Opinion: In first debate, Al Gore displayed poor behavior

Vice President Al Gore came off as less than I would have expected from a leader -- my leader. He acted as though he owned the debate. He repeatedly demanded the "last word" and usually got it, even though his opponent was, according to the rules that were set up, supposed to have the rebuttal rights to every other question. All the moderator could do was sit there meekly and give in to Gore. And when George W. Bush did attempt to give his side, the vice president would attempt to distract him by either audibly sighing or rattling papers.

I sat in front of my television for 90-plus minutes in order to learn more about the candidates, and I did. I learned that Bush could remain cool under fire, could stick to his guns and could show patience in a stressful situation.

On the other hand, Gore was determined to show everyone his vast knowledge, but he ended up by repeating over and over again the same lame message -- it's "us" versus the rich and the powerful. It is indeed a strange message for the masses as it has been stated repeatedly that more than 50 percent of the work force owns stock of some sort and will be depending on that stock to ease the transition into retirement. Even President Franklin Roosevelt admitted when he originated the Social Security program that it was not meant to be the sole source of our retirement monies, but rather a supplement. However, today, many people think (wrongly) that the government is supposed to provide us 100 percent of our retirement funds. There's millions more Americans retiring today than there were when Roosevelt was president. Something has to give.

I will be anxiously awaiting the final two debates, but I won't be waiting for the media to tell me what I just heard. Please, let me and the rest of the "thinking" audience make up our own minds.
-- Richard P. Shinn, South Pasadena

Bush came out ahead

Re: Debate doesn't sway close race, by Tim Nickens, Oct. 4.

I realize that I am a younger voter. At 22, I have only voted in one presidential election and only been able to watch a few debates. However, for anyone to give Al Gore the edge in Tuesday's debate -- I must have been watching a different debate.

When I watch Al Gore, it is as if he is the great benevolent father, who wishes to see all his children simply listen to him and everything will be okay. I see a man who talks down to every single viewer and treats all of us as if we do not have the capacity to run our lives as the founding fathers intended.

Secondly, if it is one thing I do know, it is economics; I have one degree in economics and one in American history. So when George W. Bush said that Vice President Gore used "fuzzy math," he was just scratching the surface. There are more double countings, shifting interest payments, copying dividends, etc. I, for one, would rather have a man who tells it like it is, than one who uses the American people as props for his massive ego.

My vote belongs to George W. Bush in November, as should the votes of all young people in this country who cherish the freedoms that so many have died for.
-- Fred Piccolo Jr., St. Petersburg

Where was the compassion?

It's rather odd watching George W. Bush and his attacks on Al Gore and then see him go back and try to soothe the audience by speaking about how Gore is attempting to "frighten" people into voting for him.

It's just another reason "compassionate conservatism" is stranger than fiction. There is no compassion with George W. Bush. His tactics preach that he has been in power before, and he will represent the people the way a teddy bear represents a child -- only there to comfort the child but not really doing anything.

If that isn't enough reason to vote for Al Gore, I don't know what is.
-- John Fontana, Palm Harbor

One debate was more than enough

The first presidential debate of the season will be the last one for me. Al Gore attacked George W. Bush like a junk-yard guard dog going after a purebred interloper. Frankly, Gore's persona offended me. He hogged the microphone repeatedly. Moderator Jim Lehrer did little to stop his ranting and raving.

Neither candidate had anything new to say. I was so stressed by the end of the political prizefight that I've decided to watch the History Channel during the next two debates.
-- Peter W. Jasin, Tarpon Springs

A senior in need?

In his closing remarks at Tuesday's debate, Al Gore acknowledged the presence of a Midwesternsenior citizen in the audience, a senior citizen who had to collect cans to be able to buy her needed prescription drugs. Gore assured her that, if elected, he would make sure the government would help her and others like her with their drug expenses.

Gore also acknowledged that this unfortunate soul owns a Winnebago in which she drove cross-country from her home to Boston to lend her support to his cause.

I wonder how many cans her Winnebago cost and how many miles per can she gets on the road?
-- A.E. Roberts, St. Petersburg

Candidates were "air-fencing'

On the presidential debate: Martinis should be so dry. Metaphorically, it can best be described as "air fencing."

The missing elements, in my opinion, were the third-party candidates. Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan, unlike Al Gore and George Bush, have no fear of picking up rocks and looking for the ever-present snakes.

It is no wonder that "issues" like the "necktie index" and "sweat-o-meter" get so much attention.
-- Martin P. Vonderau, Palm Harbor

An ominous exclusion

I am beginning to wonder if our democratic process is on the precipice of evolving into totalitarianism. When Ralph Nader obtained a legitimate ticket to the Boston debates to listen in the audience, he was met at the door by a representative from the Commission on Presidential Debates and three police officers who refused his entrance.

The majority of American people want Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan in the debates. This is not a question of a person's party affiliation. It is not a question of whether you agree with Ralph Nader and the Green Party's platform. It is a question of the voice of everyday Americans being silenced. If we allow this to happen to Ralph Nader, then it could happen to the rest of us.
-- Karen Weibel Burton, Dunedin

No talk of freedom or liberty

Radio talk show host Neal Boortz did a keyword search of the text of the first Bush-Gore debate. The number of times either candidate said the word "freedom" -- zero. The number of times either candidate said the word "liberty" -- zero.

Yeah, I know. Big surprise. Of course, the debates were covered slavishly by the mainstream media, and none of them made note of the "freedom-liberty" vacuum, and none of them made any effort to include contemporaneous responses, comments or questioning of Libertarian Party candidate Harry Browne or any other candidate.

Yeah, I know. Big Surprise. Are the media full of dull, unimaginative, slavish clowns, or are they just transparently biased statists/socialists. Or both?
-- Rex Curry, Tampa

Arafat shares blame in Mideast violence

Re: Death by the hands of hate. Oct. 3.

Martin Dyckman writes a very compassionate and provocative editorial notebook. Sadly, it is clear that he failed to gather all the facts about the situation.

Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount was, indeed, a puzzling and unnecessary venture, and his motivation is surely unclear. He, however, is an Israeli citizen and has every right to be on the Temple Mount, which is under Israeli sovereignty.

In laying the entire blame for the ensuing events at the feet of Sharon and not implicating Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in any way, Dyckman either ignores or hasn't obtained the facts of the case. In the days prior to Sharon's visit, incidents of attacks against Jews were already taking place, albeit not to the scale of the current crisis. In addition, Shlomo Ben Ami, Israel's acting foreign minister, conferred with Palestinian security officials and was promised that there would be no violence as long as Sharon did not attempt to enter a mosque. Sharon then visited the site on Thursday of last week and abided by the directive. The violence did not erupt until Friday following the Muslim prayers. This lengthy period between the visit and the onset of hostilities strongly indicates that the riots were carefully orchestrated and not spontaneous.

Since the violence began, there have been many, many contacts with Arafat by the Israelis, beseeching him to curtail the violence. Neither he nor his police force/army have attempted to restrain the rioters.

Prior to these events, Arafat had become rather isolated in the world community due to his stubborn refusal to compromise during the Camp David talks. It is well known that Arafat has no qualms about placing women and children in harm's way and sacrificing their lives. This has been his tactic for many years and, obviously, it remains so today. Playing the world media like a fiddle, the Palestinian leader has attempted to improve his bargaining position.

The loss of life and injuries, both Palestinian and Israeli, saddens us greatly and we wish for a swift and peaceful end to the hostilities. We do hope that Martin Dyckman and others will take time in the future to fully investigate the facts before writing such condemning editorials.
-- Mike Eisenstadt, host of "The Sunday Simcha" on WMNF Radio; community relations coordinator, Tampa Jewish Federation

An unsettling silence

Re: Israel battles on 3 fronts, Oct. 3.

I am disappointed by the silence of the American Jewish community on the violence in Israel during the past week.

More than a 50 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli soldiers; three Israelis were killed by Palestinians. On TV there was the terrible scene of an Arab father and his young son pleading for respite, but Israeli soldiers shot them both. The young child died.

The American Jewish community is well organized and influential with the U.S. Congress, but their voice has not been heard.

It is reminiscent of what happened before World War II in Germany and the United States when some people understood what was happening to Jews in Europe, but chose not to get involved.

We may be going through the same thing again, but now Israeli Jews are the oppressors and American Jewish leaders and the U.S. Congress are the silent observers.
-- Joseph A. Mahon, St. Petersburg

Risky behavior

Re: In Gaza, rules of war favor Israel, Oct. 4.

If I'm stupid enough to hurl a huge stone or a sharp-edged hunk of concrete at a person standing there with a machine gun, just maybe I'd deserve to be shot. I can't see that this is a "Give me liberty or give me death" situation.

Some of those kids look so young that they can't possibly understand why they are doing such a thing. Who is "coaching" them?
-- Donald F. Kelly, St. Petersburg

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page