Published October 18, 2007 in the Philadelphia Daily News

ONE OF THE greatest political ironies of the last two years is that Al Gore, the "nerd" and "bore" of 2000, is now going from drip to hip.

With the worldwide reception of "An Inconvenient Truth," the man who was on the receiving end of one of the most unfair political raps in modern history is now regarded by many as one who can rap with the best of them - including those who decide who receives a Nobel Prize!

I didn't get it in 2000, the first time I heard Bush '43 debate Gore, or the second, or the third.

The Democratic candidate was clearly the winner, knowledgeably and thoughtfully addressing the intricacies of government and the vital choices our country was facing.

But this wasn't what you heard, even from the liberal press. Issues were largely ignored, and a personality contest was set up - who would you rather have a beer with, the charming, folksy Texan or the tightly wound Boy Scout who frequently stretched the truth?

Throughout the campaign, Gore's claims were taken out of context, presenting him as a preening narcissist. One of the nastiest lies was that Gore had said he invented the Internet.

What he did say: While in Congress, he sponsored bills that made the flourishing of "an information superhighway" possible. And Gore was criticized for not asking Bill Clinton to campaign for him. But why would he? The president had lied to him about the Lewinsky episode, Hillary was battling him for advisers to advance her political pursuits, and the Gores and Clintons had very different codes of life.

Now, once again, I'm glued to the debates, looking for the candidate who can lift us from the abyss of world condemnation, economic frailty and environmental hazard, and rescue us from campaigns based on fears of religious difference and sexual expression.

Hillary undoubtedly is brilliant and highly competent - she seems to be doing almost everything right. She is smiling more, and though her cackle has its critics, it beats a shrill voice and angry glare. While her husband is never in the audience with the other spouses during debates, he's been introducing her in campaign settings and looks at her adoringly as she speaks.

Still, despite the couple's abilities and seeming devotion to each other's goals, Bill's still a messy shoe waiting to drop. And Hillary's political enemies are carefully watching and waiting. With another Clinton nomination, they'll use whatever flaws they can find to distract from the effectiveness of another Clinton presidency, if it comes to that.

Meanwhile, Clinton's main rival, Barack Obama, has finally revealed his naivete and inexperience, and the hope for the future that many counted on from him has not developed. And though John Edwards has run a riveting campaign, in large measure due to the strength and devotion of his wife, his candidacy is lagging.

The Gores, on the other hand, have gone from the hell of a stolen election, condoned by the highest court of the land, to a happier place. The press is finally treating Al Gore with the respect his character and hard work have long deserved. And now there are public cries and private whispers that only he can lift us from our disillusionment and divisiveness.

Although Gore insists he won't run, the Nobel has increased the whispers to roars. And I, for one, am praying for a miracle.

For the good of this country, Al Gore must be drafted as the 2008 Democratic candidate. *

SaraKay Smullens (www.sarakaysmullens.com), a social worker and family therapist, writes on social and political issues.

Return to Articles Page