***Nonsense!  It makes complete sense to compare the Gore article situation with similar situations regarding other articles.  That's one of the ways you determine if A) a standard is logical and can be applied in a beneficial way, and B)*If* that standard is being applied evenly and fairly.  If similarly sourced material is being put into the Mel Gibson or Sarah Palin article with no apparent violation of WP policy then one would expect the same rules to apply here.  If they don't, then the powers that be here need to find out why, and implement policies and actions that remedy the situation.  It's also going to be interesting if these allegations end up being included on a permanent basis because if "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events" there will be absolutely no basis for excluding mention that both the President and Vice President of the administration in which he served will have had serious accusations of sexual assault leveled at them by witnesses who were willing to sign statements under oath.  Molly Haggerty being Gore's accuser, and Juanita Broadrick being Clinton's accuser.   
 *