Gore's Hypocrisy; the Punditocracy
            

            ELLEN:

            You lost me on your techno explanation, but my thanks for trying. In your
opinion, what exactly is the "counterculture" today? If it's Fatboy
Slim, and the others, and confined to that, I don't see the counterculture.
Where does today's youth stand on politics, for example? Besides the
communications breakthrough, what's today's equivalent of the sexual
revolution, the feminist movement, etc.? Besides the tattoos and piercings,
which are pretty standard, I don't see much that separates today's 25-year-old
from today's 45-year-old. Please inform me, with a touch less of Greil
Marcus.

            I love e-mail too. It's so much more convenient than the phone, when you're
not sure if someone's in and you trade voice mail. Also, in reporting, if your
subject is willing, you can reproduce exactly what they've said, on
record, so there's no dispute on misquotes. Although when I was sifting through
some storage at Moishe's in Long Island City last week, I came across a trunk
full of letters from college and high-school days. It's a cliche, but
when was the last time you got a real letter? I know I never write them
anymore. They're relics now, and will make for fascinating reading in future
generations.

            On Page 12 of today's New York Post there's a priceless photo of Rudy
Giuliani at Saratoga. He's wearing shades, with a too-wide tie, grinning, with
a flack by his side, looking for all the world like a don out of the opening
scene in Godfather II , when Michael Corleone coughs up some dough for
the state of Nevada and then has that immortal conversation with the shady
senator.

            I don't agree with your point yesterday that Gore himself is messing up his
campaign. Yes, he's made a lot of dumb moves and gaffes and is spending money
like Steve Forbes. And hiring Carter Eskew was positively Clintonian: After
moving all those union delegates to tears with his speech about his sister in
'96, it was an unbelievably hypocritical hire. But Clinton clearly doesn't want
to leave office, and he's done his best to (I'm being charitable here)
subconsciously sabotage his loyal soldier's campaign. Hillary herself is
fucking (figuratively, I assume) Gore, too. She'd be a far better asset being
on the stump for him and other Senate candidates, rather than sucking up money,
media attention, and organizational skills for herself. It was Hillary who was
responsible for re-electing Barbara Boxer last year; a plus for you, I'm sure,
a nightmare for me.

            I love your idea of combining the Kinsleys of the world into one
awful outlet for conventional Beltway wisdom. It would save so much time. An
example is here in New York: For months, the pundits, Democratic-leaning of
course, predicted that Rick Lazio would run for Senate, thus bloodying Rudy for
his slugfest with Hillary. That was stupid thinking. I don't care about the
D'Amato/Pataki feud with Rudy; there was simply no way they'd resist the
pressure from the Bush organization to unite behind the mayor. With a united
GOP party in New York, Gore/Bradley is going to actually have to spend time in
the state (same in California) instead of thinking of it as a gimme state.

            I read Dick Morris' column in the Post today, and as usual he had
some good points. He wrote that Bush is lucky to have Forbes as his chief
opponent, because the publishing scion is too dorky to win, an assessment I
agree with, although I'm a fan of his economic platform (although his pandering
to Christians is just shameless). The problem with Morris is that you can't
believe a word he says.

            I also read today that the Voice will unveil a new design tomorrow.
If editor Don Forst was smart, he'd unveil new content as well. But I'll get to
that tomorrow. I'll be curious about your Voice nostalgia. One more
question: What are your three favorite magazines? I'm sure you'll be horrified,
but mine are the Weekly Standard , Vanity Fair , and The New
Yorker .

            Best,
RUSS