"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"
Originally Posted by ChattyCat
I hope he decides to run for president.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw this on Yahoo's front page this morning! Will he have time to run in '08 or do you think he needs to wait for '12?
Originally Posted by Ruthla
I was thinking the same thing when I saw this on Yahoo's front page this morning! Will he have time to run in '08 or do you think he needs to wait for '12?
I totally think he could still run in 08... because the primaries haven't happened yet. I wish he would... but I sort of think he's enjoying his life now, better. None of the limitations that the'd face as being President in terms of what he could or couldn't say.
I don't know how I feel about this. I'm so grateful for his work on global warming b/c I feel like he really brought the issue into the mainstream. But I also remember some of his speeches from his 2000 presidential campaign. They didn't leave me w/ the feeling that he was a strong peacemaker.
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.
Gore repeatedly denied he has any plans to run again, but this week a group of grass-roots Democrats calling themselves "Draft Gore" took out a full-page ad in The New York Times in a bid to change his mind.
"Your country needs you now, as do your party, and the planet you are fighting so hard to save," the group said in an open letter.
"America and the Earth need a hero right now, someone who will transcend politics as usual and bring real hope to our country and to the world."
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.
This occured to me as well. It's too bad, because I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. But he's smart not to run now; it would be a waist of time and money. It's not too bad, though. He'll be 65 in four years.
Originally Posted by LoveBeads Except he already did that and won. He needs a new challenge.
Something people seem to keep forgetting...
All we will ever be able to do is to forever wonder what things would have been like NOW if only Gore had been able to take his rightfully won place as president...
Almost anybody can be nominated. You could nominate Bush for next year if you want to. Suggestions can be made by anyone. There is no list of 'official nominees' like in Oscar gala - people just guess around.
Look at the list of all the winners over the history - I fail to see any bad names there.
Originally Posted by InfoisPower
The Peace Prize has been of questionable value ever since Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Josef Stalin were nominated for it.
You can't control who nominates who. Your point would be valid if they won.
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.
This occured to me as well. It's too bad, because I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. But he's smart not to run now; it would be a waist of time and money. It's not too bad, though. He'll be 65 in four years.
On NPR, it was stated he won't run because of how much money Clinton and Obama have raised thus far, 80 million. Said he wants to be president but will wait since Clinton and Gore would share money resources.
Originally Posted by CharlieBrown
On NPR, it was stated he won't run because of how much money Clinton and Obama have raised thus far, 80 million. Said he wants to be president but will wait since Clinton and Gore would share money resources.
I think that's smart, actually. I'd hate to see him starting fights over the presidential nomination, I think he has bigger fish to fry. I'd love to see him run, though. I wonder about Clinton/Gore...
Originally Posted by earthgirl
I don't know how I feel about this. I'm so grateful for his work on global warming b/c I feel like he really brought the issue into the mainstream. But I also remember some of his speeches from his 2000 presidential campaign. They didn't leave me w/ the feeling that he was a strong peacemaker.
Go ahead, flame away.
Oh, I'm with you.
I mean, i think it's really a very very good thing that the Nobel Committee is acknowledging that global warming is a massive threat to global peace and security, because it is. and gore has crtainly done solid good work on that front. But I'm not aware, for example, of him speaking out or taking action in any concrete ways against the war on iraq or the bombing of afghanistan, for example; or having good economic/class politics...I mean, i don't hate the guy, after watching an nconvenient truth i went form being kinda meh about him to slightly liking him. But if you take away the context of global warming being a threat to peace, it doesn't make a ton of sense. to me.
BUT I wish he had gotten to be prez instead of bush, oh i wish it so bad.
Originally Posted by sadie_sabot
But I'm not aware, for example, of him speaking out or taking action in any concrete ways against the war on iraq or the bombing of afghanistan, for example; or having good economic/class politics..
Huh? Gore was one of the first major Democratic politicians to go after Dubya Inc.'s ramping up for the Iraq invasion in a September 2002 speech in San Francisco.......
Far more damaging, however, is the Administration's attack on fundamental constitutional rights. The idea that an American citizen can be imprisoned without recourse to judicial process or remedies, and that this can be done on the say-so of the President or those acting in his name, is beyond the pale.
Regarding other countries, the Administration's disdain for the views of others is well documented and need not be reviewed here. It is more important to note the consequences of an emerging national strategy that not only celebrates American strengths, but appears to be glorifying the notion of dominance. If what America represents to the world is leadership in a commonwealth of equals, then our friends are legion; if what we represent to the world is empire, then it is our enemies who will be legion.
At this fateful juncture in our history it is vital that we see clearly who are our enemies, and that we deal with them. It is also important, however, that in the process we preserve not only ourselves as individuals, but our nature as a people dedicated to the rule of law.
Moreover, if we quickly succeed in a war against the weakened and depleted fourth rate military of Iraq and then quickly abandon that nation as President Bush has abandoned Afghanistan after quickly defeating a fifth rate military there, the resulting chaos could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States than we presently face from Saddam.
Some more excerpts from Gore speeches since then....
August 7, 2003
Unfortunately, here too, every single one of these impressions turned out to be wrong. Instead of creating jobs, for example, we are losing millions of jobs -- net losses for three years in a row. That hasn't happened since the Great Depression. As I've noted before, I was the first one laid off.
And it turns out that most of the benefits actually are going to the highest income Americans, who unfortunately are the least likely group to spend money in ways that create jobs during times when the economy is weak and unemployment is rising.
And of course the budget deficits are already the biggest ever - with the worst still due to hit us. As a percentage of our economy, we've had bigger ones -- but these are by far the most dangerous we've ever had for two reasons: first, they're not temporary; they're structural and long-term; second, they are going to get even bigger just at the time when the big baby-boomer retirement surge starts.
Moreover, the global capital markets have begun to recognize the unprecedented size of this emerging fiscal catastrophe. In truth, the current Executive Branch of the U.S. Government is radically different from any since the McKinley Administration 100 years ago.
The 2001 winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics, George Akerlof, went even further last week in Germany when he told Der Spiegel, "This is the worst government the US has ever had in its more than 200 years of history...This is not normal government policy." In describing the impact of the Bush policies on America's future, Akerloff added, "What we have here is a form of looting."
How many of you, I wonder, have heard a friend or a family member in the last few years remark that it's almost as if America has entered "an alternate universe"?
I thought maybe it was an aberration when three-quarters of Americans said they believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on September 11, 2001. But more than four years later, between a third and a half still believe Saddam was personally responsible for planning and supporting the attack.
At first I thought the exhaustive, non-stop coverage of the O.J. trial was just an unfortunate excess that marked an unwelcome departure from the normal good sense and judgment of our television news media. But now we know that it was merely an early example of a new pattern of serial obsessions that periodically take over the airwaves for weeks at a time.
Are we still routinely torturing helpless prisoners, and if so, does it feel right that we as American citizens are not outraged by the practice? And does it feel right to have no ongoing discussion of whether or not this abhorrent, medieval behavior is being carried out in the name of the American people? If the gap between rich and poor is widening steadily and economic stress is mounting for low-income families, why do we seem increasingly apathetic and lethargic in our role as citizens?
On the eve of the nation's decision to invade Iraq, our longest serving senator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor asked: "Why is this chamber empty? Why are these halls silent?"
The decision that was then being considered by the Senate with virtually no meaningful debate turned out to be a fateful one. A few days ago, the former head of the National Security Agency, Retired Lt. General William Odom, said, "The invasion of Iraq, I believe, will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history."
But whether you agree with his assessment or not, Senator Byrd's question is like the others that I have just posed here: he was saying, in effect, this is strange, isn't it? Aren't we supposed to have full and vigorous debates about questions as important as the choice between war and peace?
As we begin this new year, the Executive Branch of our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of American citizens and has brazenly declared that it has the unilateral right to continue without regard to the established law enacted by Congress precisely to prevent such abuses. It is imperative that respect for the rule of law be restored in our country.
And that is why many of us have come here to Constitution Hall to sound an alarm and call upon our fellow citizens to put aside partisan differences insofar as it is possible to do so and join with us in demanding that our Constitution be defended and preserved.
It is appropriate that we make this appeal on the day our nation has set aside to honor the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who challenged America to breathe new life into our oldest values by extending its promise to all of our people.
And on this particular Martin Luther King Day, it is especially important to recall that for the last several years of his life, Dr. King was illegally wiretapped-one of hundreds of thousands of Americans whose private communications were intercepted by the U.S. government during that period.
A forum community dedicated to all mothers and inclusive family living enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about nurturing, health, behavior, housing, adopting, care, classifieds, and more!