I can buy that. I would certainly give him credit for his early interest, but also agree that his contribution was exaggerated.

nostatic: That's the key: actual accomplishment.

And in the last election, the Republicans were allergic to any comparison of actual accomplishment, because their candidate had none to claim. Their decision was to run GW against Bill Clinton (which is amazingly still going on) because he looked like a complete underachiever next to Al Gore.

And isn't it funny that the fall-back position is '...he's a long time deomocratic supporter...' Somehow being a long time right-wing supporter doesn't discredit Limbaugh or any of the other radio entertainers that tell Uh-mericans what to think.

If you consider Vint Cerf to be the same as a talk radio pesonality, then you discredit him yourself. Your comparison did not make sense. No one on the right would ever consider a radio personality an expert source regarding a technical subject. Unlike liberals, they have to present evidence from elsewhere.

Oh, and if Gore had accomplished so much, why could he not even win his home state...where they would know his accomplishments best?

Well, make up your mind: either you want to discredit the co-inventor of the Internet because of his political leanings or you don't.

And as for the Gore home-state issue -- I have no idea. I didn't live there and i didn't see the caompaign for Bush there. Obviously, the Tennesseean voters weren't interested in substance. They wanted somebody less boring.

Oh, and by the way, if being defeated in your home state makes you unworthy, consider that John Ashcroft was defeated by a man who had been dead for three weeks.

I would never seek to discredit a person unfairly. I did point out that having endorsed Gore, he did have an interest in defending him. If you think that discredits him....so be it.

Ever consider that they might know their own representative better than the rest of the country? Wouldn't it make sense that people who "didn't live there" would be more susceptible to being fooled?

It does not necessarily make one unworthy, but in recent elections, it seems to make one unelectable.
One would have to at least consider that dying might enhance ones popularity though..you know, the sympathy vote. Look at Gore, he won the popular vote and only looked dead.