October 11, 2007
Al Gore for President (Brent Budowsky)
As these words are written the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize has been chosen but not yet announced and for purposes of the future of America the great and inconvenient truth is that this does not matter.
America does not need another prize, we need another president.
Americans deserve a president who aspires not merely to wield power but to use the office of the presidency as the center of action to lift our land to the greatness that was bestowed to us by Americans who came before us.
My hope is that Al Gore is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He deserves it, and it would be a great moment for America and a great statement about the future of the earth.
But America does not need another prize, we need another president. "An Inconvenient Truth" was a brilliant, noble and historic undertaking, but if saving the planet from the ravages that threaten it is our purpose, in a journey of a hundred steps, the film took us one step, not 99.
The Assault on Reason will be viewed by historians as possibly the most sweeping and profound analysis of the troubles of our times, and the most brilliant manifesto of where an American president in the tradition of Roosevelt and Kennedy would lead this land we love.
But America does not need another brilliant book with a compelling program; America needs another president to make it happen.
The concert for the earth was a wonderful and important moment that brought to the attention of the planet the latent idealism and dreams of young people who want to inherit the wind of a better world, not merely the winds for another war, and a statement of generosity and conviction of stars who joined with kids on every continent of the earth.
But now, America does not need another concert, we need a new courage, a new conviction, and a new president to bring out the best of all of us, and make America a force that brings light to the world.
Is it unfair to ask: If the earth God gave us, that past generations endowed to us, that we hold in trust for future generations not yet born, is truly in danger and depends on decisions taken during the term of the next American president, are we not all obligated to bear any burden, share any sacrifice, endure any hardship, so our great-grandchildren will inherit a safe earth?
Is it unfair to ask: In a world where the last of the great generation that saved freedom from fascism are leaving us by the hour, in a nation where our best young are making all the sacrifice and giving all in a war far away from us, should not every political leader, at all levels, put aside personal and political convenience and ask what they can do for our country — and do it?
John Fitzgerald Kennedy was right: the presidency is the center of action, and God's work on earth must truly be our own.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was right: We have nothing to fear but fear itself, and for the great matters of life and death for our country, we are all in this together.
The Democratic Party has the opportunity not to win an election to wield power, but to win a landslide that would bring a president and a Congress who stand for a politics of courage and idealism, who call again for
our country to dare to dream, and dare again to reach for greatness.
Is it unfair to ask, as previous generations of Americans have asked, and future generations of Americans depend on us to ask today, for a leader worthy of the office once held by Washington and Jefferson, by Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, by FDR and JFK?
Imagine a president who leads the world in the battle of ideas, who knew from the start that we are a nation of idealism and hope, not a nation of torture memos and spying on each other in secret.
Imagine a president who was wise enough to know from the start that an unwise war was wrong, and who spoke with clarity and conviction when it mattered the most, and when others fell short.
Imagine a president who has believed from childhood that our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights comprise the sacred trust of the world's greatest nation, and has stood for this truth in good times and bad, in hard times and moments of triumph, from the House of Representatives, from the Senate, and from the vice presidency of the United States.
Imagine an America that is once again seen throughout the world as a beacon of hope and light, as an inspiration for human rights and freedom, and as a liberator of the world from poisoned energy that imprisons men and women everywhere, and ultimately endangers the very existence of the world itself.
Imagine an American democracy that is greater than an exercise in poll-taking, fundraising and the character assassination of fellow Americans and becomes again a democracy in which politics is viewed as a noble profession and Americanism is viewed as a call to share both the sacrifice and the triumph, and young people are inspired to reach for the stars in every endeavor in their personal and civic lives.
Imagine an America without the scandals of wounded troops and the mistreatment of disabled veterans and rising numbers of homeless heroes because our president will avoid war when we can, win war when we must, and fight for our troops and our veterans every hour, every day, in war and peace, in deed as well as word, no
matter how hard it may be, because in our country it is right, and in our country, right makes might.
I know it is fanciful, unrealistic and probably naive to believe in the greatest aspiration that America should choose its best possible president. But America has always had the Frank Capra quality of daring to dream, of looking at the stars and viewing the better angels of our nation.
Our nation began with the impossible dream of a world ruled by kings, that could be forever transformed by a brave and generous people who put their hearts, their souls, their spirit, their lives, behind what they called their sacred honor and believed was their sacred trust.
Many tears have fallen, much blood has been shed, many dreams have been crushed on the road from there to here, but for every Valley Forge there has been a Yorktown, for every Gettysburg there has been an Appomattox, for every Pearl Harbor there has been that moment in Times Square where the sailor kissed the lady, and the lady in that harbor lifted that torch higher than ever before.
Personally I will support any of the Democrats over any of the Republicans, but does anybody believe that the campaign of 2008 has given any hint of a renewal of American greatness?
In my view, never before in memory have the man, the moment and the magic come together as they come together for Al Gore in 2008.
My hope is that he is awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace, but whether or not that comes to pass does not ultimately matter.
There is a far higher stake than another honor, another prize and another award, and that is the future of a great country that deserves a remembrance of our past, a renewal of our better angels, a reform of our shortcomings, a revival of our national spirit and unity, and a restoration of our role as the true leader of the free world.
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 118 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Global Warming and Al Gore. One is an unproven theory and the other is a proven loser. That's something to which we can look forward.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 10:15 am
Brent: One other point. A court in liberal England is forcing the public school system in England to inform children who view his film that there are 11 completely false and misleading statements in the film which, ironically, are the main basis of the film. Why would anyone support anyone who promoted this film which contains so many falsehoods and is nothing more than an attempt to brainwash the public to support a totally unproven theory? Choose your friends wisely. Maybe we should choose our candidates a little more carefully.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Make up your mind, Brent. Last week you were promoting Jim Webb as President, now you're back to promoting AlGore. Like most liberals, you go wherever the wind blows, right?
Comment by John Simmons — October 11, 2007 @ 11:12 am
The Repubilcans are out! Do you like me so
much you read me immediately, or are you
alerted for immediate reaction? I was
promoting Jim Webb for Vice President now
and President in a later election, and you
better believe I mean it. Gore-Webb has
a nice ring, dont you think? The more
important point is that large forces are
at work in America and the world and Al Gore
is the man for the moment. We need an FDR
or JFK with a mission, not just another
election with more talking points.
Comment by Brent Budowsky — October 11, 2007 @ 11:23 am
NO, Global warming is not a myth. And denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
Al Gore is the one hope for both our country and our planet. We must start to undo all the damage that Bush and Cheney have done.
We can't afford wait any longer. A Gore/Obama ticket would absolutely kick A**!
Please Al. Please run!
Comment by RAD — October 11, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Brent, your post is a beautiful appeal for the healing and renewal of our increasingly damaged planet and democracy. Al Gore would indeed be our best hope for a new attitude of cooperation with and nurture of the larger land community, a life-sustaining community that gives life to all. I think he WILL run for president. After raising our awareness of the real costs of our environmental abuses , I think he MUST
Comment by Ron Nowicki-Landscape Architect — October 11, 2007 @ 11:52 am
P.S. Are the first three postings from the same people who still believe the Earth is flat and the Holocaust never happened? WTF?
Comment by Ron Nowicki-Landscape Architect — October 11, 2007 @ 11:57 am
It's time for the politics of fear and the policies of decontructing our Constitution to end. America needs a bright hope and a bold and courageous leader who is unafraid to look reality in the face and defy the odds, fighting the climate crisis with words, deeds, and new technology creating new jobs and a safer and stronger nation. That is what a Gore Presidency would be. His vision. Our future, and our children will thank us.
Comment by Lisa L — October 11, 2007 @ 12:00 pm
Politics of fear? That's precisely what the global warming enthusiasts are promoting, and that would include Al Gore.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Re: #7 — Interesting post Ron Nowicki-Landscape Architect, it shows the narrowmindness of liberals like yourself. As one of the first three posters, I can assure you that the vast majority of conservates, including myself, know that the Earth is round and that the Holocaust did indeed happen.
Comment by John Simmons — October 11, 2007 @ 12:11 pm
Facts about Al Gore:
* He tells Americans that they must reduce consumption of energy to save the planet
* He tells Americans that they must buy carbon credits from a company that he is part owner of.
* He owns 3 giant homes, one of which uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.
* He is already rich, but flies all over the world so he can make $100,000 giving 75-minute presentations followed by a teensy 10-minute Q&A.
And you think a man of such enormous hypocrisy should be the President?
These left-wingers are truly unbelievably gullible. They idolize frauds and hypocrites.
Comment by DFAL — October 11, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
Al Gore, the self-proclaimed “global climate change activist”, keeps trying to tell us how to live. You shouldn’t do this, you shouldn’t do that.
Really? Where’s our freedom of choice? When did America become a communist dictatorship?
What makes Al Gore qualified to comment on anything? This is a guy who couldn’t even beat George W. Bush. Who is perhaps the most unpopular president we’ve ever had and yet most Americans would pick Bush or even Homer Simpson to be president over Al Gore.
Do us all a favour Al, go and live in Cuba along with the rest of your communist friends, and leave us freedom loving Americans to make up our own minds.
It will undermine the whole credablity of the Nobel Prize if they give one to one of America's greatest losers!
Comment by Capt Wild Bill Kelso — October 11, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
The question Gore needs to ask himself is if he doesn't run NOW (and the state filing deadlines are almost upon us), will he be able to look back and say he did all he could to keep the climate crisis from becoming a catastrophe?
Gore has acknowledged that he could influence events far more as President than as an (extra)ordinary citizen. Recent polls (in NH, MI, AZ) have shown that while Hillary is running away with the nomination, the moment Gore's name is added to the mix, he gets the most support. So the nomination is his for the taking if he will answer the call.
Comment by Jim in Chicago — October 11, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
If you think that Al Gore believes the planet is in as imminent danger as he professes, and yet lives his life as environmentally recklessly as he does, I’ve got a carbon credit forest in Arizona to sell you.
Comment by Rick G — October 11, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
There is only one convenient truth- this country cannot stand another 8 years of a Bush/Clinton presidency. We desperately need Al Gore as president to restore this country's true history of constitutional law ( Hillary has never said she would restore habeaus corpus)integrity and conscience.
Comment by Ilene Proctor — October 11, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
One fact about Al Gore you forgot to mention:
*ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES in the year 2000.
He would still be president today after an overwhelming re-election in 2004, and there would be no war, and certainly NOT a war based on greed for oil, money, and power.
Al Gore is a man of the people who cares about all the things a president should care about.
Mr. Gore, if you decide to run for president, you will see the biggest outpouring of volunteers working on your campaign in the HISTORY of the U.S. The criminals who stole it from you last time will not be able to overcome the LANDSLIDE VICTORY, and we will support you as you save our country, restore our rights, and spread peace throughout the world.
PLEASE RECLAIM YOUR POSITION AS PRESIDENT, MR. GORE. WE NEED YOU!!!!!
Comment by Chellee Saiz — October 11, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Beautifully written article, Brent. Thank you.
It amazes me how the climate change deniers come out in force every time something positive is published about Al Gore. The same folks who tell us that Al Gore lied when he said he took the initiative to invent the Internet, and blah blah blah. It is interesting to me how these people, who consider themeselves "conservatives" are so unconcerned about conserving our natural resources and preserving our planet for future generations. Good environmental stewardship makes sense - leave no footprint so that others can enjoy what you've enjoyed. Taking care of our environment should be as important as taking care of the ones that we love, because it is all about, ultimately, nurturing so that life can flourish.
Al Gore's right on all the issues: health care, the environment, the illegal, immoral, pre-emptive war for oil in Iraq, social security, education, gay marriage, the list goes on and on.
This country is in serious need of wholesale change. Election 2008 is a watershed eletion. I think it's time that we take a serious look at why our planet's future is in peril - from both environmental and social perspectives, and I wholeheartedly support Al Gore's candidacy, should he decide to run.
Al, we need you. Never mind what the mouth breathers say - they're uninformed.
Comment by Vicki Stein — October 11, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
Vicki Stein: A liberal court in liberal England labeled Gore a liar. Are they in denial? No, you are.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Al Gore keeps trying to tell us how to save energy–that's a far cry from being a dictator and why do you rightwingnuts have so many objections to saving money and making less mess of the planet, anyway?
Al Gore has been studying climate for more than 30 years–he's definitely qualified to comment about it.
Al Gore is wealthy and lives a more luxurious lifestyle than most of the working class. Luxury doesn't necessarily mean wasteful, however. You might drive an old Chevy, he drives a hybrid Lexus. His is more luxurious and costs more, but is also more energy efficient–the same for his homes. If we all were as conservative with energy as possible, we'd walk everywhere and go to bed with the sun. Some of us can walk, but some have to drive or fly. Most of us try to make the best of things given our resources and opportunities.
Al Gore DID beat George Bush in the 2000 election. The only reason George took office is the Supreme Court stopped the vote count.
So what are you really upset about, that Al Gore is richer than you, smarter than you, or that your Republican losers don't have a prayer in 2008?
Comment by True Blue Texan — October 11, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
True Blue Texan: I've been studying the climate for 50 years. I say Al Gore is a liar. Also, the vote count was never stopped. It was over. The Supreme Court only upheld the rights of the voters. It's amazing how liberals like the law, except when it doesn't suit their purposes.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
One has to wonder why a so-called "conservative" (read "fascist") would spend so much time writing letters to this or any other site that proposes sensible and fundamental changes in the way this nation is governed. Could it be that they are shaking in their shoes because they know there is a massive regime change coming up? Is it because so many Americans, including those duped in 2000 and 2004, have learned from the past 7 years that everything coming out of the conservatives' (read: fascists') mouths is a lie and that everything their leaders do are either corrupt attempts to preserve their own wealth or ineptitude on the massive scale of, say, a big hurricane? Or both?
But, to speak to the question of Gore: I think we have seen that the Clintons are a bit too cozy with the "haves and the have-mores" that Bush calls his base. Also, I don't like Hillary's chances, and I'm not crazy about the chances of the other Dem candidates, either (even though Georgie the Second is doing everything in his power to hand the election to the Democrats).
I think Gore has the experience, the personality, and the smarts to be a great president. I'm all for a Gore candidacy. Where can I find one of these "Draft Gore" committees?
Comment by Martin D. — October 11, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
Al– Please run. The Democrats need you, the Country needs you, and the whole World needs you.
We need the smartest guy in the room for President– not any one of this gaggle of ambitious schtups.
Please. RUN!
Tony B.
Comment by Tony Bellomo — October 11, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Whether or not a reader agrees with you on content, this is a remarkably well-ritten powerful essay. Well Done!
I think that Gore would indeed make a great President, and honestly…with the mess Bush and Cheney are leaving we need great, not "good enough" this time.
as with # 17 above, the attackers come out anytime Gore is recognized for an achievement, whether its the Asturia awrd, 2 Emmys, an Oscar or perhaps the Nobel Peace prize, which I think he will win tomorrow.
It always seems to be an ad hominem attack too: he flies on planes…he doesn't have solar panels on his house, and his house is just too big!!!
Silly, silly stuff. I appreciate that Gore has taken the public relations lead on this and has spent many hours and many years giving his presentation to raise awareness. I compare him to what Reagan, Ford or Nixon did after they left the White House and what they accomplished to better the world. Other than Carter, a reasonable non-idealogure must (at least grudgingly) admit Gore has done a lot of good with his life post VP.
Comment by Jim McKenzie (Florida) — October 11, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
Martin D ~
Sign the petition at http://www.draftgore.com, or visit http://www.americaforgore.org.
With regard to the naysayers, they're shakin' in their boots. Climate change deniers can deny everything they want, but I have one question for them:
What is so wrong with being a good steewaard of the environment, of preserving and conserving, especially in today's throw-away society?
Comment by Vicki Stein — October 11, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
Damn, my fingers are slipping today.
That would be steward.
Comment by Vicki Stein — October 11, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
Yes, Al Gore needs to start a third party and run as an independent. That's the only way to go.
Comment by Igor R. — October 11, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
It's interesting that global warming has become so partisan. I may not believe that the sky's literally falling but I don't think Mother Earth is exactly begging for more fossil fuels either. Does that make me a moderate? One inconvenient reality is that somewhere in the future, a remedy for our oil addiction will become paramount. The sooner we acquire the testicular fortitude to free ourselves from the stronghold of the oil companies, the sooner we can move ahead with this challenging task. Talking someone like Al Gore into running, who has the passion to take on the fight, is certainly more advantageous than talking someone like, um, say, Dick Cheney into running.
Comment by andy42302 — October 11, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
More Al Gore Speculation: Will He Win the Nobel, Will He Run?…
With the announcement due tomorrow of who will win the Nonel Peace prize, the speculation is rampant on whether Al Gore will be the winner and whether he will jump into the '08 presidential race if he is.
CNN asks, "Will Al Gore add a Nob…
Trackback by The Democratic Daily — October 11, 2007 @ 2:26 pm
OK Lets start with FACTS. FACT # 1: Global WARMING is a FACT. CO2 being the exclusive cause is NOT proven, nor even likely, but while maybe not the exclusive cause, it is a major factor WE CAN CONTROL. So arguing it's not PROVEN is clever parsing or just plain stupid. Gore's oversimplification of the problem was to make the point salient to the masses. The truth is far too complex to discuss in a movie. But the point is CLEAR. WE MUST REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON OIL as quickly as possible, for numerous reasons including Global Warming. Anyone who denies this is a fool.
FACT #2: AL GORE WON the Election in 2000. Millions of votes were stolen or supressed by the Republicans. MILLIONS. And had the Media not continuosly denegrated him, while painting Bush as misunderstood; if they had pursued his AWOL; if they had called the ignorent frat boy for what he is, GORE STILL would have won by a landslide. Anyone who denies this is uninformed or a liar. Goto Gregpalast.com for more details.
AL GORE HAS THE VISION TO LEAD. He has learned some painful lessons and has rediscovered who he is. People say, boy has AL Gore changed! But those who know him from before 2000 know he hasn't changed in anything but his confidence in the value of who he is as a person and his beliefs. But we need to BACK him completely, and not just talk. We need to RALLY behind him. When the media trashes him we need to respond in force with grace, logic, compassion and facts. Most Conservative arguements cannot stand the light of the sun. Greed is not good. SHINE ON PEOPLE.
Comment by Eric Harrington — October 11, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Vicki, if people were to disappear from the face of the Earth, there would be no environmental damage. Wouldn't that be great?
Comment by Igor R. — October 11, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
Eric Harrington: If you have absolute proof of global warming you are the only one in the world. Congratulations. All liberalism is based on delusion.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
So, the man who prevented senators from signing the Congressional Black Caucus objection to the 2000 election should be president?
Anyone remember that scene in F 9-11 where Maxine Waters and others come to the well of the Senate with tears of fury in their eyes, pleading for ONE SENATOR's signature? Ever wonder why they couldn't get one?
Thank God Barbara Boxer finally confirmed what we all saw with our own eyes in Michael Moore's movie. Al Gore was President of the Senate and leader of the Party. He instructed the Senate NOT to sign the objection.
All this to preserve his "viability" in 2004.
Al Gore orchestrated his own "defeat" attempting to game the system. He has a lot to answer for.
Comment by Myrna Smith — October 11, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
Myrna, please don't criticize Al Gore. As Brent explains, his efforts are brilliant and noble (and soon to be Nobel). This man is above reproach, pure and simple. By definition, anything he has ever done is holy. In the episode you described he simply sacrificed himself for the good of the People, just like…hm…well he is the Messiah to all of us who are yearning for purity in this dirty, evil world. Can't you leave somebody who brings inner peace to so many people alone?
Comment by Igor R. — October 11, 2007 @ 4:16 pm
Vicki Stein - "What is so wrong with being a good steewaard of the environment, of preserving and conserving, especially in today’s throw-away society?"
Absolutely nothing Vicki. Any chance at all we can get Al Gore to participate?
Comment by Rick G — October 11, 2007 @ 6:49 pm
Al Gore deserves to win the Peace prize. He deserves to be President.
Unfortunately, the American people deserve what they have: a president that is as dumb as a box of rocks!
What they don't deserve is a leader of the caliber of Al Gore.
Still, I wish Mr Gore would change his mind and run. I would certainly vote for him.
Unfortunately, I don't think it will happen.
Meantime, I think it makes sense to reinstitute the draft;
SUV drivers first. Good luck in Iran.
Comment by Smilinjack — October 11, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Brent,
Your essay made me weep. Thank you.
Is it beyond hope to believe that Al is listening?
Comment by Ron B — October 11, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
Robert Rosecrans: You've twice now mentioned the liberal school system in England that refuses to allow Al's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" to be shown without a disclaimer. What you've failed to mention, however, is that the conservative government of England has already endorsed the Kyoto Protocol for carbon reduction and is on target to meet it's commitments. Hmmm…seems like the government of England (and France, and Japan, and Germany, etc.) seems to think that Mr. Gore's telling the truth.
What's truly pathetic is that people want to point to the fact that Mr. Gore has to travel by airplane (heaven forbid) or that he has a large house. When, please point to any statement by Mr. Gore himself, has he ever said that being pro-environment is equivalent to be anti-wealth? It's yet another straw-man argument where conservatives say there's only 2 choices…
Comment by Jason C. — October 11, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
I'd love to see Mr. Gore run for president. How else will we ever get the possible chance to see him debate his ideas about global warming? It would be funny as hell to watch. Run, Al, Run!
Comment by Joe — October 11, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
I'm supporting Obama, and there is no power in the universe that would get me to vote for Hillary Clinton in any campaign. So if Obama can't win the nomination, I would be in Gore's camp in a second.
Comment by Nancy — October 11, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Jason C.: The Kyoto Treaty does not prove Global Warming. Also, why don't you respond to the fact that the 11 major premises in his movie have been proven to be false by an English Court. And they have signed onto the Kyoto Treaty. Aren't you mixing your metaphors?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 11, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
I voted for Al Gore the last time he won the presidency, and I will surely vote for him again if he decides to run. But my fellow Americans, it may take us a little time to get used to honor, integrity, decency, and leadership restored to the White House when Al assumes his rightful place in the Oval Office.
Audrey D.
Comment by Audrey Dahleen — October 11, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
Brent…
What a great article. Couldn't have said it better myself. I hope Mr. Gore reads it.
Comment by Michael — October 11, 2007 @ 9:53 pm
Leadership…so long gone…is about sacrifice. It's about belief, not assessing others' beliefs. To make a living, you must get; to make a life, you must give. To breathe life back into our sagging collective soul, let's pray Al can surrender — so much: great freedom of action, great wealth, an unassailable position. This he'd trade for the vituperation of the morons above and the calumny of the unworthy. Why? Because it is written on his soul, and in a book beyond any of our ken. Go, Al. Do it for the 7th generation beyond this one.
Comment by Marty Perlmutter — October 11, 2007 @ 10:01 pm
Devoid of frivolity and fleeing their wives nagging honey-do lists, the first several posters spend their time posting the same tired talking points all over the web. Time to rake the leaves, Guys.
Excellent article Brent. If you want to read one of the very best op/eds in my opinion on why Mr. Gore can lead most effectively from the inside, read Michael Yatiks op/ed in the San Fran Journal, "Gore must make changes from the inside," http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/07/22/INGKER31MT1.DTL
I truly wish Mr. Gore all the happiness he deserves tomorrow. I am so hopeful that he will be wakened to wonderful news. And when he has been given the laurels he deserves, I hope this Colossus astride the earth will come home to help us.
Comment by Eva — October 11, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
I'll give up my SUV when Al Gore gives up his fleet of limos and his private jet.
Comment by John Simmons — October 11, 2007 @ 10:07 pm
Al, we need you. I just don't think any of the three Democratic frontrunners have the necessary experience, commitment, courage, or passion to fix everything that needs to be fixed.
Also, it won't be like 2000. Sure, the media and the Republicans will try, but you've carved out your own identity now, and there's a whole new alternate media structure that'll have your back.
If you run, you will win.
Comment by Eli — October 11, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
We sure are in need of an inspirational president, not to mention one who is competent, well-informed, and honest. I join others in pledging to support Mr. Gore if he can be persuaded to run.
Comment by Carol — October 12, 2007 @ 3:39 am
[...] For no reason whatsoever, Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize Al Gore for president (The Hill) [...]
Pingback by Tennessean.com Blogs » Blog Archive » Reaction around the Web to Gore’s Nobel win — October 12, 2007 @ 6:48 am
Al Gore, congratulations on winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Now it is time to announce your wish to become America's president, take your seat in the White House, and be the leader we have all been waiting for to move beyond the corrupt system of Empire and towards Earth community.
Comment by Erol — October 12, 2007 @ 7:42 am
Eva: In in the interest of gender and opinion equality don't you have a kitchen to sweep or a pie to bake? You didn't post anything factual, yet riposted those who did.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 7:44 am
GORE WINS NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
Oh Boy! If you thought you heard dirt and scum about President Gore, you ain't heard nothing yet. The wingnut chorus is going to go into overdrive with this. They'll do that "invented the internet" routine and more that we probably haven't yet heard.
They hate achievement when it relates to free and intellectual thought, or, God forbid SCIENCE. They will go crazy.
Comment by Chris Calbi — October 12, 2007 @ 7:57 am
President Gore, The White House Awaits, you are the Elected President of the United States, we need you to elevate this Nation back to it's high place , the current scum bags have destroyed our good reputation and relationships with the world .
This Nation, it's people and the World need You !!!
Comment by Tony Arellano — October 12, 2007 @ 8:53 am
Chris — before you bow down and kiss the feet of the mighty Al Gore, you should remember that the only reason he won (according to the selection committee) was that he did the most to bring the problem to the forefront. I guess in the liberal mind he is in good company, Jimmy Carter also won the Nobel Peace Prize, and look at what a great President he was.
Comment by John Simmons — October 12, 2007 @ 8:57 am
Al, no matter what the people say about your believe and what you stand for, i want you to have it in mind that no one is ever loved by all.
Run, AL , Run
Comment by Bosun Olisa — October 12, 2007 @ 9:02 am
Chris: First, in the interest of facts, Al Gore is sharing the Nobel Peace Prize with a U.N. Committee. Now, think about this. A government committee, not a free individual, got half the prize. Does this mean that government employees around the globe can be nominated for something they did with taxpayer's money? It's ridiculous. Also, Global Warming is not science. It is a theory which relies on consensus. And consensus is not science. Jimmy Carter won a Nobel Peace Prize also and he is considered vermin by many Americans. As far as free and intellectual thought, you seem to be condemning anyone who thinks different than you. Isn't that the antithesis of free and intellectual thought?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 9:03 am
I'm always amazed at how quickly people point out the flaws of individuals like Gore who have succeeded in achieving something like the Nobel Prize…yes, he's not perfect (like most of us) - but consider the other candidates for '08. Certainly, NONE of them is either and we could spend days pointed out their shortcomings!!!
Comment by Kathleen Marchaesi — October 12, 2007 @ 9:23 am
Gore Snags 2007 Nobel Peace Prize…
Perhaps its high time that we all worked very hard to see that Gore gets drafted into candidacy for the presidential nomination? He says that hes not interested but Gore and the truth are not always close companions. Imagine the chills up Hillary…
Trackback by Faultline USA — October 12, 2007 @ 9:35 am
Al Gore has much more freedom and has accomplished vastly more as a private citizen then he ever would as president. When you're president you're hogtied by the oil and gas lobbies and all kinds of other super-powerful interests. He is making waves these days only because he is NOT in elected office. I would hate to see him run for president.
Comment by Rhea — October 12, 2007 @ 9:49 am
I'd hate to be the grandchildren of these knee-jerk rightwing dogmatists who insist global warming is a hoax because it can't be 100% proven. There are reams of scientific evidence that say global warming is real. We can go outside and see it every day. During my childhood, I played in 5 foot snowdrifts in my upstate NY hometown. Now the snow melts within days. I'm in my 20s. What it comes down to is fear and greed. The right fears change to the system which is doing a fine job of making them rich. It's right to question the facts and search for a clearer truth. It's wrong to stand in the way of evolving thought and nitpick to save your wallet and pride. Sabotage is not debate.
The history books of the future will record today's conservatives as the most destructive political element since the Nazis. Given the millions (billions?) of deaths that are bound to happen as scarcity and disasters increase with global warming, today's naysayer will likely be considered far worse than the Nazis.
Comment by Jon Itkin — October 12, 2007 @ 10:05 am
I'd like to add one more thing. I think Al Gore is the only person capable of righting our nation. Whether he owns large houses or rides in limousines doesn't amount to much when you consider the sweeping changes he would tactfully usher in. Our political system glorifies wealth. Gore could live in a no-impact platform tent, but he would not be viable. When a national politician takes a stand, some element of hypocrisy is impossible to avoid. Our absurd, puritanical, black-and-white charade we call "morals" does nothing more than invite hatred at the expense of reality. That's too bad.
Comment by Jon Itkin — October 12, 2007 @ 10:15 am
What a beautifully written piece.
Unfortunately, the very comments on this page highlight the sad reality of our country. And the main reason why Al probably won't chose to run.
A significant number of our citizens have been coopted into buying the entire shopping list of right-wing positions.
They therefore would fight Gore if he was trying to promote motherhood and apple pie. He is a democrat or worse, a "liberal" and so he must be bad.
What's more important however is that this situation is not that surprising. We have, in the last 50 years, experienced more social change than ever in our history. Entire subjects previously undiscussed have been raised and people have been forced to take a position on them. Homosexuality. Racism. Sexism. Etc. These are all difficult issues that touch on peoples deepest questions and fears.
In response to these challenges, the democratic party has chosen to support "enlightened" positions while the Repubican party has remained true to it's conservative beliefs and instead supported the historical precedent.
Change is not easy. Arriving at new points of view requires risk, learning, and, most importantly courage. And the truth of the matter is that most people are not courageous. They just want to live and be left alone.
What's more, todays political environment is such that it only takes one issue to switch a person over to the status quo side. A person might believe racism is wrong or that women are equal but may darw the line at their comfort with gay marriage. And unfortunately, in todays world that would mean that they must line up with those who are against any change. There are only two tents and you've got to pick one.
The end result, is all these seeming yahoos who spout right-wing talking points without any real thought and seek to tear down people who they probably would agree with on 95% of the issues.
Gore won the Nobel prize for his efforts on global warming. His greater achievement is the thinking behind his book "In Defense of Reason". We are no longer a nation led by reason and so I really can't blame Al if he doesn't want to retrun to the political world of us or them.
Liam
Comment by Liam Shannon — October 12, 2007 @ 10:33 am
If Al Gore does not want to be president, that is exactly why he is perfect for the role. If his name is not on the ballot, I will personally add it anyway.
Comment by Matthew — October 12, 2007 @ 10:44 am
Hey, Rosecrans - some haters like yourself may not appreciate President Carter, but he has done more to promote democracy around the world than just about anyone you could name - just certainly your Nazi president and his neocon idiots have done more to destroy democracy at home and abroad.
Through his Carter center he has monitored democratic elections in more than 70 countries around the world. He doesn't have a knee-jerk reaction to people of the Muslim faith either, pointing out that The third largest democracy in the world is Malaysia, a Muslim country.
Rosecrans, slide back under your rock! You get no award this year …
Comment by Smilinjack — October 12, 2007 @ 10:51 am
The man has such deeply entrenched supporters and with democrats willing to hold their noses while they move toward Hillary, does Gore really have to wonder if he'll be able to find support for his campaign. Certainly he owes no allegiance to the Clintons. Not with a Oscar winning film, a new and sincere persona (vs. Hillary's contrived shrill) and a Nobel Prize in his back pocket.
The presidency would be his to lose.
Comment by AnnabelleDickson — October 12, 2007 @ 11:18 am
Smilinjack, you're so sure of your rat like opinion you post it anonymously. My aren't you the brave one? In fact, Jimmy Carter is one of the most reviled ex-Presidents. If you like him fine. Just don't stink up the rest of us with that anonymous idiocy you spout.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Jon Itkin: You claim that there are reams of scientific evidence that prove global warming. No, in fact, there isn't any scientific evidence whatsoever. There is group consensus by people who are impressed with phony assumptions. Also, you claim that people who don't believe in global warming without scientific proof are Nazis. Isn't that precisely how the Nazis took over? There was no one who could stand up to their dogma precisely because of people like YOU who marginalized them because they didn't believe the same thing the Nazis did. If anyone is a Nazi, it's you. You're practicing the same propaganda methods they did.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 11:27 am
Robert:
The right of the voters? I live in Florida and as I voter, I was never given the right that vote was counted. As a matter of fact, it was stopped or over, however you want to call it. As a Florida voter, my vote was not properly counted. What's your hated towards Gore? Is it because he has more money than you? Or is it because he is a decent liberal that has strong family values as 90% of us are? More so than republicans say they are?
Give yourself a break and go and spew your lies in the conservative forums where your hatred and lies will be welcomed. Today, we are once again proud that one of us, have won the most prestigious prize in the planet, (remember Carter?), something I don’t see happening anytime soon with any of your so-called leaders in your side.
Today, it’s a beautiful day for the Democratic Party, Liberals, Al gore, America and the World.
Let’s celebrate!
Comment by John Casablanca — October 12, 2007 @ 11:29 am
It's true any of the Dem candidates will be a significantly improvement. But I too believe an Al Gore presidency is the best hope for correcting the course. He has the intelligence, experience, and international standing necessary. The situation is as dire as any we have ever faced and it calls for a principled leader with courage and hope. Please, please, please run for president Mr. Gore.
Comment by MAS — October 12, 2007 @ 11:37 am
John Casablanca: If you're too stupid to know how to vote, whose problem is that? Don't come here whining to me because you don't know if you're vote was counted or not. You elected the people who selected the people who designed the ballots. Now you're complaining to me? What an idiot. The only thing I dislike about Al Gore is that he is lying to the public through that piece of trash move he produced. If you like to be lied to don't hold it against others if they don't like to be lied to. People might perceive you as a sociopath or something. By the way John, you don't own this paper and I don't think you have the right here to tell anyone to do anything. Control freak? Maybe.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 11:43 am
I am 58 and may not live to see documents that will unveil the true horror of the last 7 years. I would love to see Al Gore in the White House, which he won in 2000. But I suspect that he has changed enough to be above our broken politics, and the hate that is now mainstream. We all, including President Gore, are all responsible to fix or overhaul those politics. I trust that in office or not he is doing his part. What am I doing, what are you doing?
Comment by Sandra — October 12, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Hey Robert. What makes you NOT a loser? I don't see you winning any Peace Prizes and you're certainly won't win any if you keep acting like a jerk.
Oh, and John Simmons? What? Are you going to continue to dedicate yourself to typical, hypocitical, loser conservative ideology that's usually reserved for clan leaders and hicks who don't know any better?
Comment by Maria — October 12, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
robert:
I voted. I wasn’t stupid. The ballot was there, I punched the hole; however the counting of the votes were stopped. This has nothing to do with me voting or not, but has a lot to do with counting the votes. I am not whining either, I was debunking your previous comment from yesterday that Florida votes where counted or over, which we know for a fact it was not. No, I don’t like to be lied to, that’s why I don’t like your chimp-in-chief and last, for your information, people don’t perceive me as a sociopath, maybe you are perceived as such?
Comment by John Casablanca — October 12, 2007 @ 12:19 pm
Robert Rosencrans,
While I don't think speaking to people like you does much good, I am starting to think that maybe allowing your uneducated nonsense to go uncontested may be worse.
So a couple of points:
- Buy a dictionary and look up "sociopath". Your use of it makes no sense.
- While perusing said dictionary, look up "dogma" - again your writng shows you don't know what it means.
- While buying that dictionary, you might want to invest in a book about 1930's Germany. If you did and you read it (again the dictionary would come in handy) you would come to understand that your comments about the Nazi's and how they rose to power reflect a complete ignorance of the facts. In fact, if anything contributed to the nazis rise to power it was the kind of dogmatic, lock-step, jingoistic, nationalism that you espouse.
Finally, until you do put some time into educating yourself, do the world and yourself a favor and keep your ignorance to yourself.
Liam
Comment by Liam Shannon — October 12, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
Liam Shannon: You need a dictionary, an encyclopedia and a shrink. I didn't say that propaganda was the only way they rose to power, but it was highly effective for them. If anyone is an ignorant baboon it's you. You didn't know the Nazi's specialty was propaganda? Are you sure you're not a sociopath? You couldn't prove it by that sociopathic comment of yours.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
Hey John: You're still whining about your vote. Well, mine was counted and the best man won. It's hard for losers to accept their fate and that's what it sounds like happened to you. Sorry, but that's the truth. I(f you don't like to be lied to you wouldn't like Al Gore. He's a liar. As far as voting, keep trying it and maybe you'll get it right one day.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
Maria: I wouldn't want a Nobel Peace prize. They're usually reserved for liberal losers like Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. Just about the same status as the Oscars.And calling other posters clan leaders and hicks could make you look like a loser. You certainly sound like one.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Liam, face it: you're a damn sociopathic freak, yet you come here and you want to shut good people up. Dogma, ha! If there was a ever a dogma, the man-made global warming stupidity is it. All this teary-eyed adoration here for the greatest scam artist in history, Al Gore, and no facts! No proof! Nothing! When a judge finds that Gore's stupid movie is full of inaccuracies, instead of addressing these inaccuracies, some idiot refers to some other idiots ratifying the Kyoto treaty. They ratify it because Great Britain is even more full of liberal idiots than this country. The whole freaking Europe wants to tear it's heart out to prove it's "fairness". The only thing that will lead to is what's happening in Switzerland now when people start supporting right-wing fanatics who will take them back to real fascism because that will be the only way to get rid of the all the liberal mind-control.
Al Gore should visit Arafat's grave to remember the caliber of people getting the Nobel peace price. He should listen to the greatest failure in American history, Jimmah and his pro-Palestinian rants. He should visit Iran with ElBaradei and proclaim that there is a global consensus that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. He should re-read the "classic" of the fact-falsifying Marxist guerilla propagandist Rigoberta Menchu.
Pathetic menaces to society, all of them. Just like this one. Yes, he achieved personal wealth by fooling the world. He has managed to imposed much larger costs on the world already. And all you freaks that love him so much, cite ANY proof of man-made global warming, otherwise just admit it that you love and adore him because you need a god-like figure in your life.
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Ummm, so The Nobel Peace Prize is "usually reserved for liberal losers"??? Wow! Way to go RR. Do you recall some adage about it being better for one to remain silent and appear ignorant than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt?
Comment by andy42302 — October 12, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
Andy: You prove that adage true every time you post. Congratulations. You win the Prize for Ignorance Excellence. Do you have any movies planned about the environment?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Andy, when you claimed that people should support Al Gore's propaganda simply because in your view fossil fuels are a problem (a reasonable view, but in no way justifying Al Gore's falsehoods), you removed all doubt about yourself.
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
Robert, You really ought to go back to Israel and be there when the Iranians do us all a favor and nuke the place. Jimmy Carter is a truly excellent example of the type of American that the rest of the world looks up to and of whom the rest of us should be proud. And as for Al Gore, he is so much better than any of the other candidates that he should be the only option for the Presidency, with the vice presidential slot going to either Barak Obama or John Edwards. Though Bill Clinton wasn't particularly bad, I would hate to see Hillary get anywhere close to the presidency.
Comment by CahrlesEtheridge — October 12, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
To all the people who doubt global warming here is the real issue: I agree that the Earth goes through fluctuations of temperature naturally. This is 'scientifically proven'. However, science is only one way to look at the world, and the state of our environment represents broader issues in society. Wastefulness, lack of care for future generations, and neglect of the fact that every action has impact (to name a few). It is important for America to get involved in something of global concern whether science agrees with it or not. We have one earth…. we don't need science to tell us that. Al Gore has the international acclaim to get things moving for America… lets go!
Comment by Brent Daly — October 12, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
Igor, apparently you're referencing post # 27.
It’s interesting that global warming has become so partisan. I may not believe that the sky’s literally falling but I don’t think Mother Earth is exactly begging for more fossil fuels either. Does that make me a moderate? One inconvenient reality is that somewhere in the future, a remedy for our oil addiction will become paramount. The sooner we acquire the testicular fortitude to free ourselves from the stronghold of the oil companies, the sooner we can move ahead with this challenging task. Talking someone like Al Gore into running, who has the passion to take on the fight, is certainly more advantageous than talking someone like, um, say, Dick Cheney into running.
My meaning was that in order to free ourselves of oil dependency (be it for the environment, middle east dependency, the economy, or whatever), the last person we need in the White House is another oil man.
Feel free to take any statement I make out of context if that's needed for you but please don't reinvent them. It makes you appear, well, doubtful.
Comment by andy42302 — October 12, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
Reply to Post 11 - DFAL - "Facts About Al Gore"
"He owns 3 giant homes, one of which uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.
"He is already rich, but flies all over the world so he can make $100,000 giving 75-minute presentations followed by a teensy 10-minute Q&A.
"And you think a man of such enormous hypocrisy should be the President?"
I honestly don't see a problem here. Even if this does constitute hypocrisy, Gore does so much to raise awareness of global warming that it more than offsets any environmental harms he might personally cause. The Nobel Peace Prize commitee obviously thought so.
And arguing that Gore is a hypocrite does nothing to refute his arguments or the reality of global warming. At most it suggests that he doesn't practice what he preaches.
"These left-wingers are truly unbelievably gullible. They idolize frauds and hypocrites."
And you? What do you idealize? The current administration? Some misty-eyed view of the great Reagan era? Do you think it's better to err on the side of caution when it comes to issues of such importance as global warming, or better to keep accelerating as we head toward a giant brick wall that we can't see until it's too late?
It's clear from your scattershot ad hominem attacks on Al Gore that you've got nothing in your intellectual bank account but bounced checks.
Comment by Peter Scholtz — October 12, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
With all the talk about how Al Gore won the 2000 election because of Florida, there is a point his supporters choose to ignore: What's to say that votes in the other 49 states were counted correctly? Gore's supporters cry that every vote should be counted, and I agree. But why have they never tried to get an accurate count in any state that Gore won?
Comment by John Simmons — October 12, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
You gotta love these Gore supporter posts. Even though he's lying and wasting prodigious amounts of energy spreading his lies he's a saint to these people. It reminds me of that line from that movie, As Good As it Gets. "Go sell stupid somewhere else, we're all full up here.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 4:01 pm
What amazes me is how some types of individuals can actually look at PHOTOGRAPHS of geological features of our planet, taken years ago and again very recently and NOT observe for themselves the RADICAL changes brought about by SOMETHING.
Glacier National Park will soon be a bald muddy mountain top for future generations to wonder about- what the heck is a "glacier" anyway..?
Antarctica is melting and falling into the ocean. The Arctic icecap is almost gone. NASA photos from space show the stark contrast between how it all looked in the recent past and now.
Just look at the pictures if you can't seem to understand the SCIENCE behind what's happening.
Then ask yourselves this- is it worth taking the chance they actually might be RIGHT, just so you can continue to drive a gas-guzzling SUV..?
Meanwhile, be careful you don't drive your Hummer off the edge of the earth- it's flat, you know.
Comment by BobR — October 12, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
Robert,
I don't even know where to begin. I swear, you just write whatever jibberish that comes into your mind. I didn't call anyone a clan leader or a hick.
You wanna know who is a loser? Jerks like you who need to get some instead of sitting in their mom's basement while flaming people in cyberspace whom they've never met so they can feel like a big boy. So Robbie, do you feel like a "big boy" now?
And, oh yeah, don't bother trying to post anything back because, unlike you, I actually HAVE a life and I have better things to do then to waste any more time on you.
Comment by Maria — October 12, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Andy, most of what you said was entirely reasonable, even thought I don't agree with parts of it, but isn't it crucial to decide whether what Al Gore is saying is true or not before voting for him? Otherwise it's a pure "ends justify the means" argument.
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
Maria: You referred to John Simmons in a way that could only be interpreted as calling him a clan leader or hick. Go back and read it. Everyone else can and that makes you look like a liar although I'm sure like most liberals you will try to weasel out of it. You accuse me of flaming people? I was only responding to the fact you flamed me. Maybe you should go hide in your mother's basement, if you know who she is, and feel like a big girl.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
CahrlesEtheridge, you're a perfect example of an anti-Semite to whom Jimmy Carter appeals. Who can illustrate better what he stands for than his ardent supporters!
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
Igor, good point. A single issue doesn't, or shouldn't elect a president. My post only pertained to one and it wasn't necessarily on the environment but rather, dealing with big oil. In my opinion, the winner of that round is Al Gore. That doesn't mean I believe him on every issue. Considering the last 6.5 years, one could almost question if honesty is even relevant anymore. That's truly disturbing.
Comment by andy42302 — October 12, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=426777
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
Igor, as I'm sure you know, you and I disagree on most issues discussed here.
But on this post, #89, I agree.
I challenge those who quote some judge in England that 12 points in Gore's movie can be refuted to post the 12, and refute them. How about Rosencrap? He seems to know everything about everything.
Show us your brilliant mind Rosencrap. Post the 12 (or 9 as you said somewhere else) and give us the science behind your denial. Fat chance!
However, I am ashamed of the person with the go-back-to-Isreal comment, and condemn the sentiment behind it. Rosencrap has a right to speak his opinion; racist comments are uncalled for.
Comment by Smilinjack — October 12, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Okay Maria, let's try to be clear. I made four posts before your little rant about me. So which one got your underpants in a knot? I'd be more than happy to defend any one of my comments.
Comment by John Simmons — October 12, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
Well, Smilingjackoff, we now know you apparently know how to use a computer,but you don't know how to do research in the internet. Also, I didn't make the Israel comment even though you in your lunacy posted it to look that way. This is the last time I respond to any comment you make because you're apparently nuts. Here is a link to the original news report since you are apparently too dumb to look it up yourself. The story does not specify each of the 11 falsehoods. You can look that up yourself. Gore claimed that polar bears had drowned due to lack of ice and that comment pretty well sums up the whole movie. He's a liar and a moron. If you want to believe go ahead. But don't condemn and ridicule those who want some facts. It's so Nazi like.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=485336&in_page_id=1811
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 12, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
Robert: Can I make a suggestion? Pony up and buy that bottle of Viagra man. Its not that expensive and might give you something better to do.
I hope this attention hasn't fed your need to be loved.
Comment by Sean — October 12, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
Andy, I believe that honesty is important and relevant. We should not give up searching for it. When you see puff pieces about a candidate being skillful at avoiding tough question, voice your opposition.
Comment by Igor R. — October 12, 2007 @ 7:01 pm
Igor R.,
I would love to know what the hell you are talking about referng to Carter a an antisemite. Carter was responsible for the only and most important breakthrough in Middle east history - the settlement between Egypt and Israel. His work has always supported the existence of a free and vibrant Jewish state. His views have nevr been antisemite and he was supported and continues to be supported by the majority of the jewish lobby. To say otherwise is either a misprepresentation of reality or more probably the regurgitation of a splinter group's POV.
Liam
Comment by Liam Shannon — October 12, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
If the derisionist fans of Rovian pundits like Limbaugh, Beck, and O'Reilly have the nerve to call Mr. Gore a hypocrite they reveal themselves to have the most constricted mental functions on this planet.
Mr. Gore's recent "Assault on Reason" demonstrates an understanding of the true depravity and threat to our national identity that these crude simpletons have produced. None of the current candidates have named their royalist sense of priviledge, their "above the law" pretentions, for the dangerous assault that it is, none as well as Mr. Gore does in "Assault on Reason".
Next should be the Pulitzer.
Comment by Steven N — October 13, 2007 @ 8:11 am
Sean: Thanks for the suggestion. Now, you can take your meds to control that anger thing.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 13, 2007 @ 8:36 am
You got me. I am angry and I don't want to control it with drugs, the likes of which Mr. Limbaugh is famous for using as he spews his venom into the veins of our discourse, as he stirs up the hate of his racist audience from atop his ego reinforced soapbox.
Comment by Steven N — October 13, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
Liam, Carter compares Israel to apartheid and considers the Jews the main source of the problem there. He refuses to recognize Palestinians who kill Jewish children as murderers.
Comment by Igor R. — October 13, 2007 @ 11:37 pm
Steven, you're a nutcase spewing your own venom. Rush just states opinions about idiot liberals and the audience is conservative, which is not the same as racist.
Comment by Igor R. — October 14, 2007 @ 2:21 am
I think what most of the right-wing fanatics that are posting to this page tend to forget is that not all opinions have value or are entitled to be heard. It is a fallacy to say that opinions which are based on bigotry and close-mindedness are entitled to as much respect as the reasoned arguments of those who support caution in the face of a potential global disaster.
Comment by Pat Robertson — October 14, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Well then Pat Robertson, I must say I agree with you and will put you on ignore.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 14, 2007 @ 9:58 pm
Pat, yes, just like George Orwell noted, some are more equal than others. But really, I think your particular opinion does not deserve to be heard, becasue, well, I said so.
Comment by Igor R. — October 14, 2007 @ 10:07 pm
Al's a great guy and would be a great President, but all of the energy used here is being wasted: HE DOESN'T WANT TO RUN, LEAVE HIM ALONE! Who can blame him, he's getting a lot done now and on his own terms without having to answer to us taxpayers. That said, if you wish you could have Al, but you know you can't, put your enrgy and votes behind the only other Dem that says what he means and does what he says: VOTE KUCINICH! Kucinch doesn't just talk the talk. He walks the walk. If you don't support him, then you can just blame yourself when we get stuck with a Centrist Dem.
Comment by Dawn Lauryn — October 16, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Dawn, yes Kucinich is an honest hater of the system. Luckily the nut doesn't have prayer to win. The kooks can never figure out why everyone isn't buying their delusions.
Comment by Igor R. — October 16, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
Nobel Peace Prize, NEW Global Warming Antiperspirant, or Follow The Money
AP – Al Gore has for a long time been full of hot air. He has a vivid imagination about the world around him. His inherent mistrust of the seasons stems from an episode of the Twilight Zone, in which the Earth gets too close to the Sun. Summers are hot & sticky, and Al is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures needed to create a more effective global deodorant.
If college roommate Tommy Lee Jones, could save the City of Los Angeles from errant magma (Volcano), and the world entire from a giant cockroach (Men In Black), then certainly Al Gore deserves a prize for his initiative to combat global wetness. The same active ingredient and trusted formula that kept our leaders dry during the Cold War – now in unscented. As the planet heats up, you don’t have to! Clinton tested: guaranteed to leave no trace.
Now that Global Warming has been legitimized, a “private group” out of Monterey, California, wants to seed the North Atlantic with iron oxide pellets to help plankton absorb more carbon dioxide (greenhouse gasses). Strategy: “cleanup the planet and make a buck on the side.” Another inconvenient truth: how these Bolshevik’s misguided scam to pirate the “Peace Dividend,” sparked the worst terrorist attacks, to date, on United States soil.
So, to whom did Al Gore donate the $1.8 million dollar Nobel Prize purse? Who is the Alliance for Climate Protection? Perhaps not coincidentally, Al Gore is the founder and chairman of the § 501(c)(3) alliance. Three guesses who the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - the world’s pre-eminent scientific body (IPCC does not carry out research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena) devoted to improving our understanding of the climate crisis - a group whose members have worked tirelessly and selflessly for many years during this true planetary emergency are: http://theseedsof9-11.com
Comment by Peggy McGilligan — October 19, 2007 @ 12:19 am
I await with interest the events as they unfold. Hillary is now showing signs of weakness and certainly every democrat must now be entertaining thoughts of her electability. We'll know soon.
It's not a matter of whether a court in England says Al Gore is a liar or whether a dedicated bunch of scared republican shills can google onto every blog where Al's name is mentioned, heaping on their sophomoric assertions. Sore Loserman. It's a matter of whether Al decides to run.
I believe if he runs, he'll win. I think those terrified republican trolls know it too. That's they're trying so hard to convince themselves with their arguments, as though the talk will make a difference. It won't. It can't.
We'll know soon.
Comment by David Morton — November 3, 2007 @ 12:32 am
Ask yourselves one important question: Who among the Democrats can best stand up to the Republican attack machine? Think carefully, because this is the acid test that trumps everything else. Al Gore has proven he can stand up to them and win.
Comment by Ken Drexler — November 3, 2007 @ 10:04 pm
Hear hear!
I think Gore is our best bet. He has the knowledge about the issues and about the solutions. And he has the worldwide respect needed to begin to repair America's reputation through true leadership.
Check out my Kanye West inspired video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A58U8k6PspA
Comment by ALH — November 9, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
Mr. Rosencrans, I've been reading these columns for quite a long while and pose you a question. Why do you engage in childish name calling and derogatory remarks to those who post remarks in this column? It would seem to me that you stand against anyone who has an opinion differing from your own. I believe one of the greatest values in this country is free speech, if you don't like what someone has to say, don't listen or in this case read what they've said. Your attacks on these posters reminds me of how people attack musicians for their music or spokesman for what they say. You have the choice to listen or not, to participate or not. It is utterly amazing how someone as supposedly educated as yourself enjoys a pastime as juvenile as name calling. Your absolute one sidedness is a stark reminder to all of us that while most of us are fairly open minded and are quite willing to let others speak their peace some would rather attempt to squash any of those who's views differ from their own. And for the record, sociopath refers to someone who is anti-social or who lacks a sense of moral obligation or social conscience. By this very definition the man you herald so much fits this definition to a tee. I would never say this to President Bush as that would make me no better than you for attacking people for simply speaking their mind. I believe we're all entitled to speak our minds and we're all entitled to listen or not. He has done more to destroy the world view of our country and no matter how you'd like to argue it this is a cold hard fact. I'm sorry if it hurts your republican feelings but we are in desperate need of a change, you can't be an active participant in this world and totally disregard the opinions of every other nation on the planet. When you act in such a way and try to enforce your beliefs or system of government on another country that is imperialism plain and simple. Look it up if you need to, that's how this nation came to be so long ago. When our forefathers rose up "TOGETHER" and said we won't stand for English imperialism over us anymore and that action gave birth to one of the greatest nations in the world. Our current administration for some ungodly reason thinks there is nothing wrong with this, and people wonder why the U.S.A. is hated by Arab nations. When you invade a sovereign nation under the guise they have w.m.d's just to gain control over some of their certain natural resources and then occupy said nation with no clear plan of withdrawal and try to impose your government on said nation I would as well as most any rational person define that as American Imperialism. I don't care how you cut it, slice it or try to justify it, it sure does match what old webster has to say. As for global warming and personally I don't care for that label because it doesn't accurately define what is happening, it strikes me as rather odd that the majority of nay sayers on this call themselves conservatives. If you can't think back 20 or 30 years ago to when we were children and remember what the weather used to be like and look at it now and not think that there is at least something going on then you are acting in a very naive beyond words. The current climate change around the world is by no means unfounded or a hoax, it reminds me of those who say the moon landing was staged when if you'll aim a telescope at the moon and look you can actually see the proof. But in your defense everyone is a little naive when it comes to there beliefs, just ask any christian, muslim, jew, mormon or any other for that matter, just take your pick there are thousands. Back to the point, doing something about global climate change isn't something you should do because your government says it isn't that bad, you should do something because we are all guilty of polluting this planet in every way that could be named and it's about time we started to do something to rectify what we are doing because unless theres another earth out there that you know of we are all going to be in a lot of trouble real soon. Everyone believed the stories about cfc's and the ozone and we rectified the situation. What's so hard to believe? 6 plus billion people polluting and pillaging at will, dumping toxic substances in the worlds oceans and spewing billions of tons of industrial and automotive waste gases into the atmosphere doesn't cause some sort of negative impact, I don't but it for a minute. I think the most upsetting thing is non-believers think that since it's up for debate that we shouldn't do anything because there's nothing to fix. Cleaning up our world shouldn't be a question of global warming so much as it's the moral correct thing to do, end of discussion. Why we would continue to destroy our own natural resources at the cost of a cheap buck is beyond rational thought. Whether you believe or you don't really is a mute point, unless we do something we'll all live to see the results of our actions and the biggest losers of all will be our children and the world with which we leave them. If we could drive cars that don't pollute, have cheap solar energy and didn't have to look at bellowing smoke stacks, then how is that harmful, especially when we have the means to do it now? People lack conviction to do the right thing and will attempt to justify their wrong doings anyway they can. whether it's at someone else's expense or at a cost to us all. How much money and power is enough? Where is the accountability? People look at Al Gore and see a glimmer of hope, at least it's known that he believes it could at least be a problem. He also warned the Bush administration about an unfounded invasion into Iraq, he told them then what would happen and everyone said he was full of it. I find it amusing that exactly what he predicted came to pass and we are now stuck in a very bad situation with no real end in sight. The truly amazing thing is that the US has more wmd's than about any other nation in the free world but we want to preach to everyone else. When you give these weapons to people and train them to use them you can't bitch to much when they turn them on you. This nation needs it's own regime change, we don't really need a republican or a democrat, we need a good man or woman to take charge who is more concerned on bettering this nation instead of influencing the politics of every other. As much as you'd like to bash the man he does have some rather good ideas and he certainly couldn't do any worse than what we have seen in the last several years. Please respond as I know you will, just try to act a little more mature, you might begin to be taken seriously. Good day sir.
Comment by Sonny E. — December 13, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
Al Gore is undoubtedly a believer in rapid human-induced climate change. He has probably done more than most to bring the attendant risks to humanity to the attention of humanity than the thousands of scientists that contributed to the data and scientific case he presents so eloquently.
However, if he is sincere in wanting to bring about the sweeping change that is going to be needed to arrest humanity's slide toward catastrophe, there can't be many better places to do this than through the office of the US president. What arguments has he for not running?
Comment by Victor Luca — January 8, 2008 @ 5:08 am
"Gore is the king; he is the senior statesman of his party; he does not need to be a kingmaker."
That's right. Gore needs to be president. Nothing less. Rather than argue about whether Hillary or Obama is better positioned to win a race against McCain, why not push for a Gore/Obama ticket — a ticket that would trounce any and all competitors.
And here's the campaign song for that Gore ticket –
from Duncan Christy's song cycle "The Blue State Blues" (www.thebluestateblues.com):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXUyoBl65R0
Comment by forrest — February 9, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
[...] Re: what's going to happen at the national convention. Harry Reid says that "things are being done" to decide the presumptive nominee before the convention. What kinds of things? Some kind of deal to put one as President and one as VP, and if so, who will be on top? A dark horse, "compromise" candidate, perhaps our favorite Nobel laureate/Oscar winner Al Gore?? All the buzz on the internet indicates that many Democrats feel that he's the best hope. Part of me feels like he's so much more effective focusing just on climate change and being a true leader and visionary on that issue, but part of me gets all excited at the prospect of giving Al another shot at something that he truly deserves. If what the nation really needs after 8 years of Bush is "psychic healing" (as a friend recently told me, in support of Obama), what could possibly be more satisfying than the man that should have been President for the past 8 years?!? More articles/blogs in support of Gore can be found here, here, and here. Maybe it's just rumors, a pipe dream, a pretty way to distract us from the messiness of the primary season (and the looming possibility that neither Clinton nor Obama could beat McCain?), but the idea is quite compelling nonetheless. [...]
Pingback by “A lot has been said about politicians…some of it complimentary, but most of it accurate.” « That’s “Jane + Speak” Not “Jane’s Peak” — March 25, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
If AL GORE keep acting like a king so much her certianly needs to get crowned
Comment by Flu-Bird — December 31, 2008 @ 11:26 am