Bush 1, Gore 0

The first of the three presidential debates in Boston last night showed the world that Al Gore is not always the great debater that he purports himself to be. But then again, what do you expect from a man who has a propensity for stretching the truth when he is not lying outright?

Time and again during the debate, we had Gore trying to paint a picture of Bush that was simply not accurate. In one statement, Gore talked about providing tax relief to the American people. Give me a break! This guy and Bill Clinton had the opportunity to provide Americans substantial tax relief, and what did they do? They imposed the largest tax increase in history in 1993 and made it retroactive to January 1st, instead of January 20th when they took office. To make matters worse, the incoming administration gave a ‘heads-up’ to some of their friends and larger contributors to shelter some of their money in order to avoid the new taxes. One of them was Michael Eisner, the CEO of Disney who reportedly made a killing in seven or eight figures on said information.

Gore talked about Social Security and the importance of keeping it solvent. Bush has promoted the idea of allowing the American people the option of taking a portion of that money and investing it themselves – and that makes a lot of sense. In the early 1980’s when Ronald Reagan was President, there was a two-year period where a number of people withdrew from the Social Security system. A few years later, one gentleman in Texas who had voted against privatization found himself glad that his employer had voted out of the system. It turned out that had they stayed in Social Security, his monthly retirement from them would have been just over $1000.00. With employers investing the money on their own in a plan that will reap far more interest than Social Security, each employee’s monthly retirement will be over $5,000.00 – an amount that will allow for a comfortable retirement.

When Bush offers tax cuts, he offers them for all Americans, whereas Gore just offers them to one target group – what he calls the middle class, who in fact, are people on the lower end of the income scale. Most real middle-income families would be ineligible for the tax cuts he proposes. Clearly, the latter is done for the sake of pandering for votes, whereas the former is seen as a step in rectifying the gross inequities committed by the current administration.

When Bush talks about the need for a strong defense, he has a wealth of experience from which to draw. His running mate is Dick Cheney, who was Secretary of Defense under his father, President George Bush. Cheney may not be Mr. Excitement, but he has proven that he knows how to lead and direct the affairs of America’s military. Look at the butt kicking we did to Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. Were Iraq to invade Kuwait, there is no way that Bill Clinton would be able to successfully perform a Desert Storm II – we simply do not have the troops to support such an operation without leaving America totally undefended.

While on the subject of the Persian Gulf War, I read some remarks yesterday that were attributed to former Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY). In it, he stated that while the Democrats and Republicans were talking things over with their Senators when a Democratic Senator came to see then-Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) and then-Senate Minority Whip Simpson. This Democrat senator was seeking some time to address the issue of the use of force to remove Saddam form Kuwait and his party was only planning on giving him seven minutes and he wanted more time. Dole offered him fifteen, and Simpson offered him five minutes of his allotted time for a total of twenty. This senator was seeking for prime-time coverage so as to enhance his mug on screen. The senate scheduler said he’d get back with this senator. When said senator tried to get a commitment the next day, he threatened to change his vote and vote against the use of force if he didn’t get his way, showing that the only person he was truly serving was himself. That senator was Tennessee Democrat Al Gore, Jr.

Last night was the first debate between the candidates. It was done in a structured format, whereas the next one will be informal and the third one will be in a town hall format. These will be good opportunities to provide the American people with the opportunity to observe the candidates and assist them in a way that will allow for the making of an informed decision when they go to the ballot box in just under five weeks.

The only down side of this debate schedule is that Pat Buchanan, Ralph Nader and Harry Browne were not allowed to participate. They would have been a welcome addition, and with Pat Buchanan’s skills in particular, it would have been an absolute blast to watch. What made things worse were when Ralph Nader was not allowed to view the debate from an adjoining hall. It turns out that some idiot from the Commission of Presidential Debates told Nader that even though he had a ticket to view the debate (given him by a student), that unless he left the campus, he would be subject to arrest. Such antics smack of Gestapo-like tactics.

If any third party is ever going to be successful in America, they need to realize that they are going to have to build their voter base one step at a time. They will need to prove that they can govern competently and responsibly at both the local and state levels before trying to take on Washington and reform the mess in Congress. They cannot realistically expect to be catapulted from obscurity into the White House overnight, and like anyone else in America who pursues his or her dream, they (the Pat Buchanans and the Ralph Naders) must be willing to pay the price necessary to achieve their objectives.

That is a lesson that all those who seek office would do well to learn and remember

You can e-mail your comments to Timothy at trollins@idirect.com.

Copyright © 2000 by Timothy Rollins.
All Rights Reserved.

-Published with permission