Late Night: Al Gore Didn’t Lose. Everyone Did.
Walter Russell Mead has delivered himself of yet another wet shart of vacuous attempted character assassination of Al Gore. He’s up to three installments of this garbage now and shows no sign of stopping — though he has yet to make use of anything resembling verifiable fact to support his “case.” Like a wedding cake topped with elegant wax figurines but whose primary ingredient is manure, this “case” amounts to nothing more than bog-standard Internet concern trollery decorated with foppish, psuedo-relevant “learned references.”
Mead is very much engaged in concern trolling. In his absurd opening salvo he crocodile snivels:
The plunge from the brink of victory to the pit of defeat must be as unpleasant as it is familiar to the winner of the 2000 popular vote; in his latest essay in Rolling Stone he gives his own best analysis of why he keeps losing. Few American politicians could write an essay this eloquent or this clear. Few people in the world can command this kind of attention for their thoughts. Even so, the results of all this talent and effort are exactly the opposite of what the former vice president would wish; the essay illuminates his shortcomings more than his strengths and makes crystal clear that if global climate policy is going to change, then Al Gore must get out of the way.
Which is rottenly disingenuous. Mead hardly gives a shit about the “global green movement” succeeding. How could he? He doesn’t believe the science, and regularly regurgitates inane and dishonest canards about the IPCC (as he did with the phony Himalayan glacier “scandal”). Mead doesn’t want “global climate policy to change” — he likes it the way it is, ineffective. And he wants Al Gore to get out of the way, because he doesn’t like Al Gore.
But he can’t even be honest about hating Gore, which is pretty scummy, frankly. You’d have to be a real shit to compose a paragraph like this:
I am not one of those who thinks him a hypocrite; I think rather that he shares an illusion common amongst the narcissistic glitterati of our time: that politically fashionable virtue cancels private vice. The drug addled Hollywood celeb whose personal life is a long record of broken promises and failed relationships and whose serial bouts with drug and alcohol abuse and revolving door rehab adventures are notorious can redeem all by “standing up” for some exotic, stylish cause. These moral poseurs and dilettantes of virtue are modern versions of those guilt-plagued medieval nobles who built churches and monasteries to ‘atone’ for their careers of bloodshed, oppression and scandal.
And then follow it up with this:
I don’t judge, dear reader, and neither should you. May we all find mercy when we stand alone, naked and ashamed before the judgement seat of God.
He’s just like bloodthirsty medieval nobles and drug-addicted Hollywood sluts, but it would be wrong to judge. Jesus fucking Christ. Just call him an asshole, already. As the kids say, man up. Faux-pious twit….
Mead leaves no cliched anti-Gore stone unthrown. The burden of his first column is that Gore is doomed to fail because “skeptics” are right to castigate his allegedly carbon-profligate lifestyle. But, hilariously, here is one of his own links which he includes to show how Gore just won’t walk the walk:
Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation’s most environmentally friendly.
He’s just throwing shit to see if he can make a statue of a pony. Note the slippage between what might be a “character flaw,” as Mead dubs it, and Gore just being rich — a curious position for a rightist to take, to say the least. (Mead intones “You cannot even become enormously rich investing in companies that will profit if the policies you advocate are put into place,” which is some hard fucking luck for Dick Cheney, who is apparently morally superior to Gore in this calculus because he was always upfront about being a sonofabitch.) And get a load of this: “A fawning establishment press spares the former vice president the vitriol and schadenfreude it pours over the preachers and priests whose personal conduct compromised the core tenets of their mission; Gore is not mocked as others have been.” Damn. Mead wouldn’t be getting away with that shit if Bob Somerby were still alive.
Of course this entire line of argument is preposterous anyhow: “I hate when people fail to understand that when collective action is needed, advocating for some sort of collective action doesn’t make you a BIG GIANT HYPOCRITE. Al Gore doesn’t go around chastising people for their individual choices. Al Gore says we have a big problem which requires collective action.”
But that is, you know, the rub. Mead is opposed to collective action on climate change, and wants to discredit its most popular public advocate, however he can. His thesis — that Gore is an abject failure because neither the American government nor world governments in general are confronting climate change — is twaddle, on its face. Al Gore is, you know, not in government. The failure is not Gore’s. It is far more Obama’s. And China’s. And, well, every elected Republican’s, and the entire conservative movement’s, which has decided that it hates the everliving shit out of science.
Don’t blame Al Gore after the coming disaster. Blame Walter Russell Mead.
Video one of Peter Sinclair’s excellent “Climate Crock” series.