RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Greengore
October 13, 2007 2:56 PM
Yes, congrats and kudos and mazal tov to former Vice President Al Gore for his Nobel Peace Prize and his commitment.
But let us also recall that as he ran for president in 2000 he downplayed his environmentalism, his consultants thinking it not electorally sage to emphasize on the stump.
Such a stance allowed Green Party candidate Ralph Nader an opening, of course, likely taking thousands of key votes from Gore in key states such as Florida. (Ahem.)
I remember covering Gore in 2000, it wasn't until the end of October, when the threat of Nader was apparent to all, that Gore gave a big speech on being green in Davenport, Iowa.
How it all played out is fascinating in retrospect.
"Now, I want to talk about the environment here today," Gore said standing on a fire truck with his jacket off.
"Now, look. Just today, we are seeing on television the new study that just comes out once ev'ry FAAAAHVE years where the scientific community around the world tells us what they've learned about this problem that these kids are gonna grow up with unless we do something and that's the problem of global warming."
Gore was referring to a United Nations report on global warming, issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- the same group that shared his Nobel with him this year -- that concluded it could get up to 11 degrees Fahrenheit hotter by the end of the century if greenhouse gases were not curtailed.
"We have a situation where the big polluters are supporting Gov. Bush and they are wanting to be in control of the environmental policy," Gore said, tearing into Texas' environmental rankings.
You may not be able to believe this, but at the time the Bush campaign responded by claiming that Bush was actually more of an environmentalist than Gore.
"There are only two candidates in this race who support a mandatory reduction of emissions from older power plants -- Gov. Bush and Ralph Nader," said then-Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett. "Environmental groups have harshly criticized Al Gore's record on global warming and deforestation, while Gov. Bush has offered a plan that will help protect the endangered tropical forests of Latin and South America."
Bartlett was able to cite a harsh critique of Gore from September 1999 by the Friends of the Earth PAC when the group endorsed Gore's then-opponent, former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley. Calling Gore a "big disappointment," the organization "graded Gore on 16 areas of his signature issue, protection of the ozone layer" and awarded Gore a "D."
(Friends of the Earth said Gore was much better than Bush. "While we have had significant differences with the Clinton-Gore administration on some issues, there's a Grand Canyon-sized gulf of leadership between Vice President Gore and Governor Bush on the environment. If Bush is elected it will do significant and irreversible harm to the global environment," a spokesman told me.)
In Gore's speech he addressed global warming in the New Democrat shades that had aroused the wrath of Friends of the Earth.
He would perpetually describe a pending environmental apocalypse -- and then propose solutions that would be easy and fun and no big deal at all! He would say "let's pick the hard right over the easy wrong!" But then he wouldn't describe anything hard at all.
"An' I know a lotta people say that it looks like [global warming] is off in the future," Gore says. "But lemme tell you what this new study said ... Unless we act, the average temperature is gonna go up 10 or 11 degrees. The storms will get stronger, the weather patterns will change. But it does not have to happen. And it won't happen if we put our minds to solving this problem ... Here is the good news. If we take the leadership role that these kids have a right to expect us to play, we can create millions of good, new, high-paying jobs by building the new cars and trucks ... and technology to STOP the pollution and lift standards of living at the same time! ARE YA WITH ME?!"
"I laid out a plan this past summer that will create partnerships with the car companies and with the utilities and with the factories that will give tax breaks to get the new kind of technologies going," Gore says. "And we'll lead the world in those technologies and all over the rest of the world, they're wanting to buy these new kinds of technologies, and we're the ones that ought to be making them and selling them to the rest of the world."
Gore deserves credit for his work, for his passion. For his Nobel Peace Prize!
But in 2000 the Al Gore who talked about what to do about the environment was one who, environmentalists said at the time, didn't rear his head enough during the campaign. Who allowed a climate where the Bush campaign could even try to out-flank him on the Left. Who didn't really give straight talk about the kinds of sacrifices necessary.
One wonders what today's Gore would say about that Gore.
Perhaps more importantly, one wonders how the millions of voters who pulled the lever for Nader would have responded to the Gore of today.
What do you think?
- jpt
October 13, 2007 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (39)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
the man is simply an opportunist... and a liar
Posted by: kirk | Oct 14, 2007 1:54:17 AM
I congratulate Al Gore on winning the Nobel Peace Prize. He has done more towards global warming then just about anyone else on the planet. All of the speeches that he has given over the years probably emitted more CO2 than half the population could emit in 24 hours. Seriously, I have no doubt that man is affecting the weather here on Earth. But that effect is actually so very minimal. Can someone answer the following four questions? (1) What caused the global warming when the Earth came out of each of ice ages, when man wasn't even around? (2) How is it that ALL of the planets are currently experiencing warming, yet man is being blamed for causing the Earth's warming? (3) How can we trust the predictions 50 to 100 years in the future, when the National Weather Service has only a fair record in forecasting weather two weeks in advance? (NOTE: Remember it was only 30 years ago that some of the same people warned of global cooling.) (4) If the Earth is under such a warming trend, how do you explain the record LOW temperatures that continue to occur world wide?
Posted by: James Danley | Oct 13, 2007 11:39:44 PM
What is a half a million to Gore when he's raking in millions from his carbon offsets business. The entire thing has been a sham from the beginning. With anyone else, they would have accused him of conflict of interests. But not with Gore. As others have said, the Nobel Peace Prize is as worthless as the paper it was printed on. So what if he raised the issue prior to 2000. If he has such a strong passion for it, he should have spoken about it in 2000, and let the chips fall where it may. By not bringing it up served only to give evidence for his use of the issue for political gain.
Posted by: Getalife | Oct 13, 2007 11:26:36 PM
Spock: He does NOT own 9 mansions...NICE TRY!!!
Posted by: mod rit | Oct 13, 2007 10:53:14 PM
GORE HAD TRIED ENDLESSLY TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING PRIOR TO 2000, & BECAUSE NO ONE BELIEVED HIM BACK THEN, THAT WAS THE REASON HE HADN'T MENTION IT DURING THE 2000 ELECTION (WHICH MAKES VERY GOOD SENSE), BUT WHAT MAKES ANYONE THINK THAT HE WOULD NOT HAVE BROUGHT IT UP AGAIN, HAD HE BEEN ELECTED?! EVEN BUSH, HIMSELF, ACKNOWLEDGED HOW VERY PRESTIGIOUS THE NOBEL PRIZE IS, INFERRING THAT GORE DID GOOD (YET, THIS AUTHOR DOESN'T)?! Btw, BUSH SENIOR, HAD MALIGNED GORE FOR HIS GLOBAL WARMING WARNINGS, PRIOR TO 2000...kinda' makes ya think, about the motives of Bush senior & this author, huh? ONE MORE THING, DO YOU THINK ANY ONE OF THESE GUYS (OR GW) WOULD GIVE EVEN ONE PENNY OF THAT PRIZE AWAY, HAD THEY WON???
Posted by: mod rit | Oct 13, 2007 10:49:30 PM
heeheehehee First what does it have to do with peace?
Secondly he gives no facts at ALL, just propaganda!
Anybody who believes him well I got swampland to sell.
This is just the beginning of Socialism, I challange anyone who disagrees with me to see the movie or read the book '1984'
Look at Chavez he is using us as a push to get power.
Also Gore owns 9 mansions each of which produce more so called greengases in a month then the average person in a year, mean while Pres Bush's ranch has no greenhouse gas footprint.
This is a Farce!
Posted by: spock | Oct 13, 2007 10:30:32 PM
If you are asking what Americans would do, they would do the same - elect the man.
Posted by: j | Oct 13, 2007 10:17:40 PM
I find it incredibly interesting that there is an add for Chevron at the top of this blog.
Hmmm, double speak again?
Reality is, we are absolutely on a path to a much warmer earth with so very horrific outcomes given “our” current policies. If Gore can get folks rallied to see this, then good for him, every little bit really helps here!
Posted by: JS | Oct 13, 2007 8:20:17 PM
Green Gore? Money green, that’s about it. Gore and his family use many times the resources as the average American family and produce many times the pollutants. Hypocrisy abounds and Gore is in the center of it.
Posted by: Royce | Oct 13, 2007 7:51:23 PM
Ellen - I have to tip my cap to you on your dedication. But, this is one guy who's not going to do anything about it. So as long as GW is used as a political issue, I will always be skeptical. So as long as celebrities talk out of both sides of their mouths - to tell us to deprive ourselves while they are traveling in gas-guzzling vehicles, I will be skeptical. So as long as the fingers consistently point at man as the only cause of any problems on earth and that the way to solve it is for us to give up our freedom, I will always be skeptical.
Posted by: Getalife | Oct 13, 2007 7:18:30 PM
So John, it seems that you and Rush Limbaugh hate Al Gore. Yeah, in 2000 many of kept our concerns to ourselves because we did not want to lose our jobs or our friends. Now, though many of us are not even trying to persuade the ditto-heads or "Senior Correspondents" that we are in trouble. We are doing something about it. Shame on you for finding fault with Al Gore's peace prize. Don't you understand that we all have to stand up and do something about global warming.
Posted by: Ellen O'Shea | Oct 13, 2007 7:10:40 PM
Gore must be right! He did invent the internet after all.
Gore for 08!
Posted by: Will | Oct 13, 2007 6:58:04 PM
You only have to read the above comments to figure out many American's view Gore's Nobel Peace Prize win.
Its sad really. The most powerful nation on earth has some of the most deluded and ignorant people on earth.
America's greatness is disappearing before our very eyes. It being squandered by people who's only interest in life is themselves, their SUVs and how many material possessions they can accumulate. But like the Cree Indian Prophacy predicts:
Only after the Last Tree has been cut down,
Only after the Last River has been poisoned,
Only after the Last Fish has been caught,
Only then will you find that
Money Cannot Be Eaten.
Posted by: Richard Gordon | Oct 13, 2007 5:46:50 PM
why is it so blatantly obvious to some of us that Gore is in this to make money as as Jeff said so eloquently. He's got y'all duped
Posted by: brian | Oct 13, 2007 5:06:18 PM
The leaders of other nations literally salivate for a chance to point an accusing finger at the American people and Gore does a better job at accusing American citizens than anyone else in history, except for Jimmy Carter. That's the reason behind giving Gore the Nobel Peace prize.
Gore pumps more CO2 into the atmosphere with his private jet than most Americans put together. This is obviously NOT about the environment or saving the planet. If the global warming issue did not exist, Gore would definitely find another reason to accuse the American people.
I guess that's how you win votes. You accuse the people who do the voting.
Posted by: jfm125 | Oct 13, 2007 4:54:34 PM
Global warming = junk science.
"An Inconvenient Truth = Algore's junk.
2007 Nobel peace prize = junk.
Posted by: kron | Oct 13, 2007 4:40:01 PM
Gore is making MILLIONS a year with his Carbon Credit trading scam company so there is no way he is ever going to get back into politics. Strange no one in the Media seems to mention about his Generations Management Investment LLP that is focus on Carbon Credit Trading company's. He would have to give up the millions he is making from the Carbon Credit trading scam if he got elected.
This is why it was not an issue for him when he was in office, but is now.
Posted by: Jeff | Oct 13, 2007 4:14:54 PM
Way to go Jake on reporting this one. This story, I'm sure, is going to rub some people the wrong way. It emphasizes that Gore is nothing but an opportunist who will use the environment only for his political gain. It highlights that his latest "passion" is also one that is driven by politics and not personal conviction. So much for his supporters who claimed that Gore has been an "expert" about global warming for the last 25 years.
Posted by: Getalife | Oct 13, 2007 4:06:57 PM
yeah but Bush also outflanked Gore on social security with his simplistic "fuzzy math" retort. Yes Gore is to blame, but so too the electorate, for not skimming beyond the surface with respect to complex policy, and for not wanting to hear bad news and make sacrifices.
Posted by: cordelia525 | Oct 13, 2007 3:40:36 PM
Post a comment
