As you know, Al Gore has won the Nobel Prize along with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Share your thoughts and comments with the rest of the TPM Community.
Advertisement
Comments (141)
What a year Al Gore has had! And what an impact his work for the environment (or, as the far right would call it, the creation) has had.
Thanks to him and the UN group, more thought has been given and action taken since Earth Day was created in '69 or '70.
I haven't stopped smiling since I saw the headline this morning. And, boy, is that comedian Rush Limbaugh going to be entertaining today.
I have to say I am a little disappointed at Gore's choice of whom to give the proceeds to. I would prefer he give the money to scientists rather than publicists.
Predicting the obvious...
The vast majority of the U.S. media will make brief mention of why Gore won the Nobel then quickly shift gears to his weight, his "reinventing" himself, his presidential aspirations, maybe even his clothing...anything but Global Warming or climate change.
I'm anticipating a few very annoying and frustrating days ahead.
I understand yuor point. And I don't know much about the group. But as a general matter, I think the real danger we face at the moment is not that scientists don't have enough funding to study the climate but that there is insufficient political will to do anything about the crisis. So to the extent this group is involved in effective public education on the subject it strikes me as a good thing.
Mainstream Media Take on Al Gore
OMYGAWD!!!!
can u believe that Al Gore character??
like, he’s pretending he’s spent 30 years advocating environmental protection
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
like, he’s pretending he spent his career trying to make government more accountable and mor efficient
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
like, he’s pretending he actually won the popular vote for the presidency, and would have won the election if not for a sophisticated right wing vote-suppression vote-stealing operation ending with a decision by a right-wing Supreme Court that put ole drunk-driver in the oval ‘stead of him
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
al gore - next thing u know, he’s gonna be predtending he won the Nobel Peace Prize or something
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
what a faker…...
fat, too...not like Decider - now THERE's a real man...
I often think that the measures necessary to clean up the mess left by our current president will make the next president so unpopular that they will only serve one term. Gore's current efforts are long term and he will most likely have even greater ability to effect the debate world wide with a president sympathetic to the cause here at home. By 2012 the next step will be to implement his efforts as a world leader. Gore 2012?
I echo the comments of destor in MJ's "Draft Gore" thread -- I don't think Gore wants the presidency badly enough to draft him for it, and it would be a huge distraction and damage the campaigns of the other candidates who are already running. I am very pleased with what Gore's been doing instead of running for president, and am thrilled that he's been honored with the Peace Prize.
I'd love to be a bug on the wall at Camp Hillary Headquarters this morning. All her "inevitability" BS just went caput.
Gore has got to run for the presidency. His passion is climate change, and what better way to effect change on that front than be president of the worlds largest polluter. In the course of working on the climate change issues, imagine all the other stuff he could accomplish, especially with Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
Ding, ding, ding, al75 and carsick...you HAVE the correct answer.
Al Gore drafted by Democrats? That just ensures twelve straight months of corporate media interviews about how he can possible run the war on terror after accepting a peace prize? That would be the number one topic, and Trudy Giuliani and Gropinator Schwarzenegger would laugh at him from the RNC podium...and Chris Matthews would lisp out that the Democrats managed to find the one gayer candidate in the world than Larry Craig.
Wish I had a dime for everytime all of the above will be said...just today. I'd be rich in 24 hours.
Gore has worked very hard at getting people to recognize the seriousness of environmental issues. Given that as a matter of policy not much has changed I am not sure what success has occured from Peace Prizes used to encourage prospective policies rather than reward for acts already done.
To quote my father on hearing that Gore won the Prize "he is still a jerk." Gore should be president but he ran a terrible campaign and then all but ceded Florida to Biush. Nothing indicates that he would be a better candidate. If he isn't then he, and we, would be better off if he stays out of electoral politics and uses his fame to push the new Democratic Presdient and Congress to act.
Daniel A. Greenbaum
I hope that Gore will run for president, but even if he doesn't, perhaps this development will serve to focus more Americans (and non-Americans) on the need to take remedial steps to ameliorate climate change. It's at least as much of a threat to our security as terrorism.
As for the media reaction, I suppose that much of it will concentrate on how Hillary (and perhaps Bill) will react to it. For example, should Gore decide not to run, he may still have an impact on the nomination process with an endorsement, particularly if it's not of Hillary.
Electing Al Gore president would go a long way toward the USA regaining a leadership role in the world.
His views on the environment, peace, and diplomacy are just what American needs to combat the corporate, military state which America has become.
All of the front running candidates are already bought by the corporations.
If Al Gore is not going to run for president then he should at the very least endorse the candidate who he thinks is best for the job.
Heard outside the oval office:
"Hey! If that guy Al Gore won a Nobel prize, well, I probly outta win a two or three bell prize!"
A draft movement feels odd at this point in the process. Carter, I believe, gained much more stature as a former president than in office. Gore might just spend the next few years becoming more visible, such that either he becomes a key influencer, or does run for office in 2010 or 2012. His presence is also evolving; his appearance strikes me as that of a man at peace with himself yet focused externally. How often do you see that in politicians?
The broader concept of wait-a-little doesn't apply only to Gore. I like Obama, Richardson, and Edwards, roughly in that order, but I have a purely gut sense that Obama would do better if he first obtained some executive experience: governor, conceivably very strong Cabinet officer, special Ambassador, etc. He's young enough. Hilary worries me; my best advice to her is that she, like LBJ, really belongs in the Senate rather than the White House.
--
Howard
*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]
I don't know who the producers/writers of the copy that's read by CNN's morning anchors are, but each day, they never fail to disappoint in using manipulative language which inserts a negative and opinion-based slant on the new they're "reporting".
It's particularly egregious starting with the 9AM - 12 noon block.
In fact, mere moments ago, before throwing to a commercial, CNN's Heidi Collins -- after announcing Al Gore's winning of the Nobel Peace prize -- said (paraphrasing here):
Coming up after the break: just like cigarette boxes carry warning labels, now, so will Al Gore's movie.
Got that? The CNN anchor compared Al Gore's movie to a dangerous cancer-causing product.
I don't expect him to endorse a candidate in the primary. His cause would have nothing to gain if he made the wrong pick.
Run, Al, Run!! Or let yourself be drafted somehow. I agree. The man has his values in the right place! Talk about a "values candidate!" And remember all those powerful speeches against the war, etc!
Congratulations, Mr. Gore, for a well deserved honor!
Same comment as over on MJ's post:
Honestly, I am starting to find the "Draft Gore" movement a little unseemly. He's said over and again, he's not interested. But people are taking ads out, adding his name to ballots.
It all seems very intrusive.
Further, getting in at this point, or 6 months from now, that might even do more harm than good.
This has gone on long enough. Let's leave Al Gore alone, and let him do whatever he thinks he should do.
"Thank God George Bush is our president." -Rudy Giuliani
I don't know. The science is crucial, but it can't do much without the campaigners and popularizers. The scientists are not the ones making the decisions, and no amount of science is going to convince thick-headed politicians.
Scientists need to analyze problems and look for solutions, but politicians and voters are ultimately the ones who can effect a change.
It's good that the Nobel Peace Prize went to both the IPCC and Al Gore, as I think they can be most effective if they work together.
But you know... it might be interesting, just for once, to try having a President whose #1 objective in life isn't being a President :-)
Bingo! And by the way - guess who will be squealing the loudest about those measures ...
I'm not part of any Please-Run-Al-Gore! movement, plus, i'm Canadian, however, my biggest and not-so-secret hope is that Al Gore will throw his hat in the ring, and run for Prez.
And I still believe that he has room and time to wait and see about the Hillary factor -- particularly -- if Dems start getting buyers' remorse about Hillary, who i just don't trust, despite my being a woman -- and a feminist.
CNN (John Roberts) announced the result but tried to undermine Gore's accomplishment by referring to a judge for found seven mistakes in his book. I have not read the verdict, but the CNN bureau Chief from London made it clear that no one was going to rain on Gore's parade and that he shared the prize with a UN committee. Then John was off on a trot about the 2008 election.
Gore lost the 2000 election unfair and unsquare: it was stolen from him. But at this stage it is really surprising to find people wanting him to enter the Presidential primary. The man is way above the rough and tumble of our rather low quality campaigning. Those who support him have to ask why they as opportunistic and those they criticise.
Gore is in a great position. His influence if used judiciously can only grow. I hope he does not take bad advice and try to parlay this for the Presidency of the US. He is too late for the race. He has a greater battle ahead of him.
A source involved in Gore's past political runs told CNN that he definitely has the ambition to use the peace prize as a springboard to run for president.
But he will not run, because he won't take on the political machine assembled by Sen. Hillary Clinton, said the source. If the senator from New York had faltered at all, Gore would take a serious look at entering the race, the source said. But Gore has calculated that Clinton is unstoppable, according to the source.
Hillary is the Skunk and the Stink.
Al is just a furry little black animal with a white stripe.
This is how the Right sees the two of them.
The Right is as hungry for real change as the Left.
It is obvious who is more palatable to the Right.
A Peace Prize lets Al slide down the throat even easier.
What a shame if he does not use this to run. He is clearly the most experienced and capable of the lot, who also can immediately restore America to greatness both domestically and abroad. He also deserves to be President. Hillary does not.
The time is right for you Al. The country and the world need you.
Agreed.
I know it's too much to hope for, but wouldn't it be nice if the MSM took this occasion to point out how many things Gore was actually RIGHT about in 2000 (and since then) ... even if he did roll his eyes or sigh during the debates. Wouldn't it be great if this became the spark for elevating the electoral process away from "gotcha" and misleading spins and half truths ... toward trying to really understand the issues and the candidates instead of effectively encouraging voters to make decisions based on haircuts, "presidentialness" and the other superficial nonsense that the MSM loves to emphasize?
Josh says this in his announcement post:
And let's not discount another benefit: watching the rump of the American right detail the liberal bias of the Nobel Committee and at this point I guess the entire world. Fox News vs. the world.
They've already adopted this position, with El Baraedi's award. The UN sharing in this award will only feed the crazed wingnut view that the entire world is a leftist conspiracy.
In the US they are the 30 percenters. If you add in the population of the OECD, they're closer to the 10 percenters. It is absolutely bizarre that these kinds of fringe opinions continue to find their way into the traditional media discourse.
The governmnet provides money for research into climate change, but doesn't do much to fund awareness and is loath to apply the changes needed in society to deal with this long emerging problem. Accordingly, it seems that Gore is making the right donation decision.
Congratulations to Mr.Gore. While I applaud his recognition, to me the slap to Bushs' face this represents is more important. And I suspect to the selecting committee it did too.
Whoever gave the above comment a zero, please read the first sentence:
Mainstream Media Take on Al Gore
Obviously an attack on the media, not an attack against Gore.
I am a Democrat. I will vote Democrat. I wish I could vote for Gore for President but I don't think that will happen. Upstream on these comments, someone suggested the next President would be a 'one termer.' I agree. The doodoo this administration is leaving to the next one to straighten/clean/scrub will make it tough and unpopular for them to do it. I would like to ask, as some on the right are trying to diminish Gore's award, has there ever been a Republican Politician NOMINATED for a Nobel let alone won one? Democrats 2-Republicans 0. I could be wrong. Please correct me if I am.
why apologize? after all, gore is a politician, not god and, the last time I checked, he was producing a lot more carbon than the average american because of his jet, mansion, etc...
To boldly go...
Between this event and Evgenia Peretz' piece in last month's VF, maybe some of the MSM will take a moment and do some truth telling of their own.
Al Gore:"politician who has done the most to raise awareness about climate change"-Nobel Committee
Al Gore:"politician whose leadership was instrumental in the development of the Internet"-Vinton Cerf
Maybe Abraham Lincoln would have been. But then, he was a very different kind of Republican than the current breed.
Now, that's a troll! See the difference?
Eh? And what does his cause gain by making no pick at all? Do you think if he endorsed Obama and Clinton won, Hillary would turn away from solving the climate crisis? I know she and Bill have a reputation for getting even with people who get in their way, but that's a little extreme.
Kissinger.
I'd say his carbon production is a good investment because the bulk of it comes while he is trying to educate us.
It's even better that he also does so much to offset his production that his NET production is closer to zero than for most people.
Hmmmm. Didn't they once give the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissinger for secretly bombing and overthrowing Cambodia and Laos, prolonging the Vietnam war, selling out the Vietnamese, organizing the overthrow of the Chilean government and subsequent murder and torture of thousands, and his support of the Indonesian massacres?
Counterintuitive, that's what it is.
Congratulations to Gore.
Now, how long will it take the alleged "liberal" Main Stream Media to take up the cudgel of the right wing noise machine and start beating up on Gore, the Prize and those that bestowed the prize?
Wolf Blitzer; 'Well Dick Cheney says Gore had nothing to do with peace so the prize is unjustified'; how about that Senator Feingold?
MSNBC; 'we now go to a Representative of the Competitive Enterprise Institute to get their view on the Gore Prize.'
Russert; 'Did Gore earn the Prize" David Broder'?
Broder; 'Well, Gore came in here with Clinton and they trashed the place, and I think George Bush is well placed for a surge in the polls.'
Tucker Carlson; '(guffaw guffaw) "Ozone Man"
Al Gore won the Nobel Prize for Peace, Pat Buchanan, your view?'
Buchanan; '(snicker snicker) Gore should have won the Prize for fund raising at that Buddhist Temple. (chortle chortle)'
al75--It seems fitting that such small-minded comments are interspersed with the brayings of an ass.
Over the years, Al Gore has demonstrated judgmental shortcomings to a fare-the-well. His ill-fated decision in 2000 to eschew the support of the popular incumbent he was seemingly destined to succeed remains especially disappointing.
That said, the mind reels at the thought of what the world would be like had Gore prevailed in that corrupted election, instead of the war-mongering, double-dealing, oil addicted, climate-change-denying, megalomaniacal resource profligates that have since made such a hash out of global civilization.
The strict scientific basis for "An Inconvenient Truth" may be flawed by extraneous bits of apocrypha and hyperbole. Nevertheless, it has revealed to a world wide audience an issue that the Bush administration would have concealed.
It is easy to imagine that, had Gore won in 2000, your manly decider would still be sulking like the juvenile dullard he is, somewhere in the scrublands of Texas, instead of applying himself to a project that might make the best of a bad situation.
KUDOS AL!
Valdron,
I never understood Kissinger getting the Prize. "Counterintuitive" , yep.
Getting into the fray lessens his campaign if he states, as he does, that this is a moral issue and not a political one. Just as Bono with his AIDS in Africa cause works with the leadership before him and not the one he may wish he had, I believe Gore will stay out of the tit for tat of individual campaigns and focus on his cause.
Congratulations are in order to Mr. Gore and his associates. There is one fact about the awarding of this recognition that I would like to cite. Mr. Gore spent the better part of his public life working to bring the problem of “global warming” to the fore and in recent years has had a profound impact on the world’s understanding of this concern. It must be very satisfying to receive this ultimate in confirmations of one’s wisdom and of the value of one’s earnest efforts in the interest of humanity.
Having said that and speaking only for myself, for the next week I intend to ignore all of the other “facts” and declare a personal moratorium on reason and pragmatism. It has been a long seven years with little consolation for the abuse of politics and society that has transpired. I intend to savor this moment and indulge a fantasy. It is the fantasy of a world ruled by reason, knowledge and good manners. It is a fantasy in which the honorable man is ultimately vindicated in his honor and his intent. It is the fantasy of the exiled but rightful heir who returns to his land in laurels and, perhaps, placed in his rightful post of authority to the acclamation of the population. It is the fantasy of being granted the opportunity to successfully right previous wrongs. And it is the fantasy of the promise of sending the violators of a freedman’s rights to the low places.
Being so intoxicated I probably should not drive, operate heavy machinery or engage in political discourse. Next week I can return to the noise and detritus of our current affairs. In that world there are no heroes and justice is hard won and nothing about the future is certain. Then will be the time for the reasoned analysis of issues and pragmatic judgments of costs and benefits. But for this moment I wish things to be otherwise and I thank Mr. Gore for creating a circumstance for my self-indulgent optimism.
Unconnected thoughts. (1) Draft movements refer to a political reality long past, before candidates were chosen through so many primaries, actual election contests each of which require active hand shaking, posturing, fund raising, and a publicity machine. The only question would be whether he should run.
(2) I'd love it, as I'm a huge admirer. He would still have an uphill contest at this point, given Clinton's effort to date and anointment by the press. His only hope would be that the press love narratives they can understand, and "prize winner, movie star, and presumptive heir to the presidency challenges presumptive heir to the presidency (and a woman)" or "Has Gore changed?" is something they can relish. But it's still unlikely, and he doesn't sound interested.
(3) I'm thrilled for the prize and also for the to me unexpected inclusion of his co-winner, the panel I've looked to for measured answers now for a decade.
(4) I'm also saddened, to think that while he probably wouldn't have been able to win a Nobel Prize had he been elected, he would have done so much more for the planet. He's done a lot, but nothing compared to what Bush's inaction on climate and corporate handouts on other environmental issues have done.
(5) If he got the peace prize, does that mean Bush gets the war prize?
nor i. but i do find hysterially funny that suddenly kissinger is a disgraced entity among the wingnuts -- all in their pathetic effort to tarnish gore's winning the nobel peace prize.
I'm pretty sure al75 was using humor and imitating what the MSM and others will say in light of Gore's win.
I caught this bit at MSNBC on Gore's prize, and it made me wonder what Bill's postion was back then on Kyoto, and what Hill's is now:
"....The U.S. Senate voted against mandatory carbon reductions before the Kyoto negotiations were completed. The treaty was never presented to the Senate for ratification by the Clinton administration....."
What I find interesting is that Gore has turned the issue of global warming from being a dull, political zero of an issue to an issue of serious consideration, which I suspect is a shock to many political strategists who consider themselves pretty savvy. And this isn't the first time Al has been way ahead of the curve, as bobbleheads like Tweety would have known if they had stopped mocking Al long enough to do some fact-checking on, say for instance, how the internet became established. Gore seems to leave everyone else in the dust, but the media hasn't understood all this time that that was Al's dust. Wouldn't it be great to have a president with that quality of a mind?
It strikes me as an honor richly deserved and I could not be happier for Al Gore. I heard some idiot on the tube today say he had been looking for something to do after the 2000 election. What a load of bull that is. Gore hasn't sat around feeling sorry for himself--he's kept on keeping on, on a range of issues. He's been the most prominent leader on this issue going back 30+ years, so he's not been looking for things to do, he's been doing them all along.
I'm delighted the Nobel committee didn't buy all the garbage out there about how giving it to Gore would politicize the issue. This only further helps raise visibility on the issue and gives Gore and the many, many others doing great work on this issue even greater standing and credibility. Maybe we will begin to see some real action, or even, dare I hope for it, leadership, from our next Adminstration. Now is a good time for the media to press the Republicans in the race on what they would commit to do doing should they be elected. Get them on record, just in case the worst happens.
yeah... I WAS kidding, but I understand: we've been so saturated in the crap i was imitating, that you just can't achieve a level of sarcasm intense enough that everybody is sure you're kidding.
i was frustrated with gore in 2000, but there never was any doubt about his competence and qualifications while bush -- his ideology aside -- was an underachiever with 3 drunk driving convictions and a draft evasion record: and all Maureen Dowd,et. al could talk about was Gore's sigh and 'inventing the internet'.
If gore had gotten the office he actually won, can you imagine the level of attacks on him in the MSM now??? we know what happened with W in office. But if gore had gotten in instead - can you imagine the level of slander now? not just from FOX, but from all those 'serious' broders and courics and judy millers?
we are in the grips of a rightist movement in our society that is part conspiracy, part zeitgeist and part - cowardice? insanity?
Krugman's discussion of the 'new progressive movement' gives me hope. WE are that movement. And AL GORE is one of our great heroes today. w
whether he runs for president, or not.
whether he loses wieght or not.
no matter what his facial expression is, or what some 'journalist' hack thinks he once said.
a hero
and the purpose of heros is to inspire people like us to try to do likewise.
So, if Draft Gore succeeds would this be the first time a Nobel Laureate has been elected to Chief Executive spot? I can't think of any one, but that's not saying much.
I agree with Josh that the Peace prize argument would have been enhanced by not stealing the presidency from him. OTOH, I was sometimes glad that at least it was a Republican making all the mistakes. That's really cowardly, I know, but the Pubs still use Viet Nam against antiwar Dems. Think of the hay they would have made if 9/11 had happened on his watch.
But Gore, being less work-averse than Bush, would have read the famous pre 9/11 PDB, and, not being such good buddies with the Saudis, might have had his Customs officers actually enforcing international entry rules, in which case, some of the killers wouldn't have gotten into the US so effortlessly.
I have been on the Draft Gore bandwagon for some time, but with mixed feelings. I think it would be a good thing for America, but not so good for Gore.
Then, look how influential he's been even w/o the presidency. and yet, media dogs and right wing wing nuts try to dismiss his message by putting it down to new Presidential aspirations, and MSM has gulped it down like true pub crawlers. As President, he would, I fear, face daily savaging from the RW "noise machine."
Given all that, I wonder if he could do more for the future by focusing on climate, and leaving politics to others. Would his environmentalism actually be undermined by holding the Presidency in such a dysfunctional nation?
"You're not beat if you get up one more time than they knock you down."
John Wayne in a movie whose name I can't recall
"Gore said he would donate his share of the $1.5 million that accompanies the prize to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan nonprofit organization devoted to conveying the urgency of solving the climate crisis."
Good for Gore.
How do you define a wrong pick? An endorsement is not suposed to be your best guess as to who is going to win. It is suposed to be your support for who you think should win. It is only the corupt and gutless who give their endorsement based on what they can gain by supporting a winner.
Cause-wise, global warming as an international security issue was highlighted in a veteran Pentagon analyst's report some years back and it was pretty apocalyptic.
Stylistically, I liked Doris Lessing's response better, sort of the pomp-reduction diet comment. Wasn't she returning from a grocery run or something? I'm glad she's in the UK. Returning home to folks in trenchcoats for outspoken writers in some countries gets you executed on your doorstep.
From a personal standpoint, congratulations. I think Al Gore has taken a heck of a beating from his involvement in partisan politics, and if politics yields such exposure that one can get easily published and then win a prestigious award to redeem some of the aweful malignancy that party politics smears on people, there is some consolation there.
If Gore were a composite character from Star Trek, he'd have Spock's mind and Captain Kirk's emotions minus Kirk's philandering manner and propensity to break the prime directive at every turn (I hope).
Most people are pretty sure he won't be running for President in 2008. That's too bad. Not only would he make a great President one, it would be exciting to see him take on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards.
Talk shows and news commentators are looking at current polls that show him above Barack Obama, but a lot lower then Hillary Clinton, as a reason why Al Gore wouldn't have a chance if he tried to get in now. I disagree.
When voters are asked, who would you vote for as your Democratic nominee to run for Pres, they see Al Gore's name but they've also heard in the news that he's not running, so they end up picking someone else. This is only logical.
If voters heard news that he was actually running for President again – it’s almost assured that he'd be at least tied with Hillary, if not more popular. Sure would knock Hillary off that pedestal she’s got herself on huh?
Coonsey's View
HTTP://WWW.FREEWEBS.COM/COONSEY/
November the first is the last day to get on some of the primary ballots. He has a couple of weeks to make up his mind.
Republicans who won the Nobel Peace Prize:
Teddy Roosevelt, Elihu Root (Sec State, Senator), Charles Gates Dawes (Comproller, VP to Coolidge), Frank B. Kellogg (Sec State), but that was when Republicans were real Republicans.
By wrangling with his own demons and rising above them since conceding the 2000 presidential elections, Al Gore has demonstrated a greatness of mind and spirit that we have seen only on rare occasions even from the very best of our leaders. Just the opposite is true of those on the right who, after ascending to power, have debased themselves and this country and our global reputation by eschewing every possible opportunity to lead with the broader interests of the planet, our nation, all its people, and its founding principles in mind.
No one that I've seen since the mid-90s has succeeded in dealing effectively with the viciousness of the poisonous attacks coming from the right, nor with its iron-fisted lock on message control. No one, that is, but Al Gore during the past few years. Despite what some consider Gore's failures during the run-up to and following the 2000 vote, he has turned thee events into a triumph, not as a shrine to his own ego but on behalf of this unprecedented global emergency of climate change we have no choice but to address as a planet.
Regardless of whether he ever chooses to again run for political office, Al Gore inspires. He is the best role model we have for what it looks like and means to act, and fight, for the larger good as statesman and as a public servant.
Congratulations, Al Gore, and thank you.
I think the guys over at Powerline are so upset about this because they thought Pinochet had a lock on the prize this year.
There are plenty of GOP Nobel nominations-- hell, I heard that Rush Limbaugh's been nominated (wonder if it was written in crayon?)-- but the only winners I know of from their camp have been Henry Kissinger (ugh) and Teddy Roosevelt.
But as far as I can tell, it's been a very long time since the Republican Party has actively promoted peace except at the point of a gun, and certainly not in my lifetime.
I did a quick Blackle search and got a list of all the previous winners. What struck me in reading through them is that, by and large, I would call the winners, wait for it......... liberals.
My other impression, from el Baradei to Carter to the Quakers way back when, is that the current "conservative" party in America would view most of these people as "wrong-headed."
Peace.
Why did you downrate me? You can snark and I can't?
I hope Gore runs for prez in 2008 and I hope he announces before it is too late. Why does everyone mention his weight? Personally I WANT the happier, more at-ease, "fat" Gore! He's become an even greater man since 2000 and if that includes greater in weight, so be it.
In current polls, the "generic" Dem beats the generic Repub by a large margin. If actual names are substituted, Hillary Clinton can only manage a very small margin of victory. So who is that "generic" Democrat that people are thinking of?
I don't want to see "W" replaced by "H." Nader's famous remark about not seeing a "dime's worth" of difference between Gore and Bush will actually be true about H and any of the Repub candidates. H is our best chance for LOSING in '08.
GORE MUST RUN.
I understand one wing-nut reaction to this: "stupid! it's a PEACE prize! WHAT has Gore done to promote peace?!"
But they fail to understand that as the resources of the world get used up, wars will erupt far more often. Hopefully we won't ever know if Gore was trying to promote peace, and we won't get to the point where we are fighting over the last truffula tree, and see the wisdom in Gore's words.
I think you're reading more into my comment than was intended. Gore may well endorse a candidate. But, as someone who will strive to influence whomever wins the election, I doubt he will endorse until after the primary.
I'm afraid I have to reject the scientific consensus on global warming. You see, I flew on a plane recently, and I may be over on the square footage requirement...
New York Times is sliming Gore this morning
where 500+ comments are predominantly positive and congratulatory but they post the most viciously negative.
Funny that Mondale chose today to make his announcement of endorsement of Hillary.
They've started already, John. On CNN this morning, they were speculating that the prize wasn't really for Al Gore, it was really a rebuke to George Bush. That's how these people think.
The best of our generation.
MSNBC has two guests commenting on Gore;
1- Republican 'commentator' Joe Watkins
2- Journalist Chris Cilizza
Standard procedure for the MSM, guest mix = conservative columnists/commentators and journalists.
Fair and balanced. heh heh
By the way;
Anchor Monica Novotny posed a question; "Why doesn't Gore simply put it out there that he isn't going to run so we can stop all this speculation?" How many times must Gore say it before Novotny awakes from her stupor?
Gore remembers what the Main Stream Media did to him during his Presidential run, most of which is documented by Bob Somerby at The Daily Howler. I'm sure this is in Gore's mind when the question of him running again comes up.
Wingnuts are a mile wide and an inch deep. Their sophistication ends at; "Come Jane, see Spot run and play."
Sorry, but I don’t see the list of former winners as mostly “liberal”. Theodore Roosevelt, George Marshall (I know these go back a ways), more recently Kissinger, Le Duc Tho, Begin, Sadat, Mother Teresa, de Klerk . . . It is interesting that the right wing tends to view technocrats such as ElBaridei or Borlaug as liberal, probably their anti-intellectualism showing. Then again, many conservatives tend to view the whole idea of “Peace” as a liberal plot. Maybe they should establish a “War” prize to make things more fair and balanced.
As a scientist in a related field, I agree with those who say Gore's choice is a good one. While scientists do compete for funding, climate change research is very well funded (our funding agencies certainly have deemed it an important area of research for over 40 years). The roadblock is public opinion and political will - all of which seem to be changing, but it's time to use this momentum to keep up the work Gore's political group is doing.
Congratulations President Gore!
It's a shame that the pretender remains in your office and is not behind bars where he belongs for the crimes he committed to steal the office and those he has committed since.
Yeah, but the MSM doesn't take seriously people who invented the Internet... like Vint Cerf.
So much (positive) has been said above that I agree with, it's hard to know what else to post.
This is a happy, happy day for everyone, and especially for Al and Tipper.
Yes, congratulations, Al Gore! You absolutely rock!
Teddy Roosevelt would be a Democrat today, MHO. Maybe not the most liberal, but to the left of Joe Lieberman, for sure.
Hmmm...I've also heard on the cable news shows the complaint that if Gore was to run he would "damage the campaign" of the other candidates. When you think about it, it's a peculiar claim, and really absurd. Think about it. Should Hillary, for instance, demand that all the other candidates withdraw, because they are "damaging" her campaign by running?
And "distraction" from what, exactly?
What is the MSM so afraid of in Gore? That he might offer a real challenge to their preferred and already MSM-crowned candidate?
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
A draft [Gore] movement feels odd at this point in the process.
But why does it feel odd? We're still months out from the very first primaries, and it's more than a year before the actual general election. Could it "feel odd" because the press has already crowned Hillary the inevitable winner?
I'm not certain that Gore should run, it's just that none of the reasons that people are mentioning about why he should not seem particularly persuasive.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
Well, I'm not part of the MSM and I didn't hear this complaint from them. Who exactly is the candidate they have already crowned? Hillary?
Maybe you're right and no damage would be done. But I'm thinking that, much as I like Gore, I don't think he has even as much of a chance as Obama, who I like even more -- and the candidates whose campaigns might be damaged by Gore are not the candidacy of the current frontrunner; I think he would become the instant runner-up, and take money and attention away from everyone except Hillary.
I also feel that this is not Czechoslovakia or South Africa, and being a Nobel Laureate doesn't really help in presidential politics.
Sure, and our troops might leave Iraq sometime soon.
So what the heck are are you really trying to say? That nedbalzer is on the side of this evil plotting "MSM"? Or that he has just been brainwashed by them? If so, wow, that was fast brainwashing on the Gore Nobel issue.
C'mon, sheesh get real, the talking heads you heard on the tube are just people opining on breaking news, just like nedbalzer on this blog. You can agree with him, or not, with them or not. That's all there is, if you want to have public political commentary, that is. Everything is not a plot. Gore uses P.R., Gore uses Hollywood, Gore wins Nobel prize, people are going to speculate about him and his future and how he might affect politics. I am sure he knows all that. This does not make "them" "afraid of him." Rather, is not the speculation in all kinds of media, including blogs, of those who have gained some power above the ordinary joe in this world, just the opposite, not being afraid of them?
BTW, here's how I take it: if you don't think Gore running would damage the campaigns of the other candidates, you are basically saying that you don't think he would get a single supporter. To me, there doesn't seem to be any deep plotting against Gore in saying that he would hurt the chances of other candidates. Actually, it seems to be just the opposite, unless you're looking for conspiracies.
I'm watching CNN as I write this, and there has been pundit after pundit giving the reasons why the Gore message on climate change is flawed, and enumerating all the reasons why he should not run for president. But the awarding of the Nobel prize to a former VP of the U.S. represents an honor for our entire country. That part of it isn't really part of a political campaign at all so it's curious why the press seems to be so determined at this point to present the arguments against Gore's win of the prize.
But the many remimders about why Gore should not run (and in the hour or so I've been watching CNN there have been a multitude of them, while nothing about why he should run) cause me to ask: What are they all so worried about?
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
I saw that, Bev. There also was a Republican woman pundit who actually claimed that the Nobel Committee only awarded the prize to Gore in order to "get (media) attention for themselves."
Unbelievable.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
Two thoughts:
The rest of the world got to hold the 2000 election. It voted the way that a majority of this country did. What a different place the world would be had he won... Congratulations are well deserved.
But he's going to get slimed anyway. Article in the WaPo stating that an english court found scientific exaggerations in Gore's movie vis a vis the greenland ice caps and some other points, and ordered teachers to explain to students what the exaggerations were. It does not appear that Gore (or anyone related to the film) was involved in the case at all.
One of the nicest things that should be said about Vice President Gore is that he is not seeking the presidency. Do not get me wrong; he would make a great president. But it says something about his character that he does not NEED to be elected.
He now has a large stage and much well-deserved honor. South by Southwest
First, let me preface this comment by saying that I personally would love to see Gore want to be president again. That said, I must say what comes to mind today when I see "draft Gore" resurgent is your (meaning Josh Marshall) recent comments about Obama not giving off the impression that he really wants the presidency, isn't strongly "asking" for the job.
I am thinking that this may be what has always bothered me about draft movements: unless the draftee is being disingenous about not wanting the office, what are you going to end up getting if you have to heavily persuade a person to take that office? On the other hand, sometimes reluctant draftees into the armed forces become heroes...it also comes to mind that Bruce Willis seems to specialize in this in his movies--the guy who would rather be elsewhere being dragged into some crisis and solving it...
ooops... My bad... and my apologies.
I just get so tired of the opponents of the reality-based community, it sometimes clouds my sense of humor.
*Edited*
I have a purely gut sense that Obama would do better if he first obtained some executive experience: governor, conceivably very strong Cabinet officer, special Ambassador, etc. He's young enough. Hilary worries me; my best advice to her is that she, like LBJ, really belongs in the Senate rather than the White House.
Howard, it would be interesting to hear your take on Edwards and Biden as contenders, if you have one. And if you feel like saying so, of course...
And not to forget what this award is about even more than Gore. If half of what we think we know about global warming is true, people will look back fifty years from now on the claims that "War on Terror" was the defining challenge of this century and see it as a very sick, sad joke
It could be sicker and more ironic than even that, if the worst we believe about global warming is true. Consider the future school kid reading about the 2000 election and all the key locations in deciding the victor:
Palm Beach, Florida: Elevation 7 ft
Miami, Florida: Elevation 6 ft
Fort Lauderdale, Florida: Elevation 9 ft
Gore's Nobel Prize is giving the Forces of Wingnuttery apoplexy, and for that he should receive a Pulitzer.
Wordie, well said.
I was going to say that they attack him so fiercely when he is not President, think what they'd if they really had reason to fear him -- like if he could read their e-mail or detain them in a foreign country without benefit of attorney, charges, etc.
But I'm missing the point, in a way. He's just so fracking powerful right now, even without the presidency, he looks fair to make Big Oil and Auto's war on climate science very difficult to sustain.
Plus, This is excellent evidence that his argument in Assault on Reason, that it is not only desirable, but also possible to return to the rule of laws and reason,the meritocracy of ideas.
I think THAT'S what scares them.
yt
"You're not beat if you get up one more time than they knock you down."
John Wayne character
If it's any help, Vint did describe Gore's role to me in those (well, more extended) terms. He and I have been on a number of committees, and he was one of the advisors for my last two books.
--
Howard
*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]
Comments (141)
What a year Al Gore has had! And what an impact his work for the environment (or, as the far right would call it, the creation) has had.
Thanks to him and the UN group, more thought has been given and action taken since Earth Day was created in '69 or '70.
I haven't stopped smiling since I saw the headline this morning. And, boy, is that comedian Rush Limbaugh going to be entertaining today.
October 11, 2007 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to say I am a little disappointed at Gore's choice of whom to give the proceeds to. I would prefer he give the money to scientists rather than publicists.
October 11, 2007 10:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Predicting the obvious...
The vast majority of the U.S. media will make brief mention of why Gore won the Nobel then quickly shift gears to his weight, his "reinventing" himself, his presidential aspirations, maybe even his clothing...anything but Global Warming or climate change.
I'm anticipating a few very annoying and frustrating days ahead.
October 11, 2007 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand yuor point. And I don't know much about the group. But as a general matter, I think the real danger we face at the moment is not that scientists don't have enough funding to study the climate but that there is insufficient political will to do anything about the crisis. So to the extent this group is involved in effective public education on the subject it strikes me as a good thing.
October 11, 2007 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mainstream Media Take on Al Gore
OMYGAWD!!!!
can u believe that Al Gore character??
like, he’s pretending he’s spent 30 years advocating environmental protection
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
like, he’s pretending he spent his career trying to make government more accountable and mor efficient
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
like, he’s pretending he actually won the popular vote for the presidency, and would have won the election if not for a sophisticated right wing vote-suppression vote-stealing operation ending with a decision by a right-wing Supreme Court that put ole drunk-driver in the oval ‘stead of him
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
al gore - next thing u know, he’s gonna be predtending he won the Nobel Peace Prize or something
HAW-HAW-HAW!!!!!
what a faker…...
fat, too...not like Decider - now THERE's a real man...
October 11, 2007 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I often think that the measures necessary to clean up the mess left by our current president will make the next president so unpopular that they will only serve one term. Gore's current efforts are long term and he will most likely have even greater ability to effect the debate world wide with a president sympathetic to the cause here at home. By 2012 the next step will be to implement his efforts as a world leader. Gore 2012?
October 11, 2007 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I echo the comments of destor in MJ's "Draft Gore" thread -- I don't think Gore wants the presidency badly enough to draft him for it, and it would be a huge distraction and damage the campaigns of the other candidates who are already running. I am very pleased with what Gore's been doing instead of running for president, and am thrilled that he's been honored with the Peace Prize.
October 11, 2007 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd love to be a bug on the wall at Camp Hillary Headquarters this morning. All her "inevitability" BS just went caput.
Gore has got to run for the presidency. His passion is climate change, and what better way to effect change on that front than be president of the worlds largest polluter. In the course of working on the climate change issues, imagine all the other stuff he could accomplish, especially with Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
October 11, 2007 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ding, ding, ding, al75 and carsick...you HAVE the correct answer.
Al Gore drafted by Democrats? That just ensures twelve straight months of corporate media interviews about how he can possible run the war on terror after accepting a peace prize? That would be the number one topic, and Trudy Giuliani and Gropinator Schwarzenegger would laugh at him from the RNC podium...and Chris Matthews would lisp out that the Democrats managed to find the one gayer candidate in the world than Larry Craig.
Wish I had a dime for everytime all of the above will be said...just today. I'd be rich in 24 hours.
October 11, 2007 11:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gore has worked very hard at getting people to recognize the seriousness of environmental issues. Given that as a matter of policy not much has changed I am not sure what success has occured from Peace Prizes used to encourage prospective policies rather than reward for acts already done.
To quote my father on hearing that Gore won the Prize "he is still a jerk." Gore should be president but he ran a terrible campaign and then all but ceded Florida to Biush. Nothing indicates that he would be a better candidate. If he isn't then he, and we, would be better off if he stays out of electoral politics and uses his fame to push the new Democratic Presdient and Congress to act.
Daniel A. Greenbaum
October 11, 2007 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that Gore will run for president, but even if he doesn't, perhaps this development will serve to focus more Americans (and non-Americans) on the need to take remedial steps to ameliorate climate change. It's at least as much of a threat to our security as terrorism.
As for the media reaction, I suppose that much of it will concentrate on how Hillary (and perhaps Bill) will react to it. For example, should Gore decide not to run, he may still have an impact on the nomination process with an endorsement, particularly if it's not of Hillary.
October 11, 2007 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Electing Al Gore president would go a long way toward the USA regaining a leadership role in the world.
His views on the environment, peace, and diplomacy are just what American needs to combat the corporate, military state which America has become.
All of the front running candidates are already bought by the corporations.
October 11, 2007 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Al Gore is not going to run for president then he should at the very least endorse the candidate who he thinks is best for the job.
October 11, 2007 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heard outside the oval office:
"Hey! If that guy Al Gore won a Nobel prize, well, I probly outta win a two or three bell prize!"
October 11, 2007 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
A draft movement feels odd at this point in the process. Carter, I believe, gained much more stature as a former president than in office. Gore might just spend the next few years becoming more visible, such that either he becomes a key influencer, or does run for office in 2010 or 2012. His presence is also evolving; his appearance strikes me as that of a man at peace with himself yet focused externally. How often do you see that in politicians?
The broader concept of wait-a-little doesn't apply only to Gore. I like Obama, Richardson, and Edwards, roughly in that order, but I have a purely gut sense that Obama would do better if he first obtained some executive experience: governor, conceivably very strong Cabinet officer, special Ambassador, etc. He's young enough. Hilary worries me; my best advice to her is that she, like LBJ, really belongs in the Senate rather than the White House.
--
Howard
*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]
October 11, 2007 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know who the producers/writers of the copy that's read by CNN's morning anchors are, but each day, they never fail to disappoint in using manipulative language which inserts a negative and opinion-based slant on the new they're "reporting".
It's particularly egregious starting with the 9AM - 12 noon block.
In fact, mere moments ago, before throwing to a commercial, CNN's Heidi Collins -- after announcing Al Gore's winning of the Nobel Peace prize -- said (paraphrasing here):
Got that? The CNN anchor compared Al Gore's movie to a dangerous cancer-causing product.
October 11, 2007 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't expect him to endorse a candidate in the primary. His cause would have nothing to gain if he made the wrong pick.
October 11, 2007 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Run, Al, Run!! Or let yourself be drafted somehow. I agree. The man has his values in the right place! Talk about a "values candidate!" And remember all those powerful speeches against the war, etc!
Congratulations, Mr. Gore, for a well deserved honor!
October 11, 2007 11:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Same comment as over on MJ's post:
Honestly, I am starting to find the "Draft Gore" movement a little unseemly. He's said over and again, he's not interested. But people are taking ads out, adding his name to ballots.
It all seems very intrusive.
Further, getting in at this point, or 6 months from now, that might even do more harm than good.
This has gone on long enough. Let's leave Al Gore alone, and let him do whatever he thinks he should do.
"Thank God George Bush is our president." -Rudy Giuliani
October 11, 2007 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know. The science is crucial, but it can't do much without the campaigners and popularizers. The scientists are not the ones making the decisions, and no amount of science is going to convince thick-headed politicians.
Scientists need to analyze problems and look for solutions, but politicians and voters are ultimately the ones who can effect a change.
It's good that the Nobel Peace Prize went to both the IPCC and Al Gore, as I think they can be most effective if they work together.
October 11, 2007 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you know... it might be interesting, just for once, to try having a President whose #1 objective in life isn't being a President :-)
October 11, 2007 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo! And by the way - guess who will be squealing the loudest about those measures ...
October 11, 2007 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not part of any Please-Run-Al-Gore! movement, plus, i'm Canadian, however, my biggest and not-so-secret hope is that Al Gore will throw his hat in the ring, and run for Prez.
And I still believe that he has room and time to wait and see about the Hillary factor -- particularly -- if Dems start getting buyers' remorse about Hillary, who i just don't trust, despite my being a woman -- and a feminist.
October 11, 2007 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN (John Roberts) announced the result but tried to undermine Gore's accomplishment by referring to a judge for found seven mistakes in his book. I have not read the verdict, but the CNN bureau Chief from London made it clear that no one was going to rain on Gore's parade and that he shared the prize with a UN committee. Then John was off on a trot about the 2008 election.
Gore lost the 2000 election unfair and unsquare: it was stolen from him. But at this stage it is really surprising to find people wanting him to enter the Presidential primary. The man is way above the rough and tumble of our rather low quality campaigning. Those who support him have to ask why they as opportunistic and those they criticise.
Gore is in a great position. His influence if used judiciously can only grow. I hope he does not take bad advice and try to parlay this for the Presidency of the US. He is too late for the race. He has a greater battle ahead of him.
October 11, 2007 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
A source involved in Gore's past political runs told CNN that he definitely has the ambition to use the peace prize as a springboard to run for president.
But he will not run, because he won't take on the political machine assembled by Sen. Hillary Clinton, said the source. If the senator from New York had faltered at all, Gore would take a serious look at entering the race, the source said. But Gore has calculated that Clinton is unstoppable, according to the source.
Of course Hillary is NOT unstoppable -- Read Wolcott's Vanity Fair blog, 'Heiress Apparent Heading for a Fall?' for starters.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/blogs/wolcott/2007/10/just-as-the-met.html
In politics, anything can happen.
lomo
October 11, 2007 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is the Skunk and the Stink.
Al is just a furry little black animal with a white stripe.
This is how the Right sees the two of them.
The Right is as hungry for real change as the Left.
It is obvious who is more palatable to the Right.
A Peace Prize lets Al slide down the throat even easier.
October 12, 2007 12:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
What a shame if he does not use this to run. He is clearly the most experienced and capable of the lot, who also can immediately restore America to greatness both domestically and abroad. He also deserves to be President. Hillary does not.
The time is right for you Al. The country and the world need you.
October 12, 2007 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
I know it's too much to hope for, but wouldn't it be nice if the MSM took this occasion to point out how many things Gore was actually RIGHT about in 2000 (and since then) ... even if he did roll his eyes or sigh during the debates. Wouldn't it be great if this became the spark for elevating the electoral process away from "gotcha" and misleading spins and half truths ... toward trying to really understand the issues and the candidates instead of effectively encouraging voters to make decisions based on haircuts, "presidentialness" and the other superficial nonsense that the MSM loves to emphasize?
October 12, 2007 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Josh says this in his announcement post:
They've already adopted this position, with El Baraedi's award. The UN sharing in this award will only feed the crazed wingnut view that the entire world is a leftist conspiracy.
In the US they are the 30 percenters. If you add in the population of the OECD, they're closer to the 10 percenters. It is absolutely bizarre that these kinds of fringe opinions continue to find their way into the traditional media discourse.
October 12, 2007 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
The governmnet provides money for research into climate change, but doesn't do much to fund awareness and is loath to apply the changes needed in society to deal with this long emerging problem. Accordingly, it seems that Gore is making the right donation decision.
October 12, 2007 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations to Mr.Gore. While I applaud his recognition, to me the slap to Bushs' face this represents is more important. And I suspect to the selecting committee it did too.
October 12, 2007 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whoever gave the above comment a zero, please read the first sentence:
Obviously an attack on the media, not an attack against Gore.October 12, 2007 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a Democrat. I will vote Democrat. I wish I could vote for Gore for President but I don't think that will happen. Upstream on these comments, someone suggested the next President would be a 'one termer.' I agree. The doodoo this administration is leaving to the next one to straighten/clean/scrub will make it tough and unpopular for them to do it. I would like to ask, as some on the right are trying to diminish Gore's award, has there ever been a Republican Politician NOMINATED for a Nobel let alone won one? Democrats 2-Republicans 0. I could be wrong. Please correct me if I am.
October 12, 2007 12:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
why apologize? after all, gore is a politician, not god and, the last time I checked, he was producing a lot more carbon than the average american because of his jet, mansion, etc...
To boldly go...
October 12, 2007 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Between this event and Evgenia Peretz' piece in last month's VF, maybe some of the MSM will take a moment and do some truth telling of their own.
Al Gore:"politician who has done the most to raise awareness about climate change"-Nobel Committee
Al Gore:"politician whose leadership was instrumental in the development of the Internet"-Vinton Cerf
October 12, 2007 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe Abraham Lincoln would have been. But then, he was a very different kind of Republican than the current breed.
October 12, 2007 12:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now, that's a troll! See the difference?
October 12, 2007 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eh? And what does his cause gain by making no pick at all? Do you think if he endorsed Obama and Clinton won, Hillary would turn away from solving the climate crisis? I know she and Bill have a reputation for getting even with people who get in their way, but that's a little extreme.
October 12, 2007 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kissinger.
October 12, 2007 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say his carbon production is a good investment because the bulk of it comes while he is trying to educate us.
It's even better that he also does so much to offset his production that his NET production is closer to zero than for most people.
October 12, 2007 12:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmmm. Didn't they once give the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissinger for secretly bombing and overthrowing Cambodia and Laos, prolonging the Vietnam war, selling out the Vietnamese, organizing the overthrow of the Chilean government and subsequent murder and torture of thousands, and his support of the Indonesian massacres?
Counterintuitive, that's what it is.
October 12, 2007 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations to Gore.
Now, how long will it take the alleged "liberal" Main Stream Media to take up the cudgel of the right wing noise machine and start beating up on Gore, the Prize and those that bestowed the prize?
Wolf Blitzer; 'Well Dick Cheney says Gore had nothing to do with peace so the prize is unjustified'; how about that Senator Feingold?
MSNBC; 'we now go to a Representative of the Competitive Enterprise Institute to get their view on the Gore Prize.'
Russert; 'Did Gore earn the Prize" David Broder'?
Broder; 'Well, Gore came in here with Clinton and they trashed the place, and I think George Bush is well placed for a surge in the polls.'
Tucker Carlson; '(guffaw guffaw) "Ozone Man"
Al Gore won the Nobel Prize for Peace, Pat Buchanan, your view?'
Buchanan; '(snicker snicker) Gore should have won the Prize for fund raising at that Buddhist Temple. (chortle chortle)'
October 12, 2007 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
October 12, 2007 12:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Valdron,
I never understood Kissinger getting the Prize. "Counterintuitive" , yep.
October 12, 2007 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Getting into the fray lessens his campaign if he states, as he does, that this is a moral issue and not a political one. Just as Bono with his AIDS in Africa cause works with the leadership before him and not the one he may wish he had, I believe Gore will stay out of the tit for tat of individual campaigns and focus on his cause.
October 12, 2007 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations are in order to Mr. Gore and his associates. There is one fact about the awarding of this recognition that I would like to cite. Mr. Gore spent the better part of his public life working to bring the problem of “global warming” to the fore and in recent years has had a profound impact on the world’s understanding of this concern. It must be very satisfying to receive this ultimate in confirmations of one’s wisdom and of the value of one’s earnest efforts in the interest of humanity.
Having said that and speaking only for myself, for the next week I intend to ignore all of the other “facts” and declare a personal moratorium on reason and pragmatism. It has been a long seven years with little consolation for the abuse of politics and society that has transpired. I intend to savor this moment and indulge a fantasy. It is the fantasy of a world ruled by reason, knowledge and good manners. It is a fantasy in which the honorable man is ultimately vindicated in his honor and his intent. It is the fantasy of the exiled but rightful heir who returns to his land in laurels and, perhaps, placed in his rightful post of authority to the acclamation of the population. It is the fantasy of being granted the opportunity to successfully right previous wrongs. And it is the fantasy of the promise of sending the violators of a freedman’s rights to the low places.
Being so intoxicated I probably should not drive, operate heavy machinery or engage in political discourse. Next week I can return to the noise and detritus of our current affairs. In that world there are no heroes and justice is hard won and nothing about the future is certain. Then will be the time for the reasoned analysis of issues and pragmatic judgments of costs and benefits. But for this moment I wish things to be otherwise and I thank Mr. Gore for creating a circumstance for my self-indulgent optimism.
October 12, 2007 12:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unconnected thoughts. (1) Draft movements refer to a political reality long past, before candidates were chosen through so many primaries, actual election contests each of which require active hand shaking, posturing, fund raising, and a publicity machine. The only question would be whether he should run.
(2) I'd love it, as I'm a huge admirer. He would still have an uphill contest at this point, given Clinton's effort to date and anointment by the press. His only hope would be that the press love narratives they can understand, and "prize winner, movie star, and presumptive heir to the presidency challenges presumptive heir to the presidency (and a woman)" or "Has Gore changed?" is something they can relish. But it's still unlikely, and he doesn't sound interested.
(3) I'm thrilled for the prize and also for the to me unexpected inclusion of his co-winner, the panel I've looked to for measured answers now for a decade.
(4) I'm also saddened, to think that while he probably wouldn't have been able to win a Nobel Prize had he been elected, he would have done so much more for the planet. He's done a lot, but nothing compared to what Bush's inaction on climate and corporate handouts on other environmental issues have done.
(5) If he got the peace prize, does that mean Bush gets the war prize?
John
http://www.haberarts.com/
October 12, 2007 12:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
nor i. but i do find hysterially funny that suddenly kissinger is a disgraced entity among the wingnuts -- all in their pathetic effort to tarnish gore's winning the nobel peace prize.
October 12, 2007 12:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pretty sure al75 was using humor and imitating what the MSM and others will say in light of Gore's win.
October 12, 2007 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I caught this bit at MSNBC on Gore's prize, and it made me wonder what Bill's postion was back then on Kyoto, and what Hill's is now:
"....The U.S. Senate voted against mandatory carbon reductions before the Kyoto negotiations were completed. The treaty was never presented to the Senate for ratification by the Clinton administration....."
What I find interesting is that Gore has turned the issue of global warming from being a dull, political zero of an issue to an issue of serious consideration, which I suspect is a shock to many political strategists who consider themselves pretty savvy. And this isn't the first time Al has been way ahead of the curve, as bobbleheads like Tweety would have known if they had stopped mocking Al long enough to do some fact-checking on, say for instance, how the internet became established. Gore seems to leave everyone else in the dust, but the media hasn't understood all this time that that was Al's dust. Wouldn't it be great to have a president with that quality of a mind?
October 12, 2007 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
It strikes me as an honor richly deserved and I could not be happier for Al Gore. I heard some idiot on the tube today say he had been looking for something to do after the 2000 election. What a load of bull that is. Gore hasn't sat around feeling sorry for himself--he's kept on keeping on, on a range of issues. He's been the most prominent leader on this issue going back 30+ years, so he's not been looking for things to do, he's been doing them all along.
I'm delighted the Nobel committee didn't buy all the garbage out there about how giving it to Gore would politicize the issue. This only further helps raise visibility on the issue and gives Gore and the many, many others doing great work on this issue even greater standing and credibility. Maybe we will begin to see some real action, or even, dare I hope for it, leadership, from our next Adminstration. Now is a good time for the media to press the Republicans in the race on what they would commit to do doing should they be elected. Get them on record, just in case the worst happens.
October 12, 2007 1:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
yeah... I WAS kidding, but I understand: we've been so saturated in the crap i was imitating, that you just can't achieve a level of sarcasm intense enough that everybody is sure you're kidding.
i was frustrated with gore in 2000, but there never was any doubt about his competence and qualifications while bush -- his ideology aside -- was an underachiever with 3 drunk driving convictions and a draft evasion record: and all Maureen Dowd,et. al could talk about was Gore's sigh and 'inventing the internet'.
If gore had gotten the office he actually won, can you imagine the level of attacks on him in the MSM now??? we know what happened with W in office. But if gore had gotten in instead - can you imagine the level of slander now? not just from FOX, but from all those 'serious' broders and courics and judy millers?
we are in the grips of a rightist movement in our society that is part conspiracy, part zeitgeist and part - cowardice? insanity?
Krugman's discussion of the 'new progressive movement' gives me hope. WE are that movement. And AL GORE is one of our great heroes today. w
whether he runs for president, or not.
whether he loses wieght or not.
no matter what his facial expression is, or what some 'journalist' hack thinks he once said.
a hero
and the purpose of heros is to inspire people like us to try to do likewise.
October 12, 2007 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
So, if Draft Gore succeeds would this be the first time a Nobel Laureate has been elected to Chief Executive spot? I can't think of any one, but that's not saying much.
I agree with Josh that the Peace prize argument would have been enhanced by not stealing the presidency from him. OTOH, I was sometimes glad that at least it was a Republican making all the mistakes. That's really cowardly, I know, but the Pubs still use Viet Nam against antiwar Dems. Think of the hay they would have made if 9/11 had happened on his watch.
But Gore, being less work-averse than Bush, would have read the famous pre 9/11 PDB, and, not being such good buddies with the Saudis, might have had his Customs officers actually enforcing international entry rules, in which case, some of the killers wouldn't have gotten into the US so effortlessly.
I have been on the Draft Gore bandwagon for some time, but with mixed feelings. I think it would be a good thing for America, but not so good for Gore.
Then, look how influential he's been even w/o the presidency. and yet, media dogs and right wing wing nuts try to dismiss his message by putting it down to new Presidential aspirations, and MSM has gulped it down like true pub crawlers. As President, he would, I fear, face daily savaging from the RW "noise machine."
Given all that, I wonder if he could do more for the future by focusing on climate, and leaving politics to others. Would his environmentalism actually be undermined by holding the Presidency in such a dysfunctional nation?
"You're not beat if you get up one more time than they knock you down."
John Wayne in a movie whose name I can't recall
October 12, 2007 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Gore said he would donate his share of the $1.5 million that accompanies the prize to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan nonprofit organization devoted to conveying the urgency of solving the climate crisis."
Good for Gore.
October 12, 2007 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
How do you define a wrong pick? An endorsement is not suposed to be your best guess as to who is going to win. It is suposed to be your support for who you think should win. It is only the corupt and gutless who give their endorsement based on what they can gain by supporting a winner.
October 12, 2007 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cause-wise, global warming as an international security issue was highlighted in a veteran Pentagon analyst's report some years back and it was pretty apocalyptic.
Stylistically, I liked Doris Lessing's response better, sort of the pomp-reduction diet comment. Wasn't she returning from a grocery run or something? I'm glad she's in the UK. Returning home to folks in trenchcoats for outspoken writers in some countries gets you executed on your doorstep.
From a personal standpoint, congratulations. I think Al Gore has taken a heck of a beating from his involvement in partisan politics, and if politics yields such exposure that one can get easily published and then win a prestigious award to redeem some of the aweful malignancy that party politics smears on people, there is some consolation there.
If Gore were a composite character from Star Trek, he'd have Spock's mind and Captain Kirk's emotions minus Kirk's philandering manner and propensity to break the prime directive at every turn (I hope).
October 12, 2007 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Most people are pretty sure he won't be running for President in 2008. That's too bad. Not only would he make a great President one, it would be exciting to see him take on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards.
Talk shows and news commentators are looking at current polls that show him above Barack Obama, but a lot lower then Hillary Clinton, as a reason why Al Gore wouldn't have a chance if he tried to get in now. I disagree.
When voters are asked, who would you vote for as your Democratic nominee to run for Pres, they see Al Gore's name but they've also heard in the news that he's not running, so they end up picking someone else. This is only logical.
If voters heard news that he was actually running for President again – it’s almost assured that he'd be at least tied with Hillary, if not more popular. Sure would knock Hillary off that pedestal she’s got herself on huh?
Coonsey's View
HTTP://WWW.FREEWEBS.COM/COONSEY/
October 12, 2007 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
November the first is the last day to get on some of the primary ballots. He has a couple of weeks to make up his mind.
October 12, 2007 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans who won the Nobel Peace Prize:
Teddy Roosevelt, Elihu Root (Sec State, Senator), Charles Gates Dawes (Comproller, VP to Coolidge), Frank B. Kellogg (Sec State), but that was when Republicans were real Republicans.
October 12, 2007 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
By wrangling with his own demons and rising above them since conceding the 2000 presidential elections, Al Gore has demonstrated a greatness of mind and spirit that we have seen only on rare occasions even from the very best of our leaders. Just the opposite is true of those on the right who, after ascending to power, have debased themselves and this country and our global reputation by eschewing every possible opportunity to lead with the broader interests of the planet, our nation, all its people, and its founding principles in mind.
No one that I've seen since the mid-90s has succeeded in dealing effectively with the viciousness of the poisonous attacks coming from the right, nor with its iron-fisted lock on message control. No one, that is, but Al Gore during the past few years. Despite what some consider Gore's failures during the run-up to and following the 2000 vote, he has turned thee events into a triumph, not as a shrine to his own ego but on behalf of this unprecedented global emergency of climate change we have no choice but to address as a planet.
Regardless of whether he ever chooses to again run for political office, Al Gore inspires. He is the best role model we have for what it looks like and means to act, and fight, for the larger good as statesman and as a public servant.
Congratulations, Al Gore, and thank you.
October 12, 2007 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the guys over at Powerline are so upset about this because they thought Pinochet had a lock on the prize this year.
October 12, 2007 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are plenty of GOP Nobel nominations-- hell, I heard that Rush Limbaugh's been nominated (wonder if it was written in crayon?)-- but the only winners I know of from their camp have been Henry Kissinger (ugh) and Teddy Roosevelt.
But as far as I can tell, it's been a very long time since the Republican Party has actively promoted peace except at the point of a gun, and certainly not in my lifetime.
October 12, 2007 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I did a quick Blackle search and got a list of all the previous winners. What struck me in reading through them is that, by and large, I would call the winners, wait for it......... liberals.
My other impression, from el Baradei to Carter to the Quakers way back when, is that the current "conservative" party in America would view most of these people as "wrong-headed."
Peace.
October 12, 2007 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why did you downrate me? You can snark and I can't?
October 12, 2007 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Gore runs for prez in 2008 and I hope he announces before it is too late. Why does everyone mention his weight? Personally I WANT the happier, more at-ease, "fat" Gore! He's become an even greater man since 2000 and if that includes greater in weight, so be it.
In current polls, the "generic" Dem beats the generic Repub by a large margin. If actual names are substituted, Hillary Clinton can only manage a very small margin of victory. So who is that "generic" Democrat that people are thinking of?
I don't want to see "W" replaced by "H." Nader's famous remark about not seeing a "dime's worth" of difference between Gore and Bush will actually be true about H and any of the Repub candidates. H is our best chance for LOSING in '08.
GORE MUST RUN.
October 12, 2007 1:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I understand one wing-nut reaction to this: "stupid! it's a PEACE prize! WHAT has Gore done to promote peace?!"
But they fail to understand that as the resources of the world get used up, wars will erupt far more often. Hopefully we won't ever know if Gore was trying to promote peace, and we won't get to the point where we are fighting over the last truffula tree, and see the wisdom in Gore's words.
October 12, 2007 1:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're reading more into my comment than was intended. Gore may well endorse a candidate. But, as someone who will strive to influence whomever wins the election, I doubt he will endorse until after the primary.
October 12, 2007 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm afraid I have to reject the scientific consensus on global warming. You see, I flew on a plane recently, and I may be over on the square footage requirement...
October 12, 2007 1:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
New York Times is sliming Gore this morning
where 500+ comments are predominantly positive and congratulatory but they post the most viciously negative.
October 12, 2007 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Funny that Mondale chose today to make his announcement of endorsement of Hillary.
October 12, 2007 2:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
They've started already, John. On CNN this morning, they were speculating that the prize wasn't really for Al Gore, it was really a rebuke to George Bush. That's how these people think.
October 12, 2007 2:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
The best of our generation.
October 12, 2007 2:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
MSNBC has two guests commenting on Gore;
1- Republican 'commentator' Joe Watkins
2- Journalist Chris Cilizza
Standard procedure for the MSM, guest mix = conservative columnists/commentators and journalists.
Fair and balanced. heh heh
By the way;
Anchor Monica Novotny posed a question; "Why doesn't Gore simply put it out there that he isn't going to run so we can stop all this speculation?" How many times must Gore say it before Novotny awakes from her stupor?
Gore remembers what the Main Stream Media did to him during his Presidential run, most of which is documented by Bob Somerby at The Daily Howler. I'm sure this is in Gore's mind when the question of him running again comes up.
October 12, 2007 2:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wingnuts are a mile wide and an inch deep. Their sophistication ends at; "Come Jane, see Spot run and play."
October 12, 2007 2:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but I don’t see the list of former winners as mostly “liberal”. Theodore Roosevelt, George Marshall (I know these go back a ways), more recently Kissinger, Le Duc Tho, Begin, Sadat, Mother Teresa, de Klerk . . . It is interesting that the right wing tends to view technocrats such as ElBaridei or Borlaug as liberal, probably their anti-intellectualism showing. Then again, many conservatives tend to view the whole idea of “Peace” as a liberal plot. Maybe they should establish a “War” prize to make things more fair and balanced.
October 12, 2007 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
As a scientist in a related field, I agree with those who say Gore's choice is a good one. While scientists do compete for funding, climate change research is very well funded (our funding agencies certainly have deemed it an important area of research for over 40 years). The roadblock is public opinion and political will - all of which seem to be changing, but it's time to use this momentum to keep up the work Gore's political group is doing.
October 12, 2007 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations President Gore!
It's a shame that the pretender remains in your office and is not behind bars where he belongs for the crimes he committed to steal the office and those he has committed since.
October 12, 2007 2:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but the MSM doesn't take seriously people who invented the Internet... like Vint Cerf.
October 12, 2007 2:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
So much (positive) has been said above that I agree with, it's hard to know what else to post.
This is a happy, happy day for everyone, and especially for Al and Tipper.
Yes, congratulations, Al Gore! You absolutely rock!
October 12, 2007 3:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Teddy Roosevelt would be a Democrat today, MHO. Maybe not the most liberal, but to the left of Joe Lieberman, for sure.
aMike
October 12, 2007 3:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm...I've also heard on the cable news shows the complaint that if Gore was to run he would "damage the campaign" of the other candidates. When you think about it, it's a peculiar claim, and really absurd. Think about it. Should Hillary, for instance, demand that all the other candidates withdraw, because they are "damaging" her campaign by running?
And "distraction" from what, exactly?
What is the MSM so afraid of in Gore? That he might offer a real challenge to their preferred and already MSM-crowned candidate?
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
October 12, 2007 3:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
But why does it feel odd? We're still months out from the very first primaries, and it's more than a year before the actual general election. Could it "feel odd" because the press has already crowned Hillary the inevitable winner?
I'm not certain that Gore should run, it's just that none of the reasons that people are mentioning about why he should not seem particularly persuasive.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
October 12, 2007 3:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'm not part of the MSM and I didn't hear this complaint from them. Who exactly is the candidate they have already crowned? Hillary?
Maybe you're right and no damage would be done. But I'm thinking that, much as I like Gore, I don't think he has even as much of a chance as Obama, who I like even more -- and the candidates whose campaigns might be damaged by Gore are not the candidacy of the current frontrunner; I think he would become the instant runner-up, and take money and attention away from everyone except Hillary.
I also feel that this is not Czechoslovakia or South Africa, and being a Nobel Laureate doesn't really help in presidential politics.
October 12, 2007 3:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, and our troops might leave Iraq sometime soon.
October 12, 2007 3:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
So what the heck are are you really trying to say? That nedbalzer is on the side of this evil plotting "MSM"? Or that he has just been brainwashed by them? If so, wow, that was fast brainwashing on the Gore Nobel issue.
C'mon, sheesh get real, the talking heads you heard on the tube are just people opining on breaking news, just like nedbalzer on this blog. You can agree with him, or not, with them or not. That's all there is, if you want to have public political commentary, that is. Everything is not a plot. Gore uses P.R., Gore uses Hollywood, Gore wins Nobel prize, people are going to speculate about him and his future and how he might affect politics. I am sure he knows all that. This does not make "them" "afraid of him." Rather, is not the speculation in all kinds of media, including blogs, of those who have gained some power above the ordinary joe in this world, just the opposite, not being afraid of them?
BTW, here's how I take it: if you don't think Gore running would damage the campaigns of the other candidates, you are basically saying that you don't think he would get a single supporter. To me, there doesn't seem to be any deep plotting against Gore in saying that he would hurt the chances of other candidates. Actually, it seems to be just the opposite, unless you're looking for conspiracies.
October 12, 2007 3:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm watching CNN as I write this, and there has been pundit after pundit giving the reasons why the Gore message on climate change is flawed, and enumerating all the reasons why he should not run for president. But the awarding of the Nobel prize to a former VP of the U.S. represents an honor for our entire country. That part of it isn't really part of a political campaign at all so it's curious why the press seems to be so determined at this point to present the arguments against Gore's win of the prize.
But the many remimders about why Gore should not run (and in the hour or so I've been watching CNN there have been a multitude of them, while nothing about why he should run) cause me to ask: What are they all so worried about?
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
October 12, 2007 3:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I saw that, Bev. There also was a Republican woman pundit who actually claimed that the Nobel Committee only awarded the prize to Gore in order to "get (media) attention for themselves."
Unbelievable.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." ~~ Abraham Maslow
October 12, 2007 3:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Two thoughts:
The rest of the world got to hold the 2000 election. It voted the way that a majority of this country did. What a different place the world would be had he won... Congratulations are well deserved.
But he's going to get slimed anyway. Article in the WaPo stating that an english court found scientific exaggerations in Gore's movie vis a vis the greenland ice caps and some other points, and ordered teachers to explain to students what the exaggerations were. It does not appear that Gore (or anyone related to the film) was involved in the case at all.
October 12, 2007 4:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
One of the nicest things that should be said about Vice President Gore is that he is not seeking the presidency. Do not get me wrong; he would make a great president. But it says something about his character that he does not NEED to be elected.
He now has a large stage and much well-deserved honor.
South by Southwest
October 12, 2007 4:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
First, let me preface this comment by saying that I personally would love to see Gore want to be president again. That said, I must say what comes to mind today when I see "draft Gore" resurgent is your (meaning Josh Marshall) recent comments about Obama not giving off the impression that he really wants the presidency, isn't strongly "asking" for the job.
I am thinking that this may be what has always bothered me about draft movements: unless the draftee is being disingenous about not wanting the office, what are you going to end up getting if you have to heavily persuade a person to take that office? On the other hand, sometimes reluctant draftees into the armed forces become heroes...it also comes to mind that Bruce Willis seems to specialize in this in his movies--the guy who would rather be elsewhere being dragged into some crisis and solving it...
October 12, 2007 4:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
ooops... My bad... and my apologies.
I just get so tired of the opponents of the reality-based community, it sometimes clouds my sense of humor.
October 12, 2007 4:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
*Edited*
I have a purely gut sense that Obama would do better if he first obtained some executive experience: governor, conceivably very strong Cabinet officer, special Ambassador, etc. He's young enough. Hilary worries me; my best advice to her is that she, like LBJ, really belongs in the Senate rather than the White House.
Howard, it would be interesting to hear your take on Edwards and Biden as contenders, if you have one. And if you feel like saying so, of course...
October 12, 2007 4:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
And not to forget what this award is about even more than Gore. If half of what we think we know about global warming is true, people will look back fifty years from now on the claims that "War on Terror" was the defining challenge of this century and see it as a very sick, sad joke
It could be sicker and more ironic than even that, if the worst we believe about global warming is true. Consider the future school kid reading about the 2000 election and all the key locations in deciding the victor:
Palm Beach, Florida: Elevation 7 ft
Miami, Florida: Elevation 6 ft
Fort Lauderdale, Florida: Elevation 9 ft
October 12, 2007 4:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gore's Nobel Prize is giving the Forces of Wingnuttery apoplexy, and for that he should receive a Pulitzer.
October 12, 2007 4:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wordie, well said.
I was going to say that they attack him so fiercely when he is not President, think what they'd if they really had reason to fear him -- like if he could read their e-mail or detain them in a foreign country without benefit of attorney, charges, etc.
But I'm missing the point, in a way. He's just so fracking powerful right now, even without the presidency, he looks fair to make Big Oil and Auto's war on climate science very difficult to sustain.
Plus, This is excellent evidence that his argument in Assault on Reason, that it is not only desirable, but also possible to return to the rule of laws and reason,the meritocracy of ideas.
I think THAT'S what scares them.
yt
"You're not beat if you get up one more time than they knock you down."
John Wayne character
October 12, 2007 4:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
If it's any help, Vint did describe Gore's role to me in those (well, more extended) terms. He and I have been on a number of committees, and he was one of the advisors for my last two books.
--
Howard
*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]
October 12, 2007 5:08 AM | Reply |