American Politics Journal -- GOP Hits the Panic Button



Home • Latest • Archive • Search

Twist the Debate
Have you seen the most hypocritical TV spot of the election season?

by Dr. Ivo Planarian
as told to Ferguson Foont

Monday, April 3, 2000 (AmpolNS) -- I was watching CNN Saturday afternoon and, interrupting my laughter at Evans and Novak's questioning of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, perhaps the weakest individual ever to hold a leadership role in Congress, there came a commercial break.

Normally I don't attend too much to ads, preferring to use the few moments to read or get myself a snack from the kitchen.

But this ad caught my attention immediately.

It was on a set that was designed very accurately to resemble that of the set of the game show Jeopardy before Sony gussied it all up, but the game was called Hypocrisy.

Hmmm...interesting.

The first contestant, a fairly attractive woman, selected a question from the category, "Political Hypocrisy" for $200. The answer was, "He says he supports campaign finance reform... But held an illegal fundraiser at a Buddhist temple." She gave the question, "Who is Al Gore?" The more Art-Fleminglike than Alex- Trebekian announcer said
"Correct."

She then selected "Political Hypocrisy" for $400. The answer was, "He promised never to cut Medicare... But he cast the deciding vote to cut Medicare by $55 billion." The gentleman in the middle, a 60-year old gray-haired heavyset sort of man, rang in and, with an exasperated wave of his hand that implied that this was too obvious for a $400 question, responded, "Who is Al Gore?"

DING! Correct!

He then selected "Political Hypocrisy" for $600. The answer was, "He crusades against tobacco... But grew it and sold it from his very own farm." The third contestant, another middle-aged man but this one maybe in his mid-50s with dark hair, responded (you guessed it!) "Who is Al Gore?"

The announcer then said, "Mr. Gore has a lot to explain. That's Hypocrisy. Bye bye!"

The ad is then tagged, without further explanation, "Paid for by Shape the Debate."

"Shape the Debate." Hmmm... never heard of 'em, but they're already buying national advertising with a highly negative, anti-Al Gore tone on national media, CNN in this case.

I decided to poke around a bit.

First I looked for www.shapethedebate.org.

No luck.

Then I tried www.shapethedebate.com.

Bingo.

On their top-level web page they state their mission. In their own words, they describe themselves as

a nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to shape the debate on American's future. 'Shape the Debate' will use provocative television ads to promote a generally conservative and free enterprise point of view.

Well, the ad was provocative, at least for me. I was fortunate that the Sony on which I was watching at the time had a sturdy picture tube or the book I threw at it might have caused some real damage.

But reread this ad: it seemed to me to promote campaign finance reform, stricter regulation of the tobacco industry, and increasing Medicare spending.

In my view it was chiding Al Gore for purported failures in these areas of public administration.

But it puzzled me to read in the "Mission" of Shape the Debate that they wished to "promote a generally conservative and free enterprise" agenda, as these particular positions are seldom associated with American political conservatism.

Things got stranger still when I looked down the left-hand column of their web page. Many web designers are doing this now -- setting up a column on the left for navigation or general information, and it bugs the hell out of me. It makes it a real hassle to cut-and-paste text from the web page into a word processor or e-mail client. But I digress.

In their left column they explain the following points regarding contributions to their non-profit (but .com) organization:

Contributions:
1. Can be given in unlimited amounts,
2. Can be from any source,
3. Are not political contributions and are not a matter of public record,
4. Not tax deductible.

And they complain about Al Gore's four-year-old speaking engagement in a Buddhist temple?

But here is one of the most interesting passages from their mission statement, one I found most peculiar in light of the content of the only advertising product of their labors I have yet perused:

As a nonprofit corporation, we will strictly refrain from supporting or opposing any candidate for president, or any other state or federal office.

Not TOO terribly strictly, I see.

A little farther down on their Mission page they claim that

Legally speaking, "Shape the Debate" will be engaged in "issue advocacy," as described by law and federal court rulings.

I am left to ponder what exactly is the "issue" they have chosen to advocate in the subject advertisement.

Who are these people calling themselves, "Shape the Debate," and accepting political (despite their denials) contributions in unlimited amounts from any source without any reporting requirements whatsoever?

They seem to be three Californians associated with Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian: George Gorton, Vigo Nielson and F. Lawrence "Larry" Scott. I know nothing else about these people.

The only one whose name is familiar to me is "Vigo," and I believe he was the chief villain in the movie "Ghostbusters 2."

Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian were early supporters of George W. Bush. If this is not coordinated by the Bush campaign I will eat this computer monitor.

If the Democrats chose to behave so disingenuously, well, needless to say the Republicans would scream bloody murder. But we could run an ad featuring good old Joe Isuzu interviewing citizens of Houston on George W. Bush's effectiveness as an environmentalist:

"Hiiii. I'm Joe Isuzu, here in Houston talking to the citizens about how Governor Bush has cleaned up the air, as he has so often claimed. You sir, tell me, is the air cleaner today than it was six years ago?"
(The citizen takes a deep breath and goes into a coughing, retching fit)
"Yeah, Joe, [kaff kaff] it smells as sweet as daisies in [retch] springtime!"
"And there you have it, folks. George W. Bush is a real environmentalist. Remember, you heard it from Joe Isuzu."

You get the general idea. And just think what we could do on the subject of drug policy! It boggles the mind.

But in any event such ads as I have mentioned actually involve real political issues and might therefore be considered "issue oriented." I am unclear how the Jeopardy ad run by Shape the Debate could be so defined.

It is not time for Democrats to sit on their hands and "take the high road."

Not this year.

If we do, we will be Dukakised just as sure as a flatworm reproduces by parthenogenic budding whether he's "gettin' any" or not.