It all depends on whose ox is being gored

Gore still is Gore, and some of his speech was disingenuous to say the least. Still, he is but a politician, and that is who they are and what they do. Hypocrisy, prevarications, deceptions and outright lies are their meat and drink on both sides of the aisle. I have no more respect for a DeLay than I do for a Gore...and no less for a Gore than I have for a DeLay. However, I try to always give credit where credit is due, and Gore hit the nail on the head with a few things in his speech.
He talked about the national media obsession with some things. He used the example of the OJ trial. Seriously, how many people had a stake in the outcome? The Goldmans had a circle of acqaintances that it is doubtful exceeded a few hundred...O.J. a slightly larger circle of at least passing acquaintances, but still...very limited in the number of people personally affected by the murder and civil trials. Yet ratings skyrocketed as people tuned in to see what happened. Books are still being sold based on the media frenzy that surrounded it.
Yet it was a passing fancy. Just as Katrina is turning out to be. Just as the last great disaster. Quick, what was the name of the Hurricane that nailed Florida most recently, when did it happen, and when is the last time you thought about it?
He also hits home with a point on why the founding of this nation was so successful and so innovative. It was not based on birth, economic status, privilege, etc. No, this nation was about equal opportunity for all, for the ability to combine education, hard work, and good fortune to improve the lot in life. That is not to say people who were not smart or hard-working would succeed...simply that they had the opportunity to succeed.
But perhaps his best point has to do with the "Marketplace of Ideas". It is interesting to compare the interplay of ideas between the citizens at the time of the Revolution, a decade or two both before and after, and now.
At that time there was an intelligent discourse between widely disparate opinions. The Federalist Papers stood opposed to The Anti-Federalist Papers and yet the authors could meet in friendship. Their views were diametrically opposed yet they were able to speak civilly.
Andrew Jackson was directly responsible for the immoral and deadly Trail of Tears and yet was friendly with John Ross. Robert E. Lee was a brilliant general who caused thousands of deaths through his successful prosecution of military campaigns that had no business succeeding, yet he and Grant were able to communicate amicably at Appottomax Courthouse.
Dialogues and discourses are more than just words. Look today at what passes for discourse; vitriol, spite and hatred. people bombing places they believe are houses of murder. Insults. Accusations of treachery and treason.
As per normal in a Gore effort, there is far less I agree with than I disagree with, but on these things, he got it right. The U.S. needs to step back and look at itself. Do we really want to teach the kids that name-calling and threats are the way to deal with conflict? Because whether we mean to or not, that is the lesson being learned.
I am reminded of the shirt I saw one time that showed a Mother walking hand in hand with her child. In one hand was the hand of the child, in the other a lit cigarette. Under the picture it said, "Will she smoke?"
The inference is the mother would TELL the child not to smoke, but the example set was the lesson the kid would actually learn.
Nobody MEANS to teach kids to hate and hurt. Then again, Aesop said it best; actions speak louder than words.
So if you disagree with someone else on some matter, whether it is welfare benefits, abortion, homosexuality, origin of life, the war in Iraq, how Kaatrina should be handled, or whether Tuba practice is acceptable after 10, figure out a way to handle it where you can still be friends in the morning.