Mike Hansen Hansen is a political
science and history major. Sooner or later you will succumb to his
views. Send your objections to [email protected].
Oh where, oh where has my vice president gone? Oh where, oh
where can he be? With his days so empty and his belly so full, oh
where, oh where could he be? In the midst of my morning routine, as
I waited at Puzzles for my smoothie before class, a large man
wearing a dark suit, sunglasses and an earpiece walked in. He stood
stoically by the exit, apparently inspecting the joint for any
suspicious activity. I thought to myself, “Wow, this guy
looks like a Secret Service agent. I wonder why he’s here at
UCLA on a Thursday morning.” Of course, he was there to
protect our almost-president Al Gore from any menacing students
lurking in Puzzles who might be looking to harm our beloved
ex-veep. Now a visiting professor at UCLA, Gore was on campus May
10 to give a lecture on “community-building.” The
commotion he caused made me realize that, other than a couple
blurbs in the news about his post-election academic endeavors, I
have heard very little about the activities of Gore since the
Supreme Court gave him the highest boot in the land, denying him
the presidency in December. Is he still recuperating from his
colossal defeat? Is he hiding from the limelight because he has put
on more than a few pounds? Or has he finally given up on the
crusade against Bush’s compassionate conservatism? In any
case, Gore’s departure from the public eye is detrimental to
the Democratic Party, to his chances for election in 2004 and to
the UCLA community as well. Wipe away those crocodile tears, Al.
Without you at the helm, the Democratic Party lacks a unifying
leader. With the notable exception of Sen. Jim Jeffords’
defection from the Republican Party, the Democrats have been
floundering ever since Gore’s defeat. His disappearance from
the national spotlight leaves no strong voice from the left to
counter Bush’s conservatism.
Illustration by JARRETT QUON/Daily Bruin In their disarray, the
Democrats have consistently failed to present compelling
alternatives to Republican initiatives, allowing them to make
progress on tax cuts, education reform and missile defense. Even
without an elected position, Gore should mobilize the ranks and
travel the states in an attempt to get out the liberal message.
Perhaps with the Senate in democratic hands, things will change
and the Democrats will get their act together. But without Gore,
the party faces a challenge in the upcoming presidential election.
Maybe Gore’s disappearance was orchestrated by the vast
right-wing conspiracy in an attempt to eliminate the best
Democratic candidate for president in 2004. Or maybe the smoking
man in the X-files has kidnapped Gore and replaced him with a
duller and chubbier alien clone. Or … maybe not. If Gore insists
on remaining a political hermit, the Democrats will lose a proven
winner. Not only has Gore shown he can win the majority of the
popular vote, but he has also demonstrated the capability to beat
the man who he will challenge if he decides to run in 2004. In
addition, Gore is the only potential Democratic candidate who
invented the Internet. Sure, the campaign is a few years down the
road, and there is still plenty of time to declare candidacy, but
the more time Gore spends out of the public eye, the worse his
chances are for winning in 2004. If Gore stays out of the limelight
for too long, the American public will forget about him. His
absence also increases the legitimacy of Bush’s presidency,
because the man for whom half of America voted is now nowhere to be
seen. Gore risks being replaced by ambitious party upstarts if he
stays out of the realm of politics much longer. Already there is a
growing cadre of Democrats who may have presidential ambitions.
Gore’s own running mate, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, is already in
the process of forming an exploratory committee and Senate majority
leader Tom Daschle is increasingly assertive in his leadership role
within the Democratic Party. In my considerate effort to prevent
the reader from shuddering in fear, I will neglect to mention the
name that starts with “H” and ends with
“illary.” If the ex-veep is nowhere to be seen on the
national level, he can only scarcely be found at UCLA, where he
accepted a professorship in the School of Public Policy and Social
Research. Gore intends to develop a curriculum on community
building and hopes to bridge differences between all areas of
campus. During spring quarter, he was to have a teaching presence,
meeting regularly with students. To the disappointment of many
students, however, Gore only showed up once during spring quarter
on May 10. This is hardly a regular presence. Also, his first
session was inaccessible to many students, because you had to be
chosen by a member of the faculty from the School of Public Policy
and Social Research, Public Health, Medicine, Law, or the Anderson
School. If Mr. Touchy-feely is trying to bring people together who
are interested in the same issues and bridge the differences
between all areas of campus, why can’t any UCLA student sit
in on his lecture (not yet plural)? Is that community building Mr.
Gore? Although it is an honor for UCLA to have such a distinguished
and accomplished figure as a visiting professor, Gore has done
little to interact with students and teaching. I hope all you
Muldavin supporters launch a vigorous campaign to deny Gore his
professorship, since teaching is the most important component of
being a professor here at UCLA. My advice to you, ex-veep Gore, is
to stop crying, restrain from the Twinkie binges, begin actually
teaching students at UCLA, and come out from hiding to show that
you can in fact be the leader of the left-wing … if you indeed
have what it takes.