Al Gore's Last Chance; Jason Binn, NYC's Crassest New Resident
It must be true: Despite his father's wishes, Al Gore simply wasn't cut out to be a politician. He did, for the family's sake, a bodacious (air-kiss, Karenna!) job faking it, but getting elected to the House and U.S. Senate from Tennessee, given that he was blessed with a fail-safe pedigree, probably wasn't the bright young man's most difficult challenge. That came?after an embarrassing run at the presidency in 1988?in '98 after Bill Clinton fessed up to his romps with Monica. Gore can moan from now till eternity about the pair of deuces his boss dealt him, but when Clinton admitted perjury to the nation, the Vice President was handed the top job, as if it were a martini on a silver tray toted by a butler at a Hollywood fundraiser.
But Gore wasn't drinking. He turned down the opportunity to resign his post and become the titular head of the Democratic Party, the cleanest politician?chastened by the financial swindles of the '96 reelection campaign?in the United States. Mister Integrity, Brother Integrity, Sister Integrity, Señor Integrity: in every region of the country, he woulda been da man! Adding to the Democrats' hear-no-evil base of blacks, trial lawyers, union members, gays, showbiz nitwits and billionaires who've long ago provided for their heirs, Gore would've won over the swing voters and goo-goos who were disgusted by Clinton's serial lying in the White House.
It's likely George W. Bush, the GOP's best hope for 2000, would've studied the odds and taken an El Paso, deferring a run until 2004 or 2008. Some Republican retread would've been nominated?Lamar Alexander, Elizabeth Dole, Strom Thurmond?and trounced.
Gore not only played it safe, but vouched for Clinton the day he was impeached. Then he conducted a disorganized populist campaign, bombed in the debates and was defeated, even though the country was at peace and citizens didn't yet know that the economic boom was over.
After the Clintons' shameless departure from the White House, and the ensuing furor over the ex-president's pardons, not to mention Terry McAuliffe's hijacking of the Democratic National Committee chair, what does Gore do? He goes underground. Then, at his first major media appearance after Bush's inauguration, a lecture at Columbia University's Journalism School, Gore, with the associate dean's approval, silenced the attendees, insisting that his words of wisdom were off the record and closed to the working press. At a journalism school!
Nat Hentoff wrote an insightful piece for the Village Voice last week (Feb. 21) excoriating both Columbia and Gore for this egregious hypocrisy. He said: "Dick Wald [a professor there whom Hentoff admires] thinks the Gore story will blow over in a month or so. I doubt it. It will be remembered that this famed journalism school did not have the integrity?or the respect for its students?to tell Gore that if he insisted on gagging the students, he should go lecture somewhere else. Why didn't any of the professors, themselves journalists, publicly object to the gag rule?"
Here's my take: Journalism schools are staffed mainly by hacks who have either retired from the news business or are too lazy to actually work for a living. I can't understand why any young person interested in the profession would flush some $20,000 down the toilet for a meaningless degree, taking classes instead of gaining actual experience by writing every day, whether for a chain daily, a weekly newspaper or a mom 'n' pop publication in, say, Macon, GA.
It's true that papers like The New York Times and Washington Post unofficially require some stamp of elitist approval?whether it's a sheepskin from an Ivy League college or journalism school, or a family connection?but most of the best journalists in the country start from scratch. Which means covering mindless zoning meetings or high school basketball games, working rewrite desk assignments, making trips to the morgue or eating hotdogs with candidates for town supervisor. Another route is working at a paper like the Phoenix New Times, New York Press or San Diego Reader and taking advantage of the column inches offered for exhaustive investigative or personal journalism?and who cares what the wages are. If a kid is truly consumed by journalism, he won't worry about how little he earns, if it means an opportunity to develop a craft, a unique style of writing. Professors at journalism schools can't teach that; they're running one of the most blatant educational con jobs in the United States.
And you can blame that on the success of Woodward and Bernstein (who began his career as a lowly scrub) in the early 1970s, with their dogged pursuit of Richard Nixon and his coterie of coconspirators. Suddenly, the dynamics of journalism changed, and not for the better. Newsrooms began to resemble the antiseptic offices of accountants; reporters became more sanctimonious in their quest for The Truth (as well as Pulitzers and famous actors to portray them onscreen); and every major newspaper dispatched squads of writers to concoct some mind-numbing series of articles on issues of supposed national significance.
Fast-forward to 2001 and you have an industry that's largely intertwined (at least in Washington, New York and Los Angeles) with the government, where reporters and their natural antagonists?elected officials and the shills who carry briefcases and write their speeches?socialize after hours and yuk it up before and after cable talk shows. It's a miserable and deplorable evolution for a once-honorable, if not glitzy, calling, and journalism schools are part of the problem. A legend like H.L. Mencken, who lacked the funds or aristocratic bloodline to worm his way onto a daily, most likely would be shown the door at places like The Washington Post, Newsweek, Time, or, God help us, The New York Times. He might not have made the cut at The Baltimore Sun! And that's one reason why the media in the United States is so bloodless and homogenized.
Craig Wolff, a professor at Columbia, wrote an op-ed for the Daily News on Feb. 23, castigating the media for its lack of interest in the former veep's second appearance at his school. He lectured all of the reporters who, not surprisingly, wanted to attend Gore's first major public outing after his hibernation. Wolff: "News stories and editorials chastised the school. Many of you, in your heat, misquoted, caricatured and otherwise sound-bited (or should I say sound-nibbled). My name?not really a toughie?was misspelled."
(Welcome to modern journalism, Craig. My name, Smith, a layup, has been misspelled as well in daily papers. Not to make excuses for lazy reporters, but Wolff has many variations: Wolf, Woolf, Wolfe, etc.)
Later in the article, the professor rides high on the Columbia Lion, coming up with this preposterous notion: "It was legitimate to question the school's policies regarding such a high-profile professor [Gore]. But what about this idea: A professor has the right to consider a classroom as a doctor and patient would an examination room. When I close that door, it's me and the students. It's private, exclusive. That's our pact."
As my mother used to say, Give me strength!
Back to the pouting Mr. Gore. One has to assume that he's spoiling for a rematch with President Bush in 2004. After all, as every liberal pundit points out almost daily, he did win the popular vote in November and ought to be not only the leading contender for the Democratic nomination, but also the party's leader for the next four years. Instead, he meekly let Clinton assume that role, muttering about bimbos, fundraising scandals and the long list of the 42nd president's ethical failings to those friends who care to share a Miller Lite with him in private conversations at his Northern Virginia home.
Instead, since none of the other aspirants for the nod?Biden, Edwards, Kerry, Wellstone, Lieberman and probably 14 more?has the balls to definitively denounce Clinton for his shoddy, and possibly illegal, last-minute deals in the White House, why doesn't Gore grab the opportunity for himself? He's not in office now, and it's not as if he'd lose any credibility with his colleagues or the public: as it is, he's seen as a pathetic loser. The base of the Democratic Party?charlatans and cretins like Kweisi Mfume and Maxine Waters?has nowhere else to go in the next election.
If Gore let the media know he'd be giving a speech about the current state of American politics?translation, Clinton's devastating damage to the Democratic Party?he'd be given a war hero's welcome and would dominate the news cycle for the next week. It'd be a snap. After a few jokes and jabs at Bush's tax cut proposal, he'd launch into a vigorous critique of Clinton's behavior. Gore is always self-righteous, but in this case he has the evidence on his side: any amount of finger-pointing would be excused, especially since he's been treated so shabbily by the daytime King of Harlem.
I'd advise that he ditch Bob Shrum as the speechwriter and find a young firebrand who's up to the job.
It might read something like this: "Although I worked side by side with President Clinton on many important achievements for the American people, and was, to a point, proud to serve as his vice president, it's time that he left the political arena. The Democratic Party?in fact, the entire country?has been diminished by his conduct since November's election and I want to disassociate myself from his self-aggrandizing mea culpas, pardons-for-sale all-nighters in the Oval Office and grubby disregard for the public trust. Tipper and I are broken-hearted by the?and I don't use this word lightly?shenanigans of Jack Quinn, Roger Clinton, Hugh Rodham, Hillary Clinton, Beth Dozoretz, Bruce Lindsey, Eric Holder, Denise Rich (who apparently was a more frequent visitor to the White House than I was!) and [clears his throat] Terry McAuliffe.
"As you all know, I have the most profound respect for President Carter, not only for his commitment to human rights while in office but also for his selfless work on behalf of the poor in the years since he left Washington. Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter are true national treasures. And I agree with President Carter's remarks of Feb. 20, when he said, undoubtedly with a heavy heart: 'A number of [the pardons] were quite questionable, including about 40 not recommended by the Justice Department. I don't think there is any doubt that some of the factors in his pardon [of Marc Rich] were attributable to his large gifts. In my opinion, that was disgraceful.'
"And while President Carter's chief-of-staff, my friend Hamilton Jordan, was quite harsh in a Wall Street Journal article, especially when he compared Mr. and Mrs. Clinton to 'grifters,' I can't argue with his conclusion. Let me second Hamilton's opinion. He wrote: 'It is incredible that the ethical atmosphere of the Clinton White House had sunk to a level whereby the constitutional power of a president to issue a pardon was discussed among Mr. Clinton and his White House staff as just one more perk of office.'
"I don't often agree with the political views of my journalistic colleagues at the National Review, but I do believe that Florence King was most profound in quoting Thomas De Quincey, who wrote: 'If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination.'
"I won't take much more of your valuable time, but let me close in repeating that I am my own man. I don't agree with the bulk of President Bush's agenda, and will fight tooth and nail against his give-to-the-rich proposals, but I respect his presidency and believe he's correct when he says that it's time to move on. To my fellow Democrats, let me say that our party is in peril; all the hard work that we've embarked on on behalf of all Americans is currently clouded by President Clinton's unethical actions and refusal to leave the national stage. I plan to devote the next two years, every day and every night, to returning control of Congress to our party.
"I know my comments today are unprecedented and perhaps the equivalent of political suicide. But I refuse to stand by while the important issues of the day are obscured by events in the past two months. If I'm relegated to the dustbin of history, so be it. I ask my fellow patriots in the Democratic Party to join me in a new beginning, a declaration to put the past behind us, the petty squabbles and unseemly high concentration of campaign fundraising, and go back to work for the American people."
And that would be first home run of Al Gore's career.
Money, Money, Money!
It was bound to happen: the city now has a resident who's every bit as crass and vulgar as Donald Trump. His name is Jason Binn, a savvy and ambitious graduate of Roslyn High School and Boston University who's successfully insinuated himself into Manhattan's media world. Binn, publisher of the inexplicably popular Ocean Drive in Miami ($10 million in advertising revenues in 2000) and the equally vapid Hamptons, has just launched Gotham, a mostly free party-page magazine that debuts this week at upscale retailers, tony apartment buildings, clubs and the occasional newsstand.
Who needs another bootlicking journal devoted to celebrities? Not me, certainly, but unlike Binn's many competitors who troll the same unsavory beat and are quick to discount him, I'm betting on this avaricious young man's uncanny ability to schmooze advertisers and socialites. Which means, happily, goodbye to the equally smarmy Manhattan File, Manhattan Style and Quest. The first issue of Gotham is 400 pages and loaded with razzmatazz display advertisements?no doubt deeply discounted in price, but that's how Binn lured clients into Ocean Drive?including: Ferragamo, David Yurman, Ralph Lauren, Ermenegildo Zegna, Van Cleef & Arpels, Louis Vuitton, Tod's, Estee Lauder, Gucci, Absolut, Bombay Gin, The Trump World Tower, Brioni, Lacoste and the Russian Tea Room.
The editorial content is beside the point: Binn has gathered a roster of scribes-for-hire to phone in frivolous stories and snap photos of every celebrity any sane person doesn't need to lay eyes on again. I don't blame the ubiquitous Patrick McMullan, Richard Johnson, Michael Musto or R. Couri Hay for contributing to Gotham: a buck is a buck and I'm sure Jason is spreading those greenbacks around. There's a guide to restaurants and clubs, edited by Jason Oliver Nixon, that's so poorly written it makes Time Out New York look like the 60s-era Esquire. Just one example, a description of Tribeca Grill: "No cares about the noise or the lines at this Bobby DeNiro-owned, loft-like American eatery." Besides the obnoxious familiarity, the capsule doesn't give a clue about what kind of food is available at the Greenwich St. destination. But Bobby won't even notice.
In Sunday's New York Times, Alex Kuczynski wrote about Binn and Gotham, producing an unflattering portrait of the self-promoting publisher that will no doubt be proudly pasted in his notebook of clippings. This guy, despite his obvious entrepreneurial skills, has absolutely no shame. Kuczynski writes: "Jason Binn is pretty unabashed when it comes to showing his enthusiasm for celebrity, for clothes and for flashy restaurants. But he gets really excited when he talks about money."
She gets a little catty (describing his "snug" Prada suit), but mostly the Times reporter lets Binn hang himself. This paragraph is a stunner: "'That audience [for his Hamptons magazine] spends $3.5 million on their summer house,' he said, his hands springing to action. 'Imagine how much those people will spend on their apartment in New York!' Mr. Binn's eyes shone with something resembling ardor, or maybe low blood sugar. 'And Gotham has got them. Gotham's advertisers have got them. I have got them.'"
Oh, mama, New York's media cesspool has just acquired a new and most powerful stench!
I'll close with a few words from Binn in his "Publisher's Letter." Hold on tight. "And it's not just about putting out a magazine for me. It's about marketing this great city. It's about strong editorial that [Binn's obviously an indiscriminate reader, if in fact he reads at all]?page after page?captures the essence of New York. It's about successful businesses, committed citizens, and proud advertisers who want a showcase for their achievements."
This is high-octane hubris, especially for a fellow who hangs out with "committed citizens" like Sean Puffy Combs.
But this baby?Jason's baby?is going to make it. And, truth be told, if the city can put up with Al Sharpton, Trump, Paul Krugman, Hillary Clinton, Mario Cuomo, Mort Zuckerman, Matt Dillon, Paul O'Neill, Rosie O'Donnell and Julian Schnabel, there's room at the Temple of Bad Taste for the likes of Jason Binn.
February 26
Send comments to [MUG1988@aol.com](mailto:mug1988@aol.com) or fax to 244-9864. Please include your full name, town and state for publication.