In this speech Gore explains that the administration's disdain for checks and balances lead directly to systemic horrors in U.S. prison facilities. The checks and balances concern is something that we've discussed here repeatedly for years. It was my fear that these things were dangerous precedents that would inevitably be abused in the future. Gore is right. Those abuses came much faster then I had predicted. This essay is worth the time it takes to read it.

Tom gave this speech a gold star. Although I do not give this speech my own gold star, I am glad that Tom chose to do so, and I'm also glad I made the suggestion about gold stars.

This speech is a mixed bag. It is significant and newsworthy, so it is worth reading for that reason on its own. Gore also makes several good points that are worthy of further discussion and consideration.

However, he alternates frequently (and frustratingly) between roles. At one moment, he plays the honest American citizen who is deeply concerned about the (mis)behavior of his government. At the next, he is jockeying for political position, blatantly playing for cheers and ovations from a partisan NYU audience. A speech half as long would have been twice as good if he had been willing to put politics aside and speak thoughtfully, honestly, candidly, and critically to the American public. If he then found himself with time left over, because the talk was of a predetermined duration, it would have been a pleasant surprise to hear him offer some concrete, constructive ideas. The closest he gets is to hearken back to the fundamental (but abstract) principles of American democracy, talking about "the founders" and quoting Jefferson.

Without directly saying it, he gives the impression that he would repeal the Patriot Act if he were in power. Yet it was the Clinton-Gore FBI director who recently made the case for ever more expanded authority in this regard, including the reinstitution of bans on the export and use of strong cryptography.

In the absence of this speech, I would not have thought to criticize Al Gore because he did not have the Answer to our Problems. It is never easy to develop a solution to a complex problem, and it is even harder to make that solution succeed in practice. But it is disappointing to see him make this speech, which (notwithstanding its truth) is so uniformly and unflinchingly negative and critical of the Bush administration, without offering anything resembling a coherent alternative beyond a laundry list of "Don'ts." Sadly, this only serves to diminish the sincerity and impact of the valid, important questions he has asked. His prescription can be summarized in a single word: Change. Thanks, but I kind of already knew that.

I was both surprised, and on some level, impressed, I think, by his call for Tenet's resignation. It gave me pause to reconsider the basic problem with the common interpretation of a resignation in the modern world. I have been quite conflicted of late regarding the notion of a Rumsfeld resignation, and it was refreshing to see a public figure call for the resignation of a friend while still retaining respect for that person.

Anthony Zinni was on Charlie Rose earlier this week, and the hour-long interview should be up on the web within the next few days. It is well worth the time, and I highly recommend it. I would consider giving the interview a gold star if not for ... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]