Gore: Next President Will Shift Climate

[sabra]

Source: CBS News/AP

Nobel Peace Prize Winner Says Bush Successor Will Be More Engaged In Climate Crisis

(AP) Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore said Monday he believes the next U.S. president will shift the country's course on climate change and engage in global efforts to reduce carbon emissions.

"The new president, whichever party wins the election, is likely to have to change the position on this climate crisis," Gore told The Associated Press in an interview before the Nobel Prize ceremony. "I do believe the U.S., soon, is to have a more constructive role."

Gore said it was not too late for the administration of President George W. Bush to join efforts to draft a new global treaty limiting greenhouse gas emissions.

"I have urged President Bush and his administration to be part of the world community's effort to solve this crisis," Gore said. "I hope they will change their position."

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/10/world/main3597052.shtml

[AzDar]

1. "Paging President Gore... please pick up the green courtesy phone..."

PLEASE.

[tom_paine]

2. I shall not forget that Mr. Gore abandoned us peasants to the tender mercies of BushClinton

when we need him most.

That is a tragedy for us and the world.

[goforit]

4. EXCUSE Meeee!....You the "peasants" weren't standing up for him in the streets

of Forida or Washington DC in 2000 either!!!!

We the "passive" American people ARE at fault!!!!

[tom_paine]

7. I agree that there is more share of blame to go around. You and me and all of us.

You'll get no argument from me on that. I accept my share of the responsibility.

But Mr. Gore never asked for our help (and don't get me wrong here, I am not turning on Al, I still like and respect him and wish him the very best, if he announced tomorrow I still might join his campaign) in 2000.

I remember reading an article long ago, during the Nov.-Dec. 2000 debacle that Freepers and such had staked out Gore's residence, and were screaming chants through the night, etc.

Karenina Gore or perhaps another of his daughters asked, "Where are OUR people, Daddy?"

But Gore, so the articles have said (true or not, we can see what he did), was nervous (undoubtedly Lieberman was fueling his nervous weakness by whispering Bushie poison in his ear) about bringing in counterprotestors, especially if they happened to be majority African-American, which would have overtones of racial strife, especially if conflict broke out.

So, as we are now so dreadfully accustomed to, the Democratic side abandoned the playing field to the Repugs, like we did during the Bushie-staged Brooks Brothers' Riot in 2000 where a bunch of doughy Bushie staffers stopped the vote count and assaulted a Democratic vote-counter. Ten brawny union dudes could have put a stop to that bullshit before it started just by being there, the Bushies don't fight unless they have ten to one odds and the victim has their back turned.

So, while I agree that we failed to do our duty by the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, I think you should agree that Mr. Gore did no service either in not recognizing what was going on, and making the usual Pompey vs. Caesar, German Social Democrats vs. Hitler, Allende vs. "Pincohet and the Bushies" mistake.

He never asked any citizens to go down to Florida. Not through organizations, let alone an outright public call (which I agree would probably be a last resort, though Gore never even took the first resort to get some damned concerned Democrats down there to counterbalance Bushie Stormtroopers and to keep an eye on their fascist asses).

As I said, plenty of blame to go around, but Mr. Gore has his share, as well. It is a tremendous blemish and derilection, among what has been a generally excellent life of work and public service.

It was and is a tragedy for us all.

[AlGore-08.com]

8. So... how exactly would that have changed the SCOTUS's ruling in Bush v. Gore?

We've seen time and time again over the past seven years how huge numbers of anti-war protesters in the streets of D.C. has had zero effect on national policy. Why exactly would that have been an effective strategy in 2000?

And BTW - - there were tens of thousands marching in cities around the country all during the recount and after, demanding a fair vote count. The media ignored them. The Congress ignored them. And the SCOTUS ignored them.

The folks in Congress - - especially the Senators - - received a record amount of snail and email begging them to challenge the Florida electors. But only 14 Congress folk tried to challenge the electors. (And they were all from Florida or predominantly African-American districts, where they risked voter anger by sitting on the sidelines.)

The entire American system failed in 2000. But the only one who gets any blame is Gore.

Of all the Dems running for President right now, how many of them organized marches in support of Gore? How many of them challenged the Florida electors? How many of them called press conferences to demand the record be set straight? How many of them have called for reform of the SCOTUS or impeachment of Bush?

No offense, but if your avatar is accurate, you're supporting John Edwards. What exactly did Edwards do to oppose the theft of the 2000 election? What rallies did he organize? What electors did he challenge? While Gore was speaking out against the proposed war, Edwards was becoming a co-sponsor of the IWR. While Gore was denouncing the Patriot Act, Edwards was voting for it. I could go on, but my intention is not to bash Edwards or any of the other Dems in the race.

During the past seven years, Gore has been consistently criticizing the Bush admin's policies. He was the first major Dem to oppose the Iraq invasion, giving his first speech against it almost three weeks before Congress voted on the IWR. Especially early during the Bush admin, he was one of the very few major Dems opposing Bush and the Dem party's rejection of populism in favor of "centrism".

The Dems in Congress, many of whom have actively enabled Bush, get a free pass - - some of them possibly all the way to the White House. Gore is the only Dem who gets any blame for the past seven years.

Is it any wonder that Gore isn't running now?

[tom_paine]

9. Whoa. You are attributing waaay too much Gore-hatin' to me

Did you read my post, or just see red?

I say again, if Gore runs I will likely work for his campaign. Does this mean I will still support Edwards, too?

You say, "while only Gore gets the blame."

How can you say that when the opposite, literally the opposite of that, is in the post directly above this one, I state unequivocally that we are all to blame.

Shall I say it again, we are all to blame. Yes, that is me, as well.

But the facts are the facts. We may not have done our part, but neither did our Leaders.

I know all of what Al Gore has said and done. About Iraq and consistently speaking out first and all of that, but reality is reality.

And if you think forcing a confrontation with the Brooks Brothers "Rioters", which also would have allowed the recount to move forward, espceially if those gutless Bushies backed down, then I submit that you must not have been paying attention to the benfit the Bushies got from intimidating the vote counters into halting their count.

Listen guy, you are arguing with someone who is on your side.

But I won't rewrite reality simply because Al Gore behaved with a certain deriliction of duty (which, to be fair we all share some degree of) at that time.

That's what Bushies do. And Al Gore has come up large for the American People and all of humanity on numerous occasions, can we not speak frankly about those few times when he came up small?

Especially when one of the times he came up that way happened to be at a moment of crossorads, with terrible consequences to generations unborn if we took the wrong path, for America and the world.

That is a tragedy, and that Gore's achievements should be overshadowed by this one moment, is also a tragedy and unfair.

But then, life is unfair. That's why our bank accounts have all lost 40% of their value along with the dollar (though that is simply not permitted to be discussed on the MSM, not at length nor where any more than 100,000 people can hear or see at once) even though we personally did not loot the Treasury and hollow out the economy.

If you think I am solely blaming Gore for what has happened, you are mistaken. He does share his portion of the blame, and yes, it is larger than that we ordinary citizens bear.

It goes without saying that Royal and Loyal Bushie Crminals are incomprehensibly more to blame than we who's "crime" was sitting back and letting it happen.

[krkaufman]

17. Hey, I was in the streets. But they were pretty damn empty.

Maddeningly so.

[sweetladybug]

10. tom_paine, what are you talking about? Gore never abandoned us

He could not do any more than he did. The 5 Republican Supreme Court Justice selected Bush in 2000. Gore went to the top court in our country. What more could he do? I was out in the streets in Nashville, TN raising hell. What did you do? What did most others do that voted for Gore and witness the stealing of the 2000 Presidential Election? I couldn't believe the people that did absolutely nothing except bitch a little. Getting out and doing something was just to much trouble. Now look at the shape our country is in. It's a crying shame!

[krkaufman]

18. Yep, as Gore, himself, said... he'd taken it as far as he could...

... short of violent revolution. (paraphrasing)

[tom_paine]

20. How much company would you have had on that street if Gore had ASKED for help

Like Kostunciza asked the Yugoslavian when Milosevic stolethe election there.

He could have done more than he did. Nomatter how positively I feel about Al Gore, that is the reality.

Did you read my other posts, "Daddy, where are OUR people?"

The Bushies actively called out the troops. Forgetting for a moment the felonious and nazi-like actions of the Brooks Brothers Stormtroopers, Gore did not.

I am sorry for the reality of it. I also know that, had Gore requested citizen assistance publicly (which I ahve alreday said was not the best way to go about it at that stage of the game, but it would have been better than not asking at all) or by asking through affiliated group and allies in a non-public way (as the Bushies did), how much more company would you have had on that street?

That is all I am saying. I am not excoriating Gore, I am merely pointing out that he, like so many other times we have seen since, never fully understood the evil of the Bushies, nor how far outside law and ethics they would go to seize their prize, and so he never tried to galvanize a counter from honest citizens.

I am sorry, and you can blame all of us all you want (it's redundant, though, I have posted many times that we all share the blame for what has happened), but reality is reality.

And the reality is that Gore did not ask the citizenry for help. So when the Bushie Stromtroopers, masquerading as Outraged Citizenry, mad their key move of intimidating and stopping the Miami Vote Count, there was literally no one there to stop them.

I don't know how many different ways to say it. Al Gore is a great public servant, and his work for America and humanity is now being justly rewarded. But he dropped the ball in 2000, as did we all.

That is the reality. And I say that as a Gore Supporter.

[Harper_is_Bush]

15. Your sentiment is born of spite, and it's absolutely pathetic. n/t

[tom_paine]

19. I guess you didn't read my other posts on this thread.

I like Al Gore and in spite of the fact that he was caught flat-footed by Bushie Evil (weren't we all?) in 2000, I would still drop everything to work on his campaign today, if he declared.

Yeah, that's pretty spiteful, allright.

:silly:

[krkaufman]

16. It is likely that Al feels he can do more good outside the Presidency ...

... rather than getting caught up in politics, again. He *has* been stressing the bipartisan nature of the climate crisis, and staying out of the race allows him to keep the door open to a possible Republican President in 2009 -- and even the dim son currently lounging in the White House.

If Gore were running for President, there would be ZERO chance of Bush changing his stance on climate change, as it would be viewed as a victory for Gore. Staying out of the race removes that one hurdle Bush may perceive.

[insanad]

3. Our NEXT Presidents ideas

My endorsement of any person running for a political office is hard won, especially since I mistrust most anyone who would involve themselves in something as seedy and corrupt as political power. It's with a great deal of research and gleaning from his written and spoken words as well as actual deeds and motives that I support Barack Obama. For those who are still on the fence on this absolutely vital issue, I invite you to do your own research. This article was found by merely typing in Barack Obama enviornmental policies. I'm sure the same efforts can be applied to anyones favored candidate.

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/07/30/obama_factsheet/

I saw a post a few days back from some little child that said, "Barack is boring". Boring...What kind of toddler is playing on the net when he should be potty training so he can get out of diapers and onto his colors and numbers? Barack Obama is anything but boring. He electrifies me when I hear him speak. His halting and soft tone are part of his charm. He THINKS before he speaks. That's something our "off the cuff" chimp idiot president couldn't even imagine. The only time Bush says anything mildly intelligent is when a teleprompeter or ear phone are dictating his words.

I'm in awe of Barack Obamas messages. I'm inspired to do good because of what he stands for and will emulate as a president. I'm enthused by the future of our nation and its impact on the world when he gets elected. I believe and will do all in my power to help this come to pass. Our nation needs him. I need him.Teachers need Barack Obama. Kids need Barack Obama. The world needs him to help heal and unify the great wounds and the hideous wrongs that have been inflicted on us in the last 8 years. It's up to us Americans to rise up and do our best to help elect him. Together with his leadership we can all benefit from the great things he beleives, represents and will instigate in his great legacy as president of the United States.

Every time I see Barack Obama or hear him speak I'm taken aback with how dignified, graceful, intelligent, thoughtful, strong, and capable he seems. He brought it out well on John Stewart's show when he mentioned that most intelligent people will look at the history of choices and leadership skills a person has and weigh that over the "experience" that some candidates claim. Sometimes the experience makes some politicians even more suspicious.

It infers that they've been willing to play the good ol boys game, that they'll accept graft, that they'll compromise their values to stay in the game. It's often the most experienced ones that I mistrust the most. Barack mentioned that Rumsfield and Dick Cheney had very long political careers and lists of experience, but "how'd that work out for them?" was a very telling statement.

From what I gather on the news, internet, and other media sources, very few Americans trust or believe in either of those men and even those that support Bush tend to believe that Dick Cheney and Rumsfield are very corrupt and sinister. Experience seems to equate with corruption in many cases. I'll take my chances with Barack Obama not just because of how he'll play the game in the future, but on how he's allready played the game in the past. His choices, focus, service and intellect are the very things I look for in a leader and I look forward to seeing how all those gifts will benefit all of us Americans.

A true leader is not one who bullies or manipulates people and organizations to do his bidding, or whose leadership can be purchased by special interests, or who caters to whatever the polls dictate. A true leader is one who educates himself and staff on the important issues at hand, who weighs the options and outcomes of each decision, who is willing to listen to people that he may not agree with or like and still respect their position. A good leader is able to pull together opposing sides and come to a healthy balanced compromise that benefits the most on both sides.

A good leader is one who shows grace under the constant glare of public light. A good leader is one who can motivate, inspire, and show by example the value of action and work toward a common goal. A good leader represents the best in himself/herself, and all of us in the choices to do good, say good things, act upon good instincts, and enact good laws. A good leader creates a setting where many people of diverse cultures, religions, races, and motives can come together to reach balanced treaties. A good leader will show strength of character, conviction, and universal values by his decisions, both in his personal life as well as his public life.

I believe Barack Obama has reflected every one of these traits. It's because of his past record that I believe in his future as the President of OUR United States. He represents the best in all of us and I believe he will represent our nation in the worlds arena with the grace, dignity, strength, and intellect that such a position requires. If anyone can take the bag of broken glass that will be the legacy handed to them in the coming presidency, he can. I believe he has the skills to appoint and direct the right people to help make a beautiful stained glass window of the whole mess. His integrity inspires me and I believe he represents the kind of leader America needs.

[cali]

5. I'm sure Obama will be good on climate change, but

he didn't show up for The Grist/NRDC/League of Conservation Voters/Living on Earth sponsored debate. In fact, only Edwards, Kucinich and Clinton did.

[onehandle]

6. Roadkill would be more engaged on the climate crisis than Bush. nt

[Uncle Joe]

11. Kicked and recommended for the most competent President to the job!

President Gore!:patriot:

Thanks for the thread, sabra.:thumbsup:

[sjdnb]

12. Only if it's you, Al ....

The rest of them appear too busy securing earmarks, garnering rock star status, covering their butts, etc. to do much if anything about climate change.

So, I guess, if you really think it's t-h-a-t important .....

[lutefisk]

14. That's right. He's the only one who will follow through.

And he must know that.

[karynnj]

21. That diminishes what Gore has done

He said in one of the Rolling Stone interviews that he wanted to make this a voting issue. It is too early to tell, but it looks like he has. On the Democratic side he clearly has - every Democratic candidate has said that they would take strong action and lead not obstruct on this. No Democrat could get nominated without that. This was not the case even in 2004. Kerry was by far the strongest on this, but I know of no one who has claimed that it was on the basis of this that he got the nomination. In addition to Gore, Kerry in Bali told the world that EVERY Democrat is committed to leading on this. I really doubt any could back away from the committment they will have to make in the primary. (It is ironic that with two committed environmentalist in 2000 and 2004, there is no one with a similar track record running in 2008.)

We will see in the general election whether the difference in position - which will be stark with any Republican other than McCain - if it is sufficiently strong as a voting issue.

[screennaame]

13. Ha

"I have urged President Bush and his administration to be part of the world community's effort to solve this crisis," Gore said. "I hope they will change their position."


the minute bush changes his position on greenhouse gas,
every pig in the world is going to sprout a pair wings out of their back and fly south for the winter.

[otohara]

22. Only If He's The Next President

name one republican who will do diddly squat? Dem will be so busy cleaning up Bush disaster in all areas of government, planet may be near bottom of long, long list.

[Lisa]

23. Al makes a good point -- Dubya had a legacy handed to him on a silver platter

It could have been a real Nixon-goes-to-China moment (former oil guy defuses the climate crisis) -- especially with that surge of approval after 9/11.

But he couldn't -- or wouldn't -- see the potential for this kind of change.