I haven't read enough of Dowd to satisfy myself that she's a liberal. But what I've seen recently indicates she is. Maybe one of y'all can help out here.

Anyway, she's fun to read.

December 6, 2000

Sisyphus at Starbucks

By MAUREEN DOWD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON — I was driving up Wisconsin Avenue Saturday afternoon, feeling sorry for myself.

I decided to do what all yuppies do when they wallow in meaningless bouts of self-pity during the holidays: drown my sorrows in an overpriced gingerbread latte at Starbucks.

Suddenly a dark green Secret Service Suburban with a flashing light cut in front of me. Was Madeleine Albright out Christmas shopping? Was Hillary townhousehunting? Was Alan Greenspan bar-hopping?

Nah.

It was just Al Gore. Our secluded yet ubiquitous vice president.

He was walking up the block with Tipper and his daughter Kristin, their breath clouding the air. Nobody was honking or stopping to get out and cheer him on. Everybody was pretty much ignoring the trio, except the people paid to watch them — the Secret Service vans and police cars dotting the street all the way up to Mr. Gore's old high school, St. Alban's, and Starbucks, where, it turned out, they were also headed.

Seeing Al trudging up the hill in the cold, just 537 votes short of his prize, Sisyphus pushing his burden to Starbucks, instantly put my petty problems in perspective.

I mean, the man has gone from being Powerful Second-in-Command of Prosperous, Happy Country to Obsessive Loon Whose Monomaniacal Quest Has Led Him to the Edge of Madness.

You see the vice president now and you think of Gabriel García Márquez's "The General in His Labyrinth," a fictionalized account of the last days of Simon Bolívar. After being rejected by his people for overreaching in an annoying way, Bolívar goes on a boat voyage and becomes ever more isolated and confused about what actually happened and what might have been.

Or you think of Melville's delirious whale hunter: "all that most maddens and torments . . . all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain."

It's sad to picture Al Gore, his brain all caked, locked up in his spooky vice-presidential mansion frantically crunching the numbers and e-mailing on his Blackberry and laptops and speed-dialing Tallahassee. He had been egged on in his "nuclear button" legal strategy by Joe "We did so win Florida — my bubeleh went there and worked the condos!" Lieberman, but now even Lieberman the Loyal seems to be edging away.

I fear that Tipper and Karenna may be humoring Al, busily planning their inaugural parade, with recyclable floats, chad confetti, Poet Laureate Jesse Jackson and Grand Marshal Tommy Lee Jones.

Enough.

Al, babe, snap out of it.

We know you won. W. hasn't given it much thought. Jeb and Katherine know better than anyone that you won. Even Trent Lott, sashaying around W.'s ranch in that unforgettable plumed cowboy chapeau and jeans ensemble, knows you won.

But you lost. If voter intent could be tabulated, you would have won. But it can't be. Your crusade is working, but only perversely.

Yes, you won the popular vote by 300,000, three times the margin of J.F.K. over Nixon. Yes, you've persuaded us that more voters turned out for you in Florida than for W. Yes, you and your 8,000 lawyers have made the case that, if it hadn't been for rundown Votomatic machines and butterfly ballots and Republican rule-bending and minorities turned away from the polls and Jewish Democrats mistakenly voting for Pat Buchanan, you easily would have won Florida and the White House.

(Of course, you also would have won it all if you had spent a few more Saturdays campaigning in your home state of Tennessee or swallowed your pride and sent Bill Clinton to woo Arkansans.)

But you are not going to make that move down the West Wing hall.

Your stars, yourself and your Brutus (Ralph Nader) have conspired to deny you the presidency. And even if, by a miracle, the Florida Supreme Court lets you recount, the Florida Legislature is going to stop you. And if Jeb doesn't, Tom DeLay will.

Why aren't people who think you deserve it more outraged to see you denied it?

Because the more you insist you're a winner who somehow found a million different weird ways not to win, the more you seem like a loser.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), December 06, 2000

Answers

In the last couple of weeks Gore has blown any chance he had of winning in '04.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Good point Dr Pibb. Can Hillary make it in four years? I still argue for Evan Bayh. He may not be far enough Left for some of the folks but he is a winner.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), December 06, 2000.

I think he has a good chance Lars. Bush is definately not right enough (for the right-wing), but the right enthusiastically supported him anyways.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Dr. Pibb-

The right supported Bush because he was not Clinton. They were so blinded by their hatred of Clinton that they backed a man who's pretty much as centrist as Bill. It will be interesting to see whether or not they eat their own when he fails to be as knee jerk conservative as they had hoped.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

Wow! I thought I was in love with hyperbole!

We did so win Florida — my bubeleh went there and worked the condos!"

That line had me in stitches!

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), December 06, 2000.

Tarzan - you seem to be quite liberal. So then, how all-of-a-sudden have you becomae an expert on what the right is thinking?

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Dr. Pibb-

You seem to suffer from a certain "tunnel vision". One does not have to be part of a group to be informed about that group.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

Tarzan, while it is true that "One does not have to be part of a group to be informed about that group", that relies on concrete,solid and objective data. Not subjective data like what someone is thinking while they are in the polling booth. I still don't understand what makes you think that you know why they voted for Bush.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

The same thing that makes you think Gore has blown his chances in '04.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

Tarzan, I'm basing my belief that Gore does not stand any chance of winning in '04 (provided that he does not become president in January) by the polls showing his support dwindling to a low percentage.

This is different than saying that the right supported Bush because of thier hatred for Clinton, unless you can show me polling that said the reason these people enthusiastically supported Bush was because of their hatred for Clinton.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Tarzan, I'm basing my belief that Gore does not stand any chance of winning in '04 (provided that he does not become president in January) by the polls showing his support dwindling to a low percentage.

And you're extrapolating this information to project his chances across the entire country four years from now.

This is different than saying that the right supported Bush because of thier hatred for Clinton, unless you can show me polling that said the reason these people enthusiastically supported Bush was because of their hatred for Clinton.

I'm basing my opinion on the polls that show intense disapproval of Clinton among members of the far right and upon postings and articles in right-leaning magazines calling for a vote against Gore rather than a vote for Bush. Then, like you, I'm extrapolating this against the entire country.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

While there were some articles arguing this point (vote against Gore rather than for Bush), I think they were in the far minority. The polls taken before the election showed that Bush supporters were much more enthusiastic to vote for Bush than Gore supporters were to vote for Gore.

On the other hand the majority of aritcles written right before the election urging people to vote for Gore were written from the perspective that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. This indicates that people from the center to the left were not energized to vote for Gore, but rather vote against Bush.

I understand your reasoning, but I think ascribing Bush's popularity only to hatred for Clinton is strecthing things quite a bit.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Tarzan, let me clarify the problem I have with your original statement: The right supported Bush because he was not Clinton. They were so blinded by their hatred of Clinton that they backed a man who's pretty much as centrist as Bill. It will be interesting to see whether or not they eat their own when he fails to be as knee jerk conservative as they had hoped.

You insinuate that the only reason they voted for Bush was because they hated Clinton, not because they liked Bush. I think you are partially wrong on this. True many of them hate Clinton (just as the left hates Regean, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.), but from the articles I've read by the right many of them enthusiastically support Bush.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

While there were some articles arguing this point (vote against Gore rather than for Bush), I think they were in the far minority.

They weren't. You just weren't looking in the right places. *tweak*

The polls taken before the election showed that Bush supporters were much more enthusiastic to vote for Bush than Gore supporters were to vote for Gore.

What polls? Which ones?

On the other hand the majority of aritcles written right before the election urging people to vote for Gore were written from the perspective that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. This indicates that people from the center to the left were not energized to vote for Gore, but rather vote against Bush.

I won't disagree with you on this point. They looked remarkably like the articles written in 1995, with the names changed from Bush and Perot.

I understand your reasoning, but I think ascribing Bush's popularity only to hatred for Clinton is strecthing things quite a bit.

Actually, that's not what I was trying to do. You yourself said that Bush is more of a centrist. I think that if a more conservative candidates had come along during the primaries, we'd be having a very different conversation now. The fact remains that there is a small and vocal minority on the right who are convinced Clinton is the anti- Christ and were energized to vote for Bush rather than the more conservative third-party candidates.

You insinuate that the only reason they voted for Bush was because they hated Clinton, not because they liked Bush.

I insinuated nothing. You read additional meaning into my post.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

I have misunderstood you intent. I can speak for myself though. I voted for Bush because I liked Bush, not because I dislike Clinton or Gore. (I do like Clinton to an extent, I do not like Gore).

If I disliked Bush, I would have gladly and enthusiastically voted for a third party candidate (which I did in '96 and will do again in the future). In fact, I had started out early in the election season planning on voting for a third party candidate, but the more I watched Bush, the more I liked him. I do not believe I am alone in this.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Dr. Pibb-

I voted for a third party candidate, too, because I didn't like the emphasis on religion from either set of major party candidates.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), December 06, 2000.

Rich, I also guffawed at that line and I've been away from NYC for so long that I'm not sure what it means---I'm guessing "grandmother".

BTW, anyone. Are there two Gore daughters, Karenna and Kristin, or are they two different names for the same attractive young woman?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), December 06, 2000.

Lars, there are three Gore daughters and they are all very attractive. IMHO Kristin is by far the best looking.

Bush's twin daughters are also very pretty.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), December 06, 2000.

Bubeleh is a term of endearment. I believe bubeh is grandmother.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), December 06, 2000.