For Progressives, Gore's the One in 2008

Gore is a lot smarter than the current president and I am more comfortable with the bulk of his uncomfortable political truths than those (that we are able to learn about) of Bush and Cheney. However, I cannot help but notice some disturbing similarities between Dubya and Al Gore. For one thing, they come from rich and powerful political dynasties. I think we would do well to end that trend.

For another, neither man is very impressive when it comes to fighting an honest and determined fight to protect the Constitution and the greater good of the common people. Books have been written about Bush's failures in this this area, but let's not forget that Gore has a history of cutting deals with the very interests he claims to be opposed to on moral grounds. And then, there was that little battle in Florida in which an election was rigged and, rather than say so, he chose to go quietly and leave us with the consequences while he took some time off to find a way to capitalize on the corrupt political connections he had preserved by so doing. And, now, he is back, ready to cut himself in, again.

No, I am not talking about his movie, his speaking tour, or even his emerging run for another shot at the White House. Those are just tactics that could lead to some icing on the cake. But the cake itself is about gaining more and longer lasting power and wealth for himself than he ever could in a government position, even president, so he has set his sights on being at the center of an energy policy that has more to do with making rich people richer than making the world safer or healthier--just like the current occupant of the White House.

Oh, sure, Al Gore cares about global warming for the right reasons. But he also cares about it for personal gain, yet he is never honest and up front about that.

Gore is founder and chairman of Generation Investment Management, LLP, one of the early leaders in creating markets for carbon offset trading. He hopes to become a carbon offset tycoon, and he can only do that if he can get the world to buy into buying and selling carbon offset credits. That is why he spent so much time on that particular subject when he was back on Capitol Hill this year.

Carbon offset credits are ripe for abuse. The standards are minimal and likely to get watered down by big, polluting industries, much as standards for "organic" food have been gutted, as time goes on. There is no proof that they work even under the best of circumstances, especially to the extent that many of the credits amount to planting trees and such, which will take decades to offset carbon emissions that are adding to a crisis today. And carbon offset credits are likely to create opportunities for gaming the system as shady accounting practices and greed lead to false claims of emissions reductions, much as Enron was able to falsify energy trades for years before the billions of dollars of fraud was exposed to the detriment of tens of thousands of victims.

If we want to really make big changes on global warming, we will need to make some tough policies and fully fund and support their enforcement. And if we want to turn the country around in many other areas, we will need someone who can take the heat, set aside their greed and self interests, and show some skill and backbone. In short, we need someone other than Gore or the other game players who are making headlines so far.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm told that Gore is "the one," the Left wants for president. But why? Gore is as much a candidate in the pocket of "big money" as are the other demo candidates. And it's a fact that Gore chose none other than Joe Lieberman to be his running mate when he opposed Bush in 2000. Lieberman could not possibly be hated more than he is, by the left. How would this indicate that Gore's is able to please the left, as a presidential candidate?


Hillary is, far and away, the preferred candidate in the race for the presidency. Whether she'll win the highest office in the land, or deserves it, remains to be seen. But I doubt that Gore will intrude on this process; though, if he did, I'd gladly throw my support behind him. But not because I'm a Leftie, but because I forgive him for his mistakes, including that he allowed Lieberman to be his VP choice in 2000, and that he is supported by corporate largesse. Faults which, up till now, the left has been unwilling, or pretended to be unwilling, to refuse to forgive, in any other dem candidate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In addition to the cogent analysis by Tad Daley in this piece I believe perhaps the most important reason NEO-GORE (YES-HE HAS FOUND HIS OWN VOICE) needs to run and be elected presisent is the following.

The nation needs desperately to expunge itself of its collective guilt for stealing the election from Mr. Gore in 2000 and handing the presidency over to an individual who almost destroyed our once great nation and ruined our reputation in the global community

Gore can restore us to greatness.

I see Gore/Obama ticket in 08- Can't possibly lose!

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton, Pa
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gore was elected twice to the Presidency. Can he run again?
If so, Re-Elect Gore in 2008!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As long as our present system of financing campaigns persists any candidate put up by either party has to be approved by the corporate establishment.

Real campaign finance reform, 100% public funding, will not be on the platform of either party's candidate, simply because this corruption keeps the corporatocracy in power.

I believe that the way for the people to gain control of our government is to act before the election to force both parties to have our issues on their platforms. The platforms are more important than the candidates.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Is there any political figure in America today who can better restore our faith in the light than Al Gore?"

What a nostalgic article. We coulda had a saint for President. Boo Hoo.

And as for "who can better restore our faith in the light...?" than our own St Paul, Al Gore? Yeah, I've a candidate: a utility worker who decides to run for President.

But seriously, Al Gore is for a carbon tax, a regressive punitive measure that sucks billions of dollars from the take home pay of utility and other average workers. Gore would launch this crushing blow to the economy even before significant alternatives to coal and gasoline exist, so we'd all be forced to give up carbon and eventually choose alternatives, when they are available. But for how many years would we suffer before alternatives are available? Al doesn't say!

Gore also claims he'll offset that carbon sales/use tax with an abolition of payroll taxes. Right. Can any sane person who reads about politics deny that Democrats are focused on taxes as the primary way to finance Medicare and Social security needs of the future?

So we'll get a carbon tax and higher payroll taxes? So much for the "party of labor". Eroding paychecks shrunk even more by sharply higher payroll and carbon taxes! We are such sinners and Al righteously is going to inflict pain on us that we so richly deserve for buying those SUVs and renting those second homes over the summer. Shades of 17th century Salem!

PS. The author is so smitten by Gore that he makes Gore into some kind of antinuclear activist. As Senator from Oak Ridge, oops, I mean Tennessee, Al was Mr. Nukie himselfie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet is supposedly "progressive" but even here the REAL progressives aren't being high-lighted. The "Blue-Dog" dems aren't going to make the drastic changes that this country (and thereby the world) needs to survive past the 21st century. Anyone that thinks carbon offsets are a solution is dreaming that the current corporations and their current stocks can co-exist with a sustainable environmental policy.

What America has created is NOT sustainable. The path we are on will lead to environmental collapse. The solution is to quit burning fossil fuels. We have the technology to go green, but the trade off is that we develop a sustainable economy, which means that we aren't constantly pumping fuel money into corporate tanks.

The solution is to have pv solar on every roof feeding the grid along with phev cars. As long as anyone in gov't is supporting coal fired power plants or subsidizing oil we will remain on the wrong path.

Perhaps Larry Page, Dr. Eric Schmidt, Shona Brown or David C. Drummond need to be encouraged to run. These people are on to the answer: http://www.google.org/recharge/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... an absolute insider who was meak and mild on every issue that would have actually cost him anything politically... until he wasn't running for any office ever again.

Give up on Al Gore already, folks. He was too much of a pansy then... he's too much of a pansy now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I really don't like to engage in the Messiah Complex that so many of my fellow Americans seem to rely on when making critical judgements. However, I did vote for Gore, and I would vote for him again..and indeed I hope that he decides to run. Just remember that any democratic candidate will have to face the slurs and arrows of the Republican machine..most notably gay marriage, abortion, troop support and flag waving over constitutional reading. Like it or not these issues will turn out the Republican fatithful as they have done before. Let the Republicans look for their Messiah, let's be practical.. First of all Al Gore must really want to run. He's no stranger to the political process, and he is still hurting from the press coverage he received during his last campaign. Things may be different, but I am one of those who believe that when push comes to shove the Bloggersphere just doesn't have the politcal muscle that TV, and talk radio have. Quite simply we're too damn intellectual and our explanations take more that a simple sound bite. John Kerry will attest to that conclusion. Blogging may be the pundit of the future, but it's not here yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore said something to the effect of: ‘to fight for the presidency would destroy peoples faith in the system’.
This must be one of the greatest political misjudgements of all time. Why would you want him for president?
That said, Hilary Clinton is unlikely to do anything to move the US into a position from where it may be able to begin to repair its deserved reputation.
The US will take generations to build any sort of position of influence or credibility, unless we are overwhelmed by a climatic disaster, which renders nations irrelevant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I really wonder about those polls. I just saw a poll that says Obama and Hillary are almost neck and neck. A poll is only as good as the sample it is taken from. Perhaps some of these polls are skewed to create the bandwagon effect - the phenomena where people have a tendency to go with the winner. I have a great deal of respect for Gore. He could have been very bitter. Instead he chose service to humanity instead of brooding. Hillary won't be getting my vote under any circumstances.

"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there MIGHT still be time."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore is no better or worse than any of the current candidates in the democratic party. Kucinich is the only one that stands out and the magical and mystical little man from Ohio has even less of a chance of getting the nomination than my preferred political fiction, Ron Paul.

If you want to pour your hearts and souls into this election and support the global warming guy, the black guy, the female guy, or the good-looking guy go right ahead. The nation will keep heading in precisely the same direction it is now no matter which of those clowns wins the primary. Then we'll have ourselves a nice general election where we get to choose between an asshole and a dick. No matter the outcome we are guaranteed to either get fucked or shit on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How George W. stole the 2000 general election is worth revisiting because next year a new group of young adults will vote for the first time. Plus the rest of us need a refresher course. Otherwise, as the axiom goes, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. And there can be no doubt that Republicans will be up to their old tricks in 2008 -- trying to steal elections.

Looking back at 2000, besides president of the United States, then Texas Governor Bush was running for the more important position of commander-in-chief. For the welfare of our armed forces, we the people needed to judge his fitness to serve as America's top military leader. Full disclosure of Dub-ya's National Guard history was and is an inalienable right paid for by U.S. soldiers, sailors and aviators who lost their lives in all past conflicts.

In the 1998 book, The Stuff of Heroes, its author, Major General William A. Cohen, USAF RES Ret., listed eight Universal Laws of Leadership. Number one was to "maintain absolute integrity."

Former Air Force Chief of Staff General Ronald R. Fogelman said in the Forward to Cohen's book that "integrity in professional relationships remained the singularly most important attribute of any leader."

Time and again, in virtually every publication written about military leadership, integrity is one of the most crucial factors to consider. Yet when reporters confronted candidate Bush about his missing Guard time, he ducked their questions and changed the subject.

Dub-ya knew his evasiveness was wrong. He was a mature adult with a history degree from Yale. But quite clearly in his selfish twisted mind, he had no choice. The 2000 election was too close to call. Disclosing his AWOL military service would most certainly have caused some of the 25 million war veterans and active duty personnel to switch their support to Al Gore, who served in Vietnam and won the Bronze Star.

Despite Shrub's ability to hide his past transgressions, he still lost the popular election by 538,000 votes and only became our 43rd president after winning Florida's Electoral College with a paper-thin margin of 537 ballots. A mere 300-vote swing would have made former Army Sgt. Gore the winner.

Of the thousands of enlisted servicemen who supported Bush in the Sunshine State, how many do you suppose would have voted as Democrats after learning he had shirked his sworn military duty during the Vietnam War?

Three hundred, perhaps?

How about a slam-dunk 3,000 -- the reason Bush cheated in 2000 and did so four years later. Winning obviously meant everything to him; being an honest candidate with integrity did not.

For details about Dub-ya’s dishonorable military service, including his falsified White House biography I found on a U.S. State Department website and reported to the Boston Globe, visit my nonprofit website, King-George.biz, which features 60 cartoons, photos and other Bushwhacking illustrations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The body politic is crying out for a "savior" -- someone to ride in on a white horse and "clean up" this absolutely rotten, corrupt system.

Well, guess what? Just like with "christianity" such a savior does not exist. Amerikka is headed for a monumental collapse, just like the bloated, arrogant empires that preceded it in history. Nothing is going to stop this from happening.

Al Gore is just as much beholden to the elite interests behind the scenes as any other candidate for president. No one who doesn't have their support will have a chance at being "elected". And even if the impossible happened and a so-called outsider won, what good would it do? The other two branches of government, with which this person would have to cooperate, remain thoroughly corrupt and would bury him (or her) just as sure as I'm sitting here typing this.

Face it, no one is going to save this country. Not Al Gore, not Hillary, not Obama... none of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I guess Alternet finally got bored with the great Not-so-white hope Barrak Obama.

So now they want to depend on their Gore-ssiah again. The same one who did so little before.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I believe that Al Gore as President and Dennis Kucinich as Vice President would give us an administration with the experience, integrity and vision that America needs to regain our democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I turned the above comment around because i hope we can and I think we might do it in time for '08 Primaries. It seems to me that the Blogesphere is already largely responsible for bringing Al Gore's name front and center even though MSM saw others as the forerunners and therefore the only ones to consider.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yea, now that's the real ticket.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To think that if Alternet spent a fraction of the time talking about the REAL progressive candidate, Kucinich may be higher in the polls than he currently is. Instead Alternet spends it’s time posting attack ads against Kucinich for his decision to debate on Fox News. Although Gore is great on many issues he has a record of being moderate on many important issues. Now that Gore is out of office it is easy for him to state liberal opinions, but how about the support of people that are in office and that have promoted liberal policy. To think that while Kucinich has been in office he has consistently opposed the war and it's funding, proposed the creation of a Department of Peace, Single Payer Universal Health Care, Universal Pre-K education, a raise in the minimum wage to over $8 an hour and a change in the economic structure to include rights for the laborers and an end to NAFTA and other Free Trade programs. Dennis has also been one of the strongest advocates for defending our civil liberties and rights by consistently opposing the Patriot Act and ease dropping programs. It's a shame that Alternet and other progressive fail to understand that Kucinich remains an advocate for our values even when the left continues to ignore him. Many people state that they want a president that is honest but when one comes around they always have the excuse that they are unelectable and then settle for the same old moderate candidates. In the process of doing so the left continues to scratch their heads a few years later wondering why things never change. We are at a crossroad in world history, and we have the choice to impact change. My vote continues to be for Kucinich as I support his genuine efforts for a sustained dialogue of peace and hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I love Al,he would make a wonderful president and that is why I am mad, I think he should of fought for the presidency when he won it, we would not be in this mess we are in, we voted for him he won but we got Mr. Bush & Co.. I have to vote for him if he runs, but I like Edwards, he would make a great president. I dont know if a good man can win, the news media controls all of our lifes and we know how they vote. If they would do their job we would get rid of Mr. Bush & Co., but the news media have no guts. Bill Davidson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need to create the White Horse and not wait for some white knight or savior or Messiah. We need to elect a vision not a man or a woman. I voted for Gore, but not all that enthusiastically. I was unhappy with what has happened to the Democratic Party in the last 30 years as it left behind working Americans. NAFTA was a debacle and part of Gore's problem was his condescension towards Perot and Perot turned out to be right. And has been noted above, the guy is not a fighter. He's a professor. In that I see Obama as the most similar to Gore. Gore is an Eeyore Democrat. He's somebody you know is right. He's a realist, but he makes you sad more than energized. He's a Cassandra. Cassandra was always right, but she sure was a wet blanket. We are in a world of hurt. We need a fighter, a people's advocate. A lobbyist for the people, as Truman once said. But we also need someone who can lift us up. An optimist who has a world vision but who can start bringing America back together. I think that's John Edwards. He's joined the movement. Forward America. Cut to the REvolution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore IS NOT a PROGRESSIVE candidate. Dennis Kucinich IS NOT a PROGRESSIVE candidate. There are NO PROGRESSIVE Democrat candidates.

The Democratic party is just as much a Big Busine$$ party as the Republican party. There is NO DEMOCRAT candidate that supports SINGLE PAYER healthcare. There is NO DEMOCRAT candidate that truly supports ENDING WAR. Al Gore is the SAME Al Gore that he was - a corporate WANK. Al Gore's electric bill could feed 30 children a month. Ever stop to figure out how much CARBON AL HAS RELEASED with his airplanes to everywhere.

If you really want a PROGRESSIVE candidate, VOTE GREEN!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Despite what everyone claims, Dennis is not a PROGRESSIVE candidate. Dennis is the GATEKEEPER so that all the "good D's" won't leave the party. You can be a "good Democrat" and still feel like a rebel by voting for Dennis in the primary and then voting "D" regardless in the election. This is exactly the kind of sheeple the Dems want - "good D's".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you want to reform politics, the thing to do is to get the big money out of politics - but the new Supreme Court appointed by Bush is dedicated to protecting the influence of big corporations in politics.

What this means is that the candidates who are most willing to prostitute themselves to the corporatocracy are the ones who will get the most campaign dollars, as well as the positive media coverage.

The corporate media plays a huge role in selecting the presidential candidates for each party via selective coverage of candidates. This amounts to free advertising for candidates that the corporate owners of the media approve of.

This is why Edwards and Kucinch are routinely smeared or ignored in the corporate press and on cable news networks. This is why polls showing that Ron Paul was the favored Republican candidate were removed from CNN's website. The ideal corporate matchup would be Hillary vs. Giuliani - no matter who wins, the corporatocracy wins.

Thus, we will probably see more and more efforts by the media to control the outcome of the Democratic primaries in order to get a corporate candidate. The corporate vote-counters will probably try and swing the primaries in that direction as well.

Given the problems with voter rolls, the ousting of US attorneys, and the privatized and proprietary electronic voting systems, expect the 2008 election to be just as problematic as the last three.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This would solve all our problems in one fell swoop - 87.3% of conservatives would die of strokes on election eve. Rush Limbone would choke on his own bile. Bill O'Lielie's head would explode and somebody would finally dump a bucket of water on Anne Coltface.

The rest of the GOP would move to Iran soon thereafter, and America would have a little elbow room.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For all you idiots, nitwits and morons who won't support Kucinich because he doesn't look like a president, I have the ideal candidate for you, Paris Hilton. That is what you want to lead your nation. Your stupidity turns my stomach. You have called him all sort of names based on his appearance despite his vastly superior intellect and moral stance. Good God! George Bush has represented our nation at the conference table with world leaders!!!!!! I've got to say one thing about the rest of the world leaders, you have to admire their ability to act. Wild horse would not have been agle to drag me to a table with Bush, I would feel so humiliated by being expected to treat that idiot as an equal. In Kucinich you have a man of the highest moral character, integrity, intelliigence, and uncompromising on his principles. If you still think he doesn't look presidential, vote for Paris Hilton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm beginning to think some people really have a Savior-Complex with this whole Gore thing. What makes people believe he'll be any better than Clinton or Obama, Giulianni or Bloomberg? Have we forgotten that the "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" policy (and the "Defense of Marriage Act") were signed while Gore was VP? Have we forgotten his lack of advocacy in ending the use of nuclear power and/or finding a safe way/place to store it? Have we forgotten his silence on Clinton's gutting of the US welfare programs? Education? Have we forgotten Gore silence on the US-influenced sanctions against Iraq; Gore's silence on the Clinton/US bombing of Iraq til he left office? Gore wants to curb global warming but is silent on our current economic system (Capitalism) which in a way necessitates pulling resources from the earth which degrade it even more. When the Supreme Court stepped in and illegally called the Presidency for Bush, Gore said (as Speaker of the House!) NOTHING! Waco anyone? Sorry, but our problems are far too endemic for Gore to fix them as a figure head and in many ways, he may be worse than Bush: at least we know where Bush stands and what he wants to do. With Gore, he'll smile in your face as his friends rape your mother.

2 cents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Har har, what's this new obsession with Gore? The guy is as dull as a lump of coal. Have you actually seen any of his recent appearances? He takes forever to say almost nothing!

No one in the field has Bill Clinton charisma yet. I think Edwards has some real charisma, as does Obama. But Gore? Unelectable bore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gore is your man if you like someone that jumps to conclusions without scientific fact.He in reality is a dead head politician.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gore gave it up to George Bush the last time. The election was his. If progressives want to act like little children because Hillary can read the writing on the wall, and not toe their party line to the letter, so be it. Al Gore can do himself, the country, and the world more good by staying what he is; the pre-eminant environmental philosopher on the planet.
Clinton/Obama in '08!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You want to end the Iraq War? Kucinich voted against the war including the funding of an illegal war.
You want to enjoy not for profit universal health care not subsidies for the insurance companies. Kucinich does.
You want to address global warming with progressive technologies while being realist about the oil dependency of America. Kucinich does.
The real change is not flashy, not made for tv, not completely from the ground up designed as a marketing campaign, not plastered all over the media. People don't want Hillary for the Democratic ticket, not too sure about Obama, and hear Edwards and hear $400 haircut. Looking for the perfect candidate takes them to Al Gore who I love, completely passing over Kucinich.
I say Consider Kucinich http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sahi78rUGZ8

For more of my Modern Musings http://www.taureandevi.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

None of these candidates will save America. There is no one as big as the problems you have.
Thinking that the single man or woman can do it is insane and irresponsible. You’re going down slowly but surly, you know that. America has to hit the bottom first to be able to go up for so much needed fresh air. That bottom part will be another revolution or some sort of revolt started by somebody or something and continued by the people. That somebody will not be your president; that something will not be your favored Hollywood movie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He has the best looking wife!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

most trully progressive candidate we have is Ron Paul. The most progressive document ever written for the common man is the USA Constitution. It provided for a way for people to rule their own lives and have a very small central government NOT look over our shoulders. Once we got a large government, we increased the number and size of wars, our educational system imploded and......

IMO, the very ticket for a Constitutional America is Paul/Kucinich. They are both men of integrity and proven caring about the average American... and NOT bought by the eilte establishment of either the GOP or DP.

ronpaul2008.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God knows we don't need any more of HER!! What is the matter with people?? Are women really SOOO STUPID that they'd vote for her -and her belief in the AEI/PNAC 'endless wars' and 'world domination' just because she's a woman ???
Good God, if that's the case GO FIND ANOTHER WOMAN TO RUN!
Hillary has said MANY TIMES and in many ways and to many people that the war in Iraq should NOT be stopped. Hillary's FIRST priority is ISRAEL --- NOT American Citizens!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NEO-GORE 2007 is more spontaneous and passionate than wooden Gore of 2000

In 2000 his "handlers" tried to re-package him several times which cost him votes.

On second thought I never thought he was as wooden as most pundits did?

This guy has always been presidential "timber" -no pun intended. But 7 years out of politics has changed him for the better!

GORE/OBAMA IN 08-Unbeatable!

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton, Pa
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yeah, I've been saying "Gore/Obama 2008" for months now.


When is the media going to start repeating it? Do we have to chant it at Bush speeches to get it noticed?

: )

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I liked the article a lot and started to read the comments, but I started seeing the griping that always comes Gore's way, he's not progressive enough, he's the son of wealth, he blew it in 2000, blah, blah, blah. And all of that may be true. But we gotta wrestle the White House away from the Republican Party, a party that is more dominated by rich special interests and crazy fundamentalist Christians. The Dems are far from a perfect party, but at least they aren't the party that has wedded this unholy holy alliance together, an alliance that may well lead to the permanent dismantlement of our treasured civil liberties, at best, and to a theocracy, at worst.

And can anyone really say they feel good going into the 2008 election with Hillary at the top of ticket? Sure, I have some good feelings about Hill. I'd like a woman to be president and fear if she fails we won't have another opportunity for a logn time. But, dang it, this is just too important.

As Gore has so cleary enunciated in his book, "The Assault on Reason," Bush has rolled back our liberty by undertaking an incredible presidential power grab. That's happened before in our past, but usually in time of war where we had a clear enemy and once that enemy was defeated or, in the case of Vietnam, when we were defeated, things swung back more to normal (although one could say that even there with the power grab of Lincoln we never got all our liberties back), but with this war on terror, the neo-cons say it will never be over. So the civil liberty rollbacks, the presidential consolidation of power, those all may stay in place. We have got to have a sober, experienced, reasonably progressive Democrat to win in 2008 and restore our liberties, get us out of Iraq and repudiate the pre-emptive strike doctrine, etc. If we send up Hillary or Barrack (I will use his first name so in as not to offend women who wonder why I use her first name) and we lose, as I think we may well do, Mitt or one of the boys aren't going to repudiate all of what has happened in last 8 years. And the Bush legacy will taint us into perpetuity.

Gore and Obama. That's a great ticket of potential that I think the nation and world would buy into. I'd like to encourage Sen. Obama to look around and really see if he thinks he is ready to be president and if he really thinks he can topple Clinton (there, no Hillary). If the answers are no, and I think they are, then he should call Al up on the phone and say, "Let's do this together."

Together Al and Barrack could restore us to sanity. They may not be paragons of progressive virtue, and we can all pick their carcasses apart for ways in which the are not the perfect vision of liberalistm, but there is nothing perfect in this life. Life is about compromise. Gore knows what he is doing. He probably won in 2000. The best way to restore our nation to sanity is to make right what so badly went wrong in 2000. We can make our own little Quantum Leap in 2008 and do that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Is Your Brain On Politics

[snip]
June 27, 2007 - Do you remember when candidate George W. Bush berated Al Gore during the 2000 presidential debates for alleged funny business in his fund-raising? Bush said, “You know, going to a Buddhist temple and then claiming it wasn’t a fund-raiser isn’t my view of responsibility.” It was a direct attack on the honor of a fellow Southerner, and Gore wasn’t taking it. “You have attacked my honor and integrity,” the vice president shot back. “I think it’s time to teach you a few old-fashioned lessons about character. When I enlisted to fight in the Vietnam War, you were talkin’ real tough about Vietnam. But when you got the call, you called your daddy and begged him to pull some strings so you wouldn’t have to go to war. So instead of defending your country with honor, you put some poor Texas millworker’s kid on the front line in your place to get shot at. Where I come from, we call that a coward.

“When I was working hard, raising my family, you were busy drinking yourself and your family into the ground. Why don’t you tell us how many times you got behind the wheel of a car with a few drinks under your belt? Where I come from, we call that a drunk.

“When I was serving in the U.S. Senate, your own father’s government had to investigate you on the charge that you’d swindled a bunch of old people out of their life savings by using insider knowledge to sell off stocks you knew were about to drop. Where I come from, we call that crooked. So governor, don’t you ever lecture me about character. And don’t you ever talk to me that way again in front of my family or my fellow citizens.”
...
[/snip]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At a recent lunch here in semi-liberal Palo Alto, CA a dozen older folks were talking about their picks for Democratic Candidate. It was the usual discussion of horserace politics. "I like and will vote for any Democrat." Followed by "I like Hillarly, but ..." You can fill in the rest. "Does Obama have enough experience?" "I like Richardson." "I like Edwards." Etc.

After the usual discussion. I asked, "OK put the odds as to whom can win or who will run aside. In your heart who would you like to see run? Out of 11 of us, Gore got 9 votes, Hillary 2.

We were all surprised. I think my older generation might be looking for someone with in-depth experience, who can mend foreign relationships and rebuild the domestic agencies: Interior, EPA, Justice, Education, Energy and the Military. This is not an overnight or 100 days task but will take 8-12 years only if there is a real sweeping out of the Repulicans.

I don't want someone who has to learn on the job. Both Hillarly and Al Gore have these qualities but I think Gore brings more of a breadth and depth to his life's experience. Edwards and Obama could be good, but it is a steep, steep learning curve to scale.

Richardson brings a great resume for foreign affairs to compliment Gore. As a Secretary of Energy he also understands what it will take to get the Federal Government back on track. It will similar but much more daunting task than the "Re-Inventing Governement" tasf force that Gore headed.

Whatever Democrat we elect he or she will have to have a solid majority in both houses to work with and to overcome the filibusters that the Repubs will mount on Supreme Court nominees and just about everything else. So we cannot just focus on the top of the tickets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get the two-party gridlock out of US politics for good, and put on the table serious Green/Sustainable Issues.

Gore/Paul, Gore/Kucinich, Gore Obama... doesn't really matter as long as its Progressive and Revolutionary. All three "vices" I mentioned would have their advantages:

Paul would draw conscientious Conservatives, Obama would draw Minorities, Kucinich would draw Liberals, but all have been marginalized by their own party... all three might defect from their own party if the platform was visionary enough.

Smart for Gore to try something "new" in these days, I believe we would see a surprisingly large mass defection from both Repuglicans and Demoflops!

...just thinking

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It boils down to what mob sect you prefer--actually this analogy probably overstates the difference. Apparetly most of the left have blacked-out the Clinton/Gore epoch completely: sanctions on Iraq killing 1 million, mostly children, the bombing of Serbia, near-genocide in East Timor, NAFTA, etc.

Gore is in the pocket of the nuclear industry and a hard-boiled imperialist--it was he who admonished Bush, in the '00 campaign, for being soft on Iraq.

The major problems that afflict this country (and the rest of the world) cannot be solved or even reduced by the Democratic party becuase they, too, take orders from the ones really in power. I think that a third-party candidate and a massive popular uprising is what it will take and nothing sort of this will do a lick of good. This will send a clear message: the population are fed up and want a democratic alternative. Either the powers that be will take responsability (unlikely) of they will be finished.

By the way, policy limits are predefined--it doesn't matter who you get; Gore or Clinton or Obama, politicians aren't independant. That's why a third-party (or a 100% transformed Democratic or Republican party--either would do) with a massive base of the general population is crucial--it is popular will not individual charisma and dynamism, of a "leader", that makes things happen in a democratic manner. If you want a Leninist then by all means support the Democrats as they are.

(Cf. http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/ if you have any doubts about the supporting the Democrats)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I like Al Gore; I voted for him in 2000 (as did a majority of Americans!) and, were he to become the Democratic nominee in 2008 I'd gladly (even enthusiastically) vote for him as opposed to ANY candidate the GOP could conceivably nominate. I would certainly sooner support Gore than HR Clinton (undisputed Mistress of Triangulation).

This being said, I sincerely hope Al Gore decides to stay out of the race. Why? First: I think the former VP is doing more good for the nation and the world currently, raising awareness of environmental and justice issues, than he actually could as a candidate. This is especially true given the poisonous narrative that so easily passes for "conventional wisdom" which the press embraces so unquestioningly. The press will not give Al Gore a fair hearing or an even break under any circumstances, and, as a candidate, he would be dragged back into the same defensive patterns that marked his earlier run. I say, let Gore continue to do the good he does right where he is! That can only help the progressive movement; a Gore candidacy would be a distraction.

Second: there's already a strong, appealing, electable candidate in the running; a candidate who doesn't bring the kind of past baggage that HR Clinton brings with her, or Al Gore would (by virtue of the above-mentioned "recieved-narrative"). John Edwards talks seriously about issues of economic justice, ending the war, improving conditions for all, and he is by far the most electable of all the candidates; polls consistently show him doing better against ANY of the GOP hacks than any of his fellow Dem White-House wannabes. He has broad appeal across regions, is highly articulate and WON'T BACK DOWN in a fight!

I think an Edwards/Obama ticket would be UNSTOPABLE in '08!

Cheers

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many of us non-Americans ( and I believe we are still the majority on this planet ); look at the coming U.S. elections and wish we had a vote. After all, decisions made by your leaders affect each and every person in the world. May I suggest a compromise? If there are 70 millions Americans who can't be bothered to participate in their democracy; let 70 million non-Americans take their places and cast ballot.

Consider these contentions; The U.S. is the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons ( on civilian targets ). The U.S. causes more than it's fair share of industrial pollution. The U.S. has militarily intervened in the democratic processes of over 70 countries since 1946. The U.S. is no longer looked on favourably even by nations who were once it's traditional allies. U.S. economic interests are regularly touted by your political leadership as more important than the well-being of the rest of our species.
Not a great track record.
Bearing all this in mind it might be argued that the presidency of the United States is too important a job to be left to an American.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He's the only leader who has directly addressed the root cause of our America's problems:Our irrational fear of death, and the denial systems we employ which prevent us from seeking rational solutions to suffering.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GORE: We have maintained the sanctions. I want to go further. I want to give robust support to the groups that are trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Some say they’re too weak to do it. But that’s what they said about those opposing Milosevic in Serbia.
Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000

Gore wanted to go FURTHER than just mere sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands!

If elected Gore promised to add $100 billion to the Pentagon budget over the next decade, while George W. Bush planned to add "only" $45 billion over that same time frame.

Peace Action, the nation's largest grassroots peace group, highlights six issues in its Presidential voter guide. On five of these, Gore and Bush agreed:
"Increase Pentagon spending" (Yes), "Spend $60 billion or more on 'Star Wars' anti-missile system" (Yes), "Give aid to Colombian army guilty of human rights violations" (Yes), "End sanctions on food and medicine to civilians in Iraq" (No), and "Require labor rights and environmental protections in all trade agreements" (No).

Gore joined 9 other Democrats who broke ranks on a 52-47 vote to authorize the use of force in the Persian Gulf.

NAFTA cleared the Senate by one vote. Al Gore was called in to perform his constitutional role as Senate President to cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of the treaty. Clinton and Gore, through Gore's tie-breaking vote, delivered what Bush I could only dream of. Thus began the precipitous hollowing-out of American manufacturing.

Gore's stances are decidedly against the positions of most progressive organizations and activists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore leads all Democrats in New Hampshire

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hello all: if Gore or any progressive US leader gets to the presidency he should: Nationalize US-Key Industries, reform the US constitution, apply the 'Social Production System' http://www.venezuelanalysis.com and copy some key aspects of the Bolivarian Revolution

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tad Daley has Al Gore on a very very tall pedestal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All the comments above have confirmed what the writer of the article describes. The debate is about will Gore run or won't he?
In essence that makes it a race between Gore and Gore.

To me, his ability to look at issues from a profoundly thoughtful point of view, combined with his unique depth of experience make him clearly something beyond the best candidate. He really is prepared for an historic role as President.

However, he is smart to keep his cards close to the vest.

We live in a time that is very dangerous. When one looks around and takes stock, we see high stakes and this is not a time for impetuous action.

The oil companies and other earth-extraction interests, and the larger corporate entities that have taken control of the media over the past thirty years or so, who have become inseparable with the military industrial complex, have not gained the power they have in order to just politely give it up. There is a great deal of ruthlessness in that power.

Looking back, as anyone might who has been around since
at least the '50s, it is possible to see the rise of this power in the world.

As progressive instincts within American society moved forward in the light of the optimism of the early '60s, we see the rise of articulate voices engaging the conscience of the nation and changing desegregation policies in the Deep South and the status of women. Voices against war and for peace became cool.

It is more than likely that Dr. Martin Luther King was shot down because he was moving towards an analysis of our society and its relation to the Constitution that could persuade America to re-examine the moral hypocrisy behind all of our social ills.

Anyone stepping into his shoes, has to think very hard about the prospects of succeeding where he and the Kennedy brothers were not able to.

The powers that rule the economic and military powers that be, may or may not be interested in doing business in order to save the planet.

That has to be the crux of the calculation as to whether or not winning the Presidency would be the best strategy for accomplishing the best purposes.

That is not the sort of contemplation that would make for an easy night's sleep for anybody with the sense enough to really be qualified to be President.

I think Al Gore would be the President we need at this time, and has far more capability to really do some good than anyone else who is running. I will support him.

However, if he runs, he steps into a fated circle. We can only hope that the bastards have concluded that they need him too, and that they recognize what kind of trouble they have gotten us into.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In your fixation with STARS - you forget that AL Gore is simply one indiviudal who stood up and realised what was going on with the environemnt we all need to survive - hardly anyone related to all the environmental acitivsts out there trying to bring the same news to your attention - all were ignorned untill Gore - one of the 'elites' started to do the same - only he had a big budget - now you glorfy him - want him to 'save' you by running for president - when he already walked away from the challenge that put BUSH in the white house - he could have challenged that outcome and changed the course of history then - but he didn't - why I wonder ?

The man has said repeatedly he does not want the job - of course he would be the better candidate and of course if he did step into the ring the Rethugs woudl be non contenders - but he doesn't want to

your all two party blind - thinking the only choice you have are the rethugs or the dems - lite and sour - why don't any of you throw your support behind the GREENS - who seem to have the same values as you same concerns as you and same dreams and desires for change as you - nope - instead the same addictive pattern of two party voting continues - nothing will change except that bush will not be president - on the scale of sexism any black man has always had more validity than any woman it goes like this - white man, black man, white woman and black woman - thats the rascist and sexist order of value the patriarchy gives to humans - your politcans are in the pockets of the war machine and corporates not to mentinon Israel - so you have little chance of real change - and like I have always said when your political circus plays with millions and billions of dollars why would they leave such an important decision as who gets elected to the highest scam job in the world - to you - the mere powerless voter - all your elections since bush have been rigged with so much evidence only the blind could truly convience themselves otherwise - the dems will win that is a given - the question is who will it be - the first black man or the first female - either way its a lose lose situation for the rest of the world - your foriegn policy will continue its MO no matter which side of the same coin you vote in - only stepping outside that and voting for a third choice can create real change ....but then will never happen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And that's a good thing. Gore is a feasable alternative, but we have a chance to break a long standing taboo in American politics by electing a woman. And HC is a woman who is bright, capable, and who can reengage the rest of the world positively.

I doubt Gore will run--but if he does, I don't thimk he will top Hillary. Organization, etc., is important. Is Hillary moderate and a pragmatist--you bet, and that's just fine with me. Perhaps not seeing everything through an ideological lens-left or right- might be refreshing for a change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore is waiting for the right timing. He will skip all this ridiculous 2 year campaigning overkill by entering the race at the last moment, thereby wiping out the so-popular form of purchasing of an elected office. Yippee! Can't wait! He IS the MAN and he is going to pluck the presidency off the tree like so much fruit. And never has America needed a leader more than today. I, for one, am all for Gore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Subject: A July Fourth’s Moment of Reflection

Each Fourth of July, we Americans celebrate. It is a mixture of patriotic appreciation, family, friends and sheer fun. Fireworks and cookouts and colorful parades abound.

It is a national passtime celebrating the country’s “declaration of independence from monarchic exploitation.” That is the national script and it has its good and bad points when viewed in historical perspective.

In its short existence, as measured against other societies, the USA has certainly made a great deal of history and perhaps has forgotten even more that might have been beneficial. Its active way of life had insured great abundance – an abundance that has come through both good and through ill - a dualism known by all great but fragile civilizations.

So, one thing that the Fourth of July could beneficially hold for its celebrants, is a sense of thankfulness for our (though currently fragile) good fortune, health and happiness. For even with the current crises of government and society, Americans, like human beings everywhere, naturally seek to celebrate and uphold the good.

But the good is coming in ever shortened supply for an increasing number of people here and worldwide as we unsustainably consume our world. And it might well be a good thing if we were to pause in the celebration of this day - individually and collectively – to contemplate how fortunate we indeed are, and how we would wish good fortune on others who are less blessed than are we.

Perhaps with each burst in the air of the fireworks we can send out our personal wishes to them, as if saying "here is a gift of light and vitality and hope and goodness." Would we not wish this for oneself?

It is known in many numerous world wisdom traditions that all good things come when we wish them on others. But when we pull it all to ourselves, little good comes of it.

I for one will send out my good wishes with each firework’s blast in the air.

Won’t you join me?

Pass this on.


Some useful links:
http://humanebeing.blogspot.com
http://www.intuition-in-service.org/
http://www.earthcharter.org/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Everyone should be able to see through Gore's slick ingenious hard sell. as the previous poster noted he stands to make a fortune from carbon offset. He was the principal architect and pusher of nafta and gatt. he comes from old oil money. he neglects to mention that climate change may be a natural phenomenon as the entire solar system is heating up. What is his position on 9/11 truth and a new independent 9/11 commission to look into the obvious connection behind the white house/pentagon and 9/11. Has he mentioned the role of persistent contrails and climate warming/global dimming? He has a whole army of people out there hosting screenings of his film that is no more than a campaign crew of scared brainwashed people who think he will deliver us from burning in the hell of climate change. There are 3 candidates worth voting for: Kucinich, Ron Paul, Gravel. The rest are corporate frauds with their own brand of corporatism and are all part of the plan for world government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dare I repeat, Gore already won the presidency once, lest one says he can't win. Unlinked from Clinton, he is truly his own person. He held back on going full blast on the environment because it was Clinton's call in 1992. He is the only potential candidate with an intellect to match Clinton's and without the baggage. He survived swiftboating when the Republicans and talk-radio attempted to ridicule him through lies and smears to his honorable name.

Al Gore, again, was :

1. Right on the internet
2. Right on the war
3. Right on global warming and climate change.

4. He is the most experienced potential president and the one with the broadest and deepest knowledge of both national and international matters.
5. He has no fat pockets to dance to nor vested interests that have besotched the current administration.

6.He is one of few American leaders with the international respect to restore America's once good name abroad.

7. He thinks on his feet; can talk with good sense without a script; and doesn't give Snow jobs.
8. He is honest, modest, religious, from a good famiy (his father an honest senator), and has a lovely family.

9. A vote for Al Gore would be a positive vote, one for our future as a people and nation.
10. He is a strong leader with vision who respects others and sound arguments.

If the Democratic Party gets caught up in personalities again; if its wise men and women are not smart enough to draft Al gore; then UNITY '08 will be ready to do so.

Al Gore, God willing and an honest election, will be President of the United States.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Al Gore is right for America in 2008!

http://gorehub.com - Al Gore news and information
http://algore.org
http://draftgore.com
http://bloggers-for-gore.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'd just like to say that I'm a Progressive and Gore is not exactly my number one choice. Personally, I think he does better as a policy maker- he would have to compromise too much of his beliefs if he became president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Back in 2000, despite the fact that a handful of Black Cingressmen stated that they would defend Gore because he had rightfully won the election. But Al Gore allowed CRIMINALS TO TAKE OVER THE WHITE HOUSE, THEY ARE GUILTY OF THE 911 ATTACKS AND THE HORRORS OS TORTURE, MAIMING AND KILLING. BUT THAT IS PAST. JOHN EDWARDS HAS PROVED THAT HE HAS THE RIGHT STUFF TO BE PRESIDENT. HE ACTUALLY BECAME A MILLIONAIRE HELPING THE UNDERDOG. NO OTHER CANDIDATE CAN MAKE THAT CLAIM. THE FOOL THAT CURRENTLY OCCUPIES THE HEAD OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD. HE IS A CRIMINAL AND IMPOSTER!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not against capitalism only the great financial divide, closer to the middle class movements representaion and to the left. Equal rights for all, united health care and education, no war, democracy for the people, worlds natural resourses protected and not courrupted for big business. Nader dose have back bone and he has proven he will stand up to the big guys. Both are for separation of church and state. Womens right to choose. Raising the poverty line. The wsws party had 4 or 5 on the ballots last yr.on 06 some were elected. What ever it takes we must try to bust the monopoloy of this bogus 2 party system. They are watching and a message must be sent loud and clear people are on the move we are not waiting or taking their B.S. any longer, a third party movement willmake them litterally wet their pants. Especially the democrats, they are worthless anyway. They will all be wearing depends when they go to work, how apropreate DEPENDS which way the wind is blowing. A revolution or collapse will be much worse. More Fascism would not be attractive either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There has been and probably never will be a 'perfect canidate'. It's always a choice between what's most importmant to you.

Gore has his faults. Giving up in 2000 was one, yet under the circumstances, the Supreme Court ruling that the popular vote wasn't important should have had people in the U.S. rioting in the streets. I don't think anyone could have predicted the devastation that Bush would do. Gore's one of the few that have let their anger show in public about it.

Given that, global warming is topping the list, along with ending Iraq and unlike Hillary, both of those issues Gore has taken a firm stand about.

Look at who he would be running against him. It's not just about him. Could he win? He's done it before and he's more likeable without advisors telling him how to act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This should be offensive to every activist and environmentalist, conservationalist and preservationalist out there--to say that Al Gore almost single handedly created the environmental conciousness in America. He has done almost nothing--tokens fall out of his mouth. Of course I prefer him to other mainstream politicians, esp. KKk/NRA gun-toting, swaggering, smirking fascist Republicans and neo-cons, but we have GOT TO STEER AWAY FROM THE DEMS AND REPUBS--IT IS TIME FOR A NEW PARTY, MANY PARTIES, AND STANDARDIZED, SUBSIDIZED CAMPAIGN MONIES. vOTE GREEN, SOMETHING, anything other than 'the party'--( the democratic-republicans, the federalist party. ) But if you must, then vote Obama. Seriously, you have no clue if you vote for that masquerading republican, war-mongering, lying Hillary. She is a joke! And of course if you vote republican you are truly a fool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]