Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Well, that’s a relief

By
October 17, 2007

Former Vice President and newly-crowned Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore says he still does not plan to run for President.

Thank God for small favors.

After seven years of George W. Bush this nation needs a lot of things but Al Gore ain’t one of them.

Gore Says Still No Plans to RunOSLO, Norway (AP) — Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore says winning the Nobel Peace Prize has not pushed him into entering the 2008 presidential race…. [Political news from The Associated Press]

14 Responses to Well, that’s a relief

  1. Helen Rainier

    October 18, 2007 at 3:13 am

    SEAL,

    I agree with your observations about Gore. He is a person who uses his intellect and addresses problems from an analytical and logical perspective as opposed to shooting from his lip — as Dubya does.

    I did vote for Al Gore in 2000 after researching both him and Bush. I followed their various speaking engagements and watched the debates. It was clear to me that, of the two, Gore was/is much more intelligent and thoughtful in his thinking.

    This paragraph of yours was spot on: “I believe Gore was devastated in 2000. Winning the election and having it taken away from him ripped his guts out. I think he harbors a great hatred of the political system and the dishonesty so prevalent within it. That must be what has motivated him to show the world they made a mistake. He would love the country to come crawling back to him.”

    Gore has moved on to bigger and better things and has truly become a player on the world stage now. He is in a much better position now to be a respected advocate for the environment and god knows, the environment certainly needs it.

    As much as I would love to see a Gore administration, I don’t envy whoever has to come in and clean up the damage after Hurricane Dubya.

  2. SEAL

    October 18, 2007 at 4:02 am

    Helen: the problem is getting a president that wants to clean up the mess. That is not Hillary Clinton. She will govern by the polls and distract just as Bush has done with her new programs that will only add to the mess. She will change the war in Iraq and reduce the troop level but she won’t end it. She will only claim she has ended it with “our remaining troops are only there to protect our interests and train the Iraqis.” That will be a permanent 60,000 or so.

    However, she may have to end the war with Turkey Pelousy is starting. The Turks are getting ready to send troops into Iraq right now.

  3. mary cali

    October 18, 2007 at 7:46 am

    Seal

    Your analysis of Gore and Hillary may be interesting, but long on conjecture and short on facts. Gore has no stomach for a fight??? For over 20 years he has led the fight on environmental issues despite being ridiculed for his zealousness. He has been a favorite target of the rightwing who continue to mock and distort him. Remember Bush Sr. calling him Ozone Man.

    He fought for almost two months to get the vote
    recounted in Florida. He did so in the face of brutal brownshirt tactics from the rightwing who finally persuaded the MSM and public that Gore was being a “crybaby” over the election and that Gore was not allowing the country to set up the presidency.

    I can certainly understand his hesitancy about running for president. He is doing what he loves advocating for the environment and has gained some ground in that effort. I don’t pretend to get inside his head as you do, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he had PTSD regarding the 2000 election that makes him hesitant to give up his position now, go on another bruising campaign only to win the mess that Bush has left.
    Some part of him is too smart to do that.

  4. Dionysis

    October 17, 2007 at 10:26 am

    Let’s see now. Al Gore has a track record of accomplishments (not including the Rush Limbaugh-originated lie that Gore claimed to have ‘invented the internet’), including reducing the size of the federal government while VP, promoting education and of course leading the charge for many years on the global climate crisis. He is a highly respected man of accomplishment (denied only by wingnuts) who represents the good that this country is capable of. He is also someone that can win a general election (he’s done it once already). Yet Mr. Thompson states, without any reasoning offered, that this nation doesn’t need him.

    Since this is Mr. Thompson’s ‘Rant’ column, the fact that he offers no reason why this country doesn’t need Gore is irrelevant. Just like the wingnut brigade, it is sufficient to just lob out a negative. No need to actually make a cogent case (or even a weak case). Nice.

  5. Doug Thompson

    October 17, 2007 at 11:29 am

    God, I hate to debunk a partisan prejudice. No, that’s incorrect. I love to debunk partisans.

    Rush Limbaugh did not start the feeding frenzy on Gore “creating the Internet.” Gore did it himself on March 9, 1999, in an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN, when he said:

    During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

    Two days later, Declan McCullagh of Wired wrote:

    It’s a time-honored tradition for presidential hopefuls to claim credit for other people’s successes. … After Gore took credit for the Internet, …

    On March 23, McCullagh wrote:

    Al Gore’s timing was as unfortunate as his boast. Just as Republicans were beginning to eye the 2000 presidential race in earnest, the vice president offered up a whopper of a tall tale in which he claimed to have invented the Internet.

    Gore did not say he “invented the Internet.” He said he took the “initiative in creating the Internet.” McCullagh was the first to use the word “invent” and Wired is hardly a bastion of conservatism. The Republicans seized on it because it was a stupid thing for Gore to say or claim. The initiative to move what was then DARPANet from military control to the purview of the National Science Foundation actually began in the House Committee for Science & Technology and Gore was not involved.

    On October 17, 2000, McCullagh wrote in Wired:

    If it’s true that Al Gore created the Internet, then I created the “Al Gore created the Internet” story.

    By the way, this is not my “Rant” column. It is a blog that is also published on the web site. Don’t you just hate it when facts get in the way of your misconceptions?

  6. lexiedogmom

    October 17, 2007 at 10:40 am

    Lexie Homewood
    Jeez Doug, you find fault with everyone. Just who (now that Mother Theresa is dead) in your exalted opinion IS good enough to run for President?

  7. Doug Thompson

    October 17, 2007 at 10:47 am

    Regular readers of this web site know I hold most politicians in equal disdain.

    In the spirit of Diogenes, I shall continue my long, painful search for an honest politician and, like Diogenes, I know that search will most likely be in vain.

    As for Mother Theresa, the recent release of her letters reveal she wasn’t the Saint she was cracked up to be. Would have made a hell of a story.

  8. JoyfulC

    October 17, 2007 at 11:00 am

    Actually, on this one, I’ve got to agree with you, Doug. While I often agree with Mr. Gore, I don’t feel he has leadership timber. He does seem to me to be the prototypical elitist egghead liberal. Someone gave me one of his books recently, Assault On Reason, and although I usually get through books at a good pace, I’m having trouble finishing this one (or even picking it back up). Suffice to say, I find he deviates too far from reality for my taste at times.

    I also think he lacks what it takes to stand up to bullies — and a US president is going to face a lot of bullies. He failed miserably in that whole Clinton matter to defend the office of the President. You’ll note I said “the office of the President” and not Clinton — for it was no one’s job but Clinton’s to defend his own personal and private actions (if they were defensible, and if it were necessary for him to defend them in the first place). That was Gore’s moment in history. One of the big problems we have in the US is that we’ve lost respect for the office of the President — that might have something to do with the guys we’ve been getting in there, but too, it might have something to do with us as a culture. If we can’t even respect our own highest office, then how can we expect anyone else in the world to respect us? Or even like us?

    We desperately needed Gore to come forward then and put things in perspective, draw the distinction between Clinton the man and Clinton the current holder of the office of the President. He choked. And you could just see it in his face — he weenered out because he was too afraid he’d be associated with Clinton’s bad choices. He wasn’t up for the fight.

    Evidence of our total lack of respect for the office of the President can be found in various recent impeachment calls, going back to Clinton. Both Clinton and Bush were not only elected once (… okay, I’m being generous here), but re-elected. The American people had ample opportunity to “throw the bum out of office” mid-way through both presidencies, had we so chosen. But we, as a people, didn’t do that. So why put us through the shame of an impeachment, which will only hurt us as a people and damage our esteem around the world far worse than it will ever hurt the man. Presidents don’t hold office forever. Will there be more zeal to bring Bush to justice for his alleged crimes AFTER he’s out of office as there has been to do so with Clinton? Why is it that once they’re out of office, the desire for justice peters out? We Americans have really gotten into a bad rut with this one — we must respect that office IF we expect the rest of the world to respect us.

    But poor Gore is too willy-nilly to defend himself even. Our daughter recently moved to a Southern state and took up with a young Southern man — the type who is very judgmental. (We hope she’ll tire of him eventually.) The other night, she told me that they got into an argument about Gore’s carbon footprint. The boy noted that he had heard that Gore lived in a big huge mansion and used many times the national average energy for a home.

    I noted that I’d heard such arguments too — and granted, Gore doesn’t live in a pup tent and poop in the bushes. He is a former US Vice President, presidential candidate, Senator, member of the House of Representatives, and globally recognized activist. His digs must accommodate Secret Service staff and security details for various visiting dignitaries. He sort of needs a big place. But even I needed to do more research into his defense on this matter, because frankly, Gore never really met the issue head on, loud and clear.

    In doing so, my daughter and I discovered that Gore shells out extra to purchase energy from renewable resources, and presumably, he makes every effort (and then some) to practice the carbon footprint reduction steps he recommends to other homeowners. But why was his defense on this matter so wishy-washy?

    My own personal belief is because Gore is an elitist intellectual who subscribes to the theory that anyone he might have to explain himself to wouldn’t be capable of understanding anyway. This nose-held-high posture allows him to avoid ever having to do that which he lacks the courage to do: defend himself. But it also casts doubt on his ability to defend the office of the President of the United States. And since he’s already let us down once on that matter, I think it would be insane to give him another chance.

    People always daydream about how much better we’d be today if Gore had won the presidency. I assume we wouldn’t be in this mess in Iraq, but frankly, I’m not convinced we’d be so much better off.

    Whew! Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. I don’t despise Gore — and I think he’s doing good work on the global warming front. But the thought of him in the White House chills me to the bone. If there’s one thing we, as a people, need desperately to restore, it’s respect for our own offices. That’s never going to happen by electing perfect, sinless people, immune from any criticism. We’re going to have to accept the fact that our elected officials have warts — and we’re going to have to each make a personal effort to tear our eyes off those warts and focus on our future, our progress and our prosperity. It’s something that’s going to have to come from within each and every one of us — but some quality leadership and guidance would sure come in handy!

  9. ianwest

    October 17, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    Well, speaking from across the pond in the UK, I like the idea of Gore running a hell of a lot better than anyone else (except Obama, but he seems to be losing it big-time). Gore is boring but clever. I haven’t stopped wondering in the past nearly 8 years what would have happened if Bush hadn’t been allowed to steal the election in 2000. Think America would be where she is now – trapped in the quagmire of Iraq and absolutely _reviled_ throughout the world? Doubt it.

    Of course there is the small matter that under Gore’s Vice Presidency America’s CO2 emissions trebled (or is that a lie too?), but out of deference to his Nobel prize I won’t mention that. Ooops, I just did. Doh!

    Oh yeah, and some of us still haven’t forgiven Tipper for the PMRC, either…

    Ian Westbrook
    Apocalypse Times
    “The man who laughs has not yet been told the news”
    http://www.apocalypsetimes.blogspot.com/

  10. trog69

    October 17, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    No, thank you, JoyfulC. Truly a laser-beam sharp analysis. You gave me quite a bit to chew on.

  11. Janice

    October 17, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    I would vote for Al Gore, as would a whole lot of other folks. In fact, didn’t we vote him into the presidency once already? Besides, with all his faults listed above, and probably some others, I still believe he is better than the rest of the candidates. There is not one of us who has not spoken out of turn, or said something stupid – that is human nature.
    Overall, Al Gore has done a lot to promote the seriousness of global warming – and the survival of our planet. At his worst, Al Gore would be more of a leader than Bush. How about having the cup half full once in a while – it sits better than the constant half empty one.

    If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything.
    Mark Twain

  12. Cailleach

    October 17, 2007 at 5:03 pm

    Cailleach
    Doug, would you rather have Hillary? I’m a liberal Democrat and a woman, but the thought of Hillary makes me cringe. Talk about waffling and saying whatever you think pleases the electorate.

    So Gore is an intellectual? Horrors! Someone who is intelligent, knows the problems of the country and the world, sees the threat of global warming to the human race, and has ideas on how to address them? God forbid!

    Who would you want as a presidential candidate? Actually, as a resident of New Mexico, I kind of like Richardson. I don’t think he’s as honest as Gore, and he’s pushed through a couple of things I haven’t lked, but in general he’s been OK. Edwards is OK as well, but Gore is far and away the best. I dearly wish he’d run.

  13. mary cali

    October 17, 2007 at 9:57 pm

    Oh no the last person we need in the WH is an intellectual, who actually knows alot about alot of things. Someone who has been consistantly passionate about environmental issues, an increasingly important global concern. We don’t need someone who has led on this important issue and motivated others with his leadership. We don’t need someone who has world wide admiration and affection. We don’t need to refurbish America’s image afer Bush shattered it.

    Oh no, we don’t need someone with Gore’s experience and global contacts. He’s no fun at a barbecue. Probably doesn’t even drink beer.
    We elected George Bush didn’t we, the non intellectual frat guy who didn’t know a Sunni from a Shia before invading Iraq. I guess we don’t like our presidents to be smarter than we are. Well we sure got that and look where we are.

  14. SEAL

    October 18, 2007 at 2:17 am

    Gore has no stomach for a fight. If they called him up and told him his name had been put up and he was nominated, he would come and accept. He is not about to risk losing the stature he has attained by running in a primary race he could lose.

    I believe Gore was devastated in 2000. Winning the election and having it taken away from him ripped his guts out. I think he harbors a great hatred of the political system and the dishonesty so prevalent within it. That must be what has motivated him to show the world they made a mistake. He would love the country to come crawling back to him.

    Actually, he probably would make a good president, if for all the wrong reasons. Those who say he will not stand up to people are correct. But that is not his way. He would out smart them. However, being president means there will surely come a time when you must draw a line in the sand. We have one of those now. But he draws them in the wrong places and when it is not the right thing to do. Also, he uses a crooked stick.