anti-democratic reasons, is that any different from legislation driven by religious fervor?

In any event, Gore's primary message was that Republicans are trying to eliminate a democratic check on power, and that they are driven by both religion and corporate greed. Gore said of Republicans:

"If they were to achieve their ambition - and exercise the power they seek - America would face the twin dangers of an economic blueprint that eliminated most all of the safeguards and protections established for middle class families throughout the 20th century and a complete revision of the historic insulation of the rule of law from sectarian dogma."

Gore listed phony crises that have been produced by Republicans simply because there was no other way to win approval of their agenda: Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, the imminent collapse of Social Security, and now the vacancies in the federal judiciary. "This one, too, cannot survive scrutiny," Gore said, and he proved it.

"The Senate has confirmed 205 or over 95 percent of President Bush's nominees," Gore pointed out. "Democrats have held up only 10 nominees, less than 5 percent. Compare that with the 60 Clinton nominees who were blocked by Republican obstruction between 1995 and 2000....

"[W]hen President Clinton left office, there were more than 100 vacant judgeships, largely due to Republican obstructionist tactics. Ironically, near the end of the Clinton/Gore administration, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said: 'There is no vacancy crisis and a little perspective clearly belies the assertion that 103 vacancies represent a systemic crisis.'

"Comically, soon after President Bush took office, when the number of vacancies had already been reduced, the same Republican committee chairman sounded a shrill alarm. Because of the outstanding vacancies, he said, 'We're reaching a crisis in our federal courts.'

"Now the number of vacancies is lower than it has been in many years: 47 vacancies out of 877 judgeships - and for the majority of those vacancies, the President has not even sent a nominee to the Senate."

Gore went on to make similar work of false claims that filibustering of judicial nominees has never been done before, by simply pointing to past cases in which it has been done - and by Republicans.

And Gore pointed out that all of this nonsense is distracting us from real crises, such as those in health care and employment.

*************

David Swanson is a board member of Progressive Democrats of America.


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Werewolf: Living With Rio’s Olympic Ruins

Mariana Cavalcanti Critics of the Olympic project can point a discernible pattern in the delivery of Olympics-related urban interventions: the belated but rushed inaugurations of faulty and/or unfinished infrastructures... More>>

Live Blog On Now: Open Source//Open Society Conference

The second annual Open Source Open Society Conference is a 2 day event taking place on 22-23 August 2016 at Michael Fowler Centre in Wellington… Scoop is hosting a live blog summarising the key points of this exciting conference. More>>

ALSO:

Buildup:

Gordon Campbell: On The Politicising Of The War On Drugs In Sport

It hasn’t been much fun at all to see how “war on drugs in sport” has become a proxy version of the Cold War, fixated on Russia. This weekend’s banning of the Russian long jumper Darya Klishina took that fixation to fresh extremes. More>>

ALSO:

Binoy Kampmark: Kevin Rudd’s Failed UN Secretary General Bid

Few sights are sadder in international diplomacy than seeing an aging figure desperate for honours. In a desperate effort to net them, he scurries around, cultivating, prodding, wishing to be noted. Finally, such an honour is netted, in all likelihood just to shut that overly keen individual up. More>>

Open Source / Open Society: The Scoop Foundation - An Open Model For NZ Media

Access to accurate, relevant and timely information is a crucial aspect of an open and transparent society. However, in our digital society information is in a state of flux with every aspect of its creation, delivery and consumption undergoing profound redefinition... More>>

Keeping Out The Vote: Gordon Campbell On The US Elections

I’ll focus here on just two ways that dis-enfranchisement is currently occurring in the US: (a) by the rigging of the boundary lines for voter districts and (b) by demanding elaborate photo IDs before people are allowed to cast their vote. More>>

Ramzy Baroud: Being Black Palestinian - Solidarity As A Welcome Pathology

It should come as no surprise that the loudest international solidarity that accompanied the continued spate of the killing of Black Americans comes from Palestine; that books have already been written and published by Palestinians about the plight of their Black brethren. In fact, that solidarity is mutual. More>>

ALSO:


Get More From Scoop

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news