(Incidentally, I just found out what the plot of "Love Story" is, and I think it should have come as a surprise to no one that Tipper is depressed, since her husband's fantasy is that they are the couple who inspired a story in which the romantic crescendo consists of the woman dying.)
Gore accused Bush of using "code words" on abortion, even as he assiduously employed a code word for abortion. Gore has openly sworn to having his own litmus test for Supreme Court justices, assuring baby-killing enthusiasts that "the right to choose is fundamental. ... I vow to you that we will never let anyone take that right away."
Indeed, Gore has a whole slew of litmus tests up his sleeve. Last January, the vice president peremptorily announced his commitment to putting gays in the military saying: "I would insist before appointing anybody to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the individual fully support my policy (on gays in the military), and yes, I would make that a requirement." That would exclude a lot of people from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including Gulf War heroes Colin Powell and Norman Schwarzkopf.
Gore denounced Bush's tax plan for giving a tax cut to the "very richest" Americans, which is a little like opposing civil rights laws on the grounds that they'll mainly benefit blacks. The rich are the ones who pay taxes, so of course an across-the-board tax cut helps them the most. As soon as the poor start paying their fair share of the tax burden, they'll get a tax cut too.
Across-the-board benefits for the "very richest" Americans turns out to be a lot more appealing to Gore when it comes to his socialist "universal" plans for this and that. Bill Gates shouldn't have his taxes cut, but he should get free prescription drugs.
But as George Bush found out, if you quote the vice president back to himself ("no controlling legal authority"), or cite something he's done (the Buddhist temple fund-raiser), he will lash out at you for making personal attacks. Democrats think it's dirty politics to remember what happened yesterday. But a "personal" attack? That assumes a fact not in evidence.