The Gift of Arrogant Scorn

Several signs of the failing health of American democracy jump out from Mickey Kaus's recent Slate commentary in which he advises Al Gore about the threat of Ralph Nader. In a typical example of what passes for intelligent political commentary these days, Kaus says that "instead of securing his base on the left by co-opting Nader and appeasing the Naderites, Gore can now seize a large chunk of the center by bashing Nader." How might he do that? By "using Nader as a foil, Gore can a) reestablish himself as a genuine New Democrat, in synch with the views of the vast middle, and b) change the public's impression of his character from 'boring-but-ruthless panderer' to 'leader with the guts to take on part of his own coalition.'"

First, let's dispatch Kaus's factual muddle. Nader and the Greens are not "part of [Gore's] own coalition." Never have been, never will be. Second, Gore is "in synch with the views of the vast middle"? Is that what we're calling it these days? The vast middle? It's plain that what's vast, and growing more vast by the minute, is the gap between the rich and the poor. That and 50,000,000. That's the number of Americans without health care. That's vast too. Oh, and 46% of children in California living either below the (dangerously unrealistic and miserly) poverty line, or just above it. It must fill their empty little stomaches with hope and pride to be part of Gore's "vast middle."

What is a "genuine New Democrat" anyway? Is that like a Republican? Bill Clinton is a New Democrat, which in recent years has been indistinguishable from war criminal and coward and betrayer and unprincipled opportunist. There's nothing genuine, new or Democratic here. A New Democrat is a pro-choice moderate Republican. George Bush, on a good day, is a genuine New Democrat.

Not content with this bit of smoke-and-mirrors, Kaus comes directly to the point. "I am saying that at some point soon, maybe at the Democratic convention in Los Angeles, Gore should make it clear, in a confrontational, put-downy way, that he disagrees with a lot of what Nader stands for and is willing to take the heat for saying it."

But the only way Gore can do that is to distort Nader's positions, which are, like Nader himself, quite popular. So expect him to do precisely that. And given the understandable frustration of the DNC protesters, Gore will certainly do his part to "protect free speech and democracy" by engaging in coded free speech bashing. It will be, as Kaus might say, a chance to seem presidential. After all it's hard to imagine Gore following Kaus's advice too closely.

My fellow Americans, let me be clear: this election is about real political choice. unlike Ralph Nader, I, the powerful and manly Al Gore, support the rights of 50,000,000 to reject Nader's tired, big government solution to their lack of health care, their hunger, their poverty.

Unlike Ralph Nader, I, the studly and clever Al Gore, support Iraqi sanctions. Al Gore stands with Madeleine Albright, the great moralist of our time, who thinks, indeed, that 5,000 starved Iraqi children a month isn't too high a price to pay.

Unlike Ralph Nader, I, the righteous and avenging Al Gore, support the death penalty. Al Gore won't even coddle an innocent man! Nader and his unwashed band of environmental extremists are clearly outside the mainstream of American political thought on this issue. After all, even my opponent agrees with my view of the death penalty, and he's got more experience at it than anyone.

And, most importantly, I, Al Gore, unlike Ralph Nader, will stand up for the rights of the American businessman, from whom all blessings flow. Unlike Ralph Nader, I represent every American. I don't discriminate against the very corporations who've made this country what it is today. Unlike Ralph Nader, I will defend the environment by supporting oil companies -- especially ones in which I have a large investment -- displacing any and all indigenous peoples, if that's what it takes to keep America running.

But, before banishing Kaus to some as-yet-unimagined circle of hell, let's listen to the one clearly true thing he says: if Gore will show the way by bashing Nader, "the press, which is bored with Gore vs. Bush but isn't expecting Gore vs. Nader, will take care of the rest."

In a culture like ours where people use words like "infotainment" seriously, it shouldn't surprise us to hear such a callous and grotesque view gleefully, openly stated. The corporate media -- you know, the rich guys who don't pay a single cent of rent for their abuse of our airwaves -- will, when pointed in the right direction by Gore, "take care of the rest," mainly, one supposes, by repeating and expanding Gore's inevitable distortion of Nader's views. Free press, indeed. Gore won't even have to pay the media, consent will have been manufactured. The media will gladly collaborate with Gore to put Nader, the Greens, and the majority of disaffected Americans back into our collective cage. The great beast will have been tamed, before it truly awakens, another crisis of democracy will have been averted by responsible men like Gore and Kaus.

In a healthy democratic society, Kaus would be laughed off the national stage; in this society, I welcome the gift of Mickey Kaus's arrogant scorn: it gives us the measure of the task we face, and for that, in a strange way, we must be grateful.