Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Gore Raises Age Issue -- to Defend Obama's Youth

June 17, 2008 9:18 AM

DETROIT -- The age issue was raised obliquely in Vice President Al Gore's endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, last night.

But it wasn't Gore overtly dissing McCain's age or raising the fact that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., would be the oldest person ever first elected president, which polls indicate some voters are concerned about (more so seniors!)

It was Gore defending Obama's youth (read: inexperience), which our new ABC News/Washington Post poll indicates many voters are concerned about.

In fact, after Gore mentioned "the Republican nominee," which was greeted by a chorus of boos in Joe Louis Arena in Detroit, Gore said, “in that case, I'm glad I brought it up because, as Senator Barack Obama has said, John McCain is deserving of that respect. He has demonstrated bravery in war and as a prisoner of war, and has served in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate for many years. Moreover, he has demonstrated a willingness to debate some critical issues, including the climate crisis that many Republicans have refused to discuss at all.”

“But, even as we acknowledge his long experience,” Gore said, “we must and we will make our case that America simply cannot afford to continue the policies of the last eight years for another four. And we all know that a long tenure in Washington D.C. is not the same as judgment, wisdom and vision.”

“Nevertheless,” the former Vice President continued, “the other party seems to think that age and experience are factors that will work in their favor during this campaign. But…our shared experience as a nation tells us otherwise. I remember when one prominent Republican wondered out loud whether the Democratic nominee, and I quote, ‘really is grown up enough to be president.’ Another used the phrase, quote, ‘naive and inexperienced.’ Yet another said, quote, ‘the United States cannot afford to risk the future of the free world with inexperience and immaturity in the White House,’ end quote.”

Asked Gore, “Who are they talking about? Every single one of those quotations came from the campaign of 1960, when the Republicans attacked John Fitzgerald Kennedy for allegedly lacking the age and experience necessary to be president. Richard Nixon's slogan in that campaign was ‘experience counts,’ to which John F. Kennedy responded, and I quote, ‘to exclude from positions of trust and command all those below the age of 44, would have kept Jefferson from writing the Declaration of Independence, Washington from commanding the Continental Army, Madison from fathering the Constitution, and Christopher Columbus from even discovering America.’”

Cute.

But it's probably worth pointing out that when Kennedy made those comments defending his age, he was defending himself not from Nixon or even the Republicans. He was answering a criticism leveled at him by former President Harry S Truman, a Democrat.

Truman had asked, "Senator, are you certain you are quite ready for the country, or that the country is ready for you in the role of President in January 1961? May I suggest you be patient?"

Truman said Kennedy should "put aside" his ambitions, that Democrats needed a nominee who was "someone with the greatest possible maturity and experience."

That's what JFK was responding to.

- jpt

June 17, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (90)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Age? You've got to be kidding. When does being older become a problem? However being in-experienced and young has always been an issue.

I agree with some of the post made. I am unemployed and trying to find a job has been a nightmare since I was laid off, 6 months ago. Not only has jobs been cut but when they re-hire they want bi-lingual. And they want to pay a lot less (50% or more). I don't have a problem with being paid less, it's better than nothing...but I was born here, and speak english. Now un-employed, english speaking only, with no insurance, can't afford gas, groceries......I'm one of many. I want the jobs brought back, and I don't want to be refused an interview because I don't speak spanish.
I am doing everything I can to NOT purchase items made outside of the US. Yes there are some things I have had to do without, but if everyone tried harder it might make a difference. Think about it...the company I worked for moved their plant to Mexico. Most of the products we purchase are from China, Japan, Thialand...almost all our call centers have moved to foriegn countries. It's depressing.

Posted by: M | Jun 18, 2008 1:00:26 PM

WHO HAS THE RIGHT VISION FOR AMERICA? THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE RIGHT AGE OF A CANDIDATE, BUT THE RIGHT TIME TO LEAD THE NATION FORWARD VERSUS BACKWARDS. IF YOUTHFUL ENERGY AND NEW FOUND EXPERIENCE WILL DO THE JOB, SO BE IT; IF ELDERLY CUNNING AND OLD TIME FEAR-MONGERING IS WHAT THE NATION NEEDS NOW, THEN SO BE IT. WE'LL SURVIVE EITHER---WE'VE SURVIVED GEORGE!---FIND WHAT YOU WANT IN A CANDIDATE, AND GO OUT AND SUPPORT IT---AGAIN, AGE OR YOUTH ISN'T THE END ALL TO THIS RACE---INSTEAD, FIND THE VISION FOR A BETTER AMERICA AND MAKE IT HAPPEN. FOR ME, IT'S TIME FOR A DEMOCRAT TO STAND UP AND DO THE JOB FOR ALL THE RIGHT REASONS.

Posted by: benighse | Jun 18, 2008 12:21:33 PM

Gimmeabreak, you wrote: "Barack will do what is RIGHT on all the issues, not just one or two, and that is what we as a society is not used to so we don't know how to deal with him." Contrary to popular belief, Sen. Obama is NOT infallible. He is NOT the Messiah. To the contrary, in several of the debates he acknowledged that he has made mistakes.

Posted by: James Danley | Jun 17, 2008 10:34:04 PM

Chris and Michael M. are more on point than anyone on this page I've seen. You guys are all kidding yourselves with your analysis. Most of you sound like political analysts, but you fail to see that Barack is not your typical politician, so none of this stuff applies to him. He has transcended everything people put in front of him and said he would not/could not do, including tipping over the "inevitable" Clinton machinery. He is mesmerizing, and some people just don't like it. Save the political rhetoric for the McCain campaign, this country needs a man who is talking common sense. It is stupid to judge any candidate on what he will or will not do, what he believes or does not believe because no one can please EVERYONE on EVERY issue. Barack will do what is RIGHT on all the issues, not just one or two, and that is what we as a society is not used to so we don't know how to deal with him. Well, we need to learn because he not only won the nomination here, the WORLD has endorsed him!!

Posted by: gimmeabreak | Jun 17, 2008 9:42:06 PM

Al Gore wants to take a revenge of his lost.

Posted by: catleya | Jun 17, 2008 5:59:02 PM

Michael M., you wrote: "...all the oil that those oil companies got came from American soil." If that were true then we would be 100% independent of foreign oil, and we wouldn't be in this squeeze in which that we find ourselves. Oil company profits amount to just 8 cents per gallon of gasoline; and the individual outlets make about 1-4 cents per gallon of gasoline. The only reason they report profits into the tens of billions each quarter is due to the huge volume sold.

It's not that we have products that other countries don't have, it's the products that we do have are BETTER quality. But due to the high costs of doing business, which is ultimately passed onto the consumer, the prices for our products are higher. So even Americans purchase the cheaper priced & less quality products. That is the nature of the free market and capitalism.

The United States has 300 million people. How long do you think we would be in business if we cut off all trade with the other 6.5 billion people in the world?

Posted by: James Danley | Jun 17, 2008 3:22:03 PM

Boy James the American media has pulled one over on you. Bush wants to build ports in Mexico to receive Chinese goods, add then truck them into the U.S. using Mexican drivers which will under cut our drivers. All those union jobs at U.S. ports will be gone. Replaced by people from another country. America will be reduced to stacking Chinese products in some warehouse. Hows that for a trade deal. The Bush way of dealing with the economy is to build more jails. We are the biggest jailer in the world because people cant afford to make an honest living.

Posted by: Michael M | Jun 17, 2008 3:20:10 PM

James you are driving me up a wall. We don't have any products to sent to other countries. Whats left food, name a few. Name some things that we have that other countries dont. Military equiptment is not going to keep this country going. Bush has been selling that technology to. He covers it up with, the Chinese have been hacking in to our computers. You cant lower taxes enough in this country to compete with slave labor. These trade deals are set up to lock us out. This country will never recover. I was not born yesterday.

Posted by: Michael M | Jun 17, 2008 2:53:56 PM

OH, and James, the oil industry cant move overseas because they have been thrown out of most oil producing countries. Do you think Putin is stupid. Just remember, all the oil that those oil companies got came from American soil. That oil belongs to the people of this country, at least they can pay taxes to keep America going. Bush lets them get away with murder. They have squandered Americas wealth.

Posted by: Michael M | Jun 17, 2008 2:39:57 PM

Michael M, free trade opens up our markets to international customers. It is NOT free trade that is sending our jobs overseas, it is the lack of government regulation, lack of government interference and low corporate taxes that make other countries more appealing.

Posted by: James Danley | Jun 17, 2008 2:33:51 PM

"Why is it that I feel uneasy about Obama? ... I hope there is unity when the convention comes ... "

Maybe you feel uneasy because he's a corporate "post-parisan" construct who talks out both sides of his mouth on every subject, and has been caught in so many downright lies it's becoming an embarrassment?

In addition to hijacking the DNC to Chicago, there are rumors -- but no official announcements so far, that I know of -- the Obamans are trying to CANCEL the Denver convention, and delegate VOTING, in favor of a coronation-like event (a mass rally, natch) in Chicago.

(Does anyone know MORE about this?)

Posted by: Mama Knows Better | Jun 17, 2008 2:29:59 PM

James, you are out of your mind. How in the world do you figure we get more jobs over here by U.S. companies moving overseas. Don't you know that whole citics have been wiped out from jobs leaving. What planet are you on. The electronics industry is gone, textile industry is gone, auto industry is gone, the drug industry is gone, do you want me to keep going. Now we have to pay millions of our tax dollars to keep an eye on the Chinese because they want to give us poison drugs. The FDA used to take care of monitoring drugs in this country with very little monry. What in gods name are you talking about.

Posted by: Michael M | Jun 17, 2008 2:21:56 PM

Why is it that I feel uneasy about Obama? I want to vote for him because I want a democrat in the WH come January, 2009, but I don't feel excited or hopeful. There are a lot of signs of uneasiness among the electorate. He should be more ahead in the polls than he is. This reminds me of Kerry/Bush election. I had an uneasy feeling about Kerry also. I hope there is unity when the convention comes. I also hope he will run on a platform. I have yet to know what that is. Change is nice, but it's not a platform. His VP pick better be a good one or it may be a disaster come November.

Posted by: Lois, California | Jun 17, 2008 2:20:31 PM

Mims nj, government "intervention" or more precisely, "interference," hurts profit margins. California's high corporate tax has driven corporations out of the state and into Nevada (which is a very business friendly state) for well over a decade. (NOTE: The fact that Nevada does not have a state income tax is a benefit to the employees.) But the loss of the revenue has been devastating to the California economy.

Posted by: James Danley | Jun 17, 2008 2:16:37 PM

Wasn't Gore part of that horrible Clinton administration you Obama supporters keep telling us about.

Posted by: tww | Jun 17, 2008 2:15:02 PM

"That was one passionate speech. If only we had seen more of that in 2000 we may have been spared the disasters of the last 8 years."

Yeah, mass rallies are long on "passion" -- it's probably all the pheromones in the air -- short on substance.

As for Gore -- who said he wasn't going to endorse anybody -- if Gore hadn't wussed out in 2000, there wouldn't have BEEN a second Bush regime.

Posted by: Mama Knows Better | Jun 17, 2008 2:12:15 PM

Michael M., more trade means more markets for American goods. THAT means more jobs here at home. Businesses go overseas to avoid the higher cost of doing business -- which also includes taxes. Just imagine what it would be like if the oil companies left the United States in retaliation for the windfall profit taxes!

Posted by: James Danley | Jun 17, 2008 2:07:52 PM

Half the democrats don't want Obama.

Posted by: tia | Jun 17, 2008 2:05:29 PM

One thing watching Gore's endorsement that occured to me, is who did Gore get stuck with the stiff as a board label. That was one passionate speech. If only we had seen more of that in 2000 we may have been spared the disasters of the last 8 years.

Posted by: markymark | Jun 17, 2008 1:40:00 PM

Michigan democrats didn't have there votes stolen, well unless you consider the fact that it was a flawed election from the start. To be fair, IMO the DNC messed up by taking all the delegates away from both Florida and Michigan, when the half penalty was fairest, but Obama suffered as much as Hillary from the bungled Michigan Primary. At least Hillary's voters got to vote for there candidate.

Posted by: markymark | Jun 17, 2008 1:38:08 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS