IAP Political Forum

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/world/13nobel.html?hp


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/algore2008/

Proof that a college D student can "make the grade".  ;D

Personally I haven't put much reputation in the Peace Prize since Arafat and Begin won it.

who is the "D" student?

Gores grades were lower than Bush's grades.  Its one reason he hasn't released his transcripts to the public.  More to the point he also dropped out of divinity school for his masters program (after dropping out of other universities).  It a harsh reality, but its true.

I am not a big Al Gore fan, but then I wasn't a big Yassir Arafat fan I wasn't a big Begin fan, frankly most of the people in the recent past who have received the Nobel Peace Prize have impressed me. 

I suppose its a Swedish thing, I suppose Ahmed Abinijad will win the next one.

I don't know much about the other two winners. THe peace prize (despite current politics)  should be considered an honorable achievement, imo.

I like Gore since he left politics more -- if he went back in, I would only support him if I felt he was going to focus on global warming, and delegate the other bullsh*t (health, immigration, blah blah) to his sub-ordinates. If he does run (he wont') but if he did he would loose my attention quickly if it were back to the status quo and usual bantering/rhetoric.

I can't fault you your support of Gore.  The environmental issue is important to you and pre eminent in your position.  And the grade thing is just that, a grade thing.  I don't hold it over Bush's head or Gore's.  What is important usually is what they do with their experience in life anyway.

I see issues with Gore in the manner in which he says one thing regarding global warming but does not adjust his own life, as either an example, or to show how he himself would reduce the impact, its one reason I admire Ed Begley, even if I do disagree with him.  Gore has an environmentally lavish lifestyle, I don't mean that he should not fly in a jet plane, and try to get to places himself instead of telecommuting.  I mean that in his own life, his own home, he is at odds with his philosophy.  If Mother Theresa had the Chippendales dancers at her home, I would also question her commitment too.

In Gore, I see a man looking for a cause, I don't see a man changed by a cause.

Maybe I am cynical.

i can agree with your point about Gore living in a house the size of Hearst Castle, and contributing more personally to global warming...but take into account the mass distribution of the problem he is having.

My whole take on this is simply this:

1) it is inevitable, no two ways about it -- 20 years, 50 years from now things will be worse
2) we can change what we do -- I personally drive less, and only speak with companies that allow telecommuting at least 3 days a week.
3) renewable technology will help solve this problem, once it is accepted, and demanded by the consumer market.

I wonder, what if Gore said he was going to get rid of his hearst castle, or change it, or make it better or something.

But no change in the past six months, and certainly none since he made the film.

I can understand using energy to get the word out (hence I will not complain about him flying about).

As an aside to the Gore thing:

I don't see much in the way of immediately viable renewable energy.  Wind is next to nothing (and the Kennedy's won't buy into it).  Solar is still to inefficient (though one day).  I believe nuclear is the immediate answer.




Anyway, I don't see Gore as being as committed, or more to the point, as able to pull off influence beyond the choir he is already preaching to.  In other words, he is not really growing the influence into areas where his views are not popular.  In part because of who he is and what he does.

So I see the Nobel "Peace" Prize as being less than it once was, and not of consequence with Gore or any influence that Gore will wield in the future.

I personally don't give a shit how gore chooses to live his life in his privacy. Just because  he has a big house (he was a damned senator for christ sake).

I find this line or arguing tiresome and not worth much time.

I assumed you were all about getting the word out, and convincing people to change.  Do you think his lifestyle will hurt or help convince people that global warming is real?

That is my point, especially if that is the key reason he got the Nobel Prize in the first place.

If he wastes too much more time "convincing" people, then it will just go down the toilet like every other political endeavor.

Get the word --- spent a few years doing that (quite a few)
Next step -- start promoting change at from the top down...there is a *ton* of money to be made in this, that's where the focus needs to be made.

Convincing people to go "vegan" and walk to work, while great if they choose, isn't going to go a long way that the cause of your life's work.

You don't care how he lives? He should practice what he preaches. Yet he lives a life of "Do as I say, not as I do".

Give me some specfics about what it is -- I'll I've heard is just what you're saying. "He flies in a jet, therefore don't listen to him about the consequences of jet pollution."

Gore didn't deserve the Nobel. What the hell did he do? He made a fictional movie.

Gore's prize: A fraud on the people (http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Gore's+prize%3A+A+fraud+on+the+people&articleId=c55c0e3e-f569-4b50-83f6-8431bde279dd)

From the sounds of it, the panel had a pretty tough time justfying it.


Looks like they had to use Milgrams "Six Degrees of Separation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_world_phenomenon)" to rationalize awarding him the Nobel.

Like Baldar said, the recent winners are less than impressive. The utter failure of Jimmy Carter, the murdering thug Yasser Arafat, the literary fraud Rigoberta Menchu, the Nobel has become a joke.

Maybe Gore deserved it after all.

I believe people who dislike Gore because he's not a head-in-the-sand conservative ideologue will find his personal life highly disturbing.

They can't stand it that he was right years ago while they were, and continue to be, wrong.
Stupidly, absurdly, obstinately, wrong.

A few years ago it was "global warming is a hoax."
Now the line is "global warming is occuring but it isn't caused by humans."
Eventually it will be "Iran is causing global warming."

Hmmm, looks like JPN wants a fight.

Lets look at the facts.

1-Does Al Gore live what he apparently preaches?  Well, no.  So does JPN believe it is convincing that someone who says one thing, but then lives a different lifestyle?  Maybe in his small world it is.

2-Can people be convinced to be more environmentally sound when the people telling them that do the exact opposite?

Is Bill Clinton a poster boy for fidelity in marriage?  :-\

Of course if JPN thinks your on his side, you could be hitler in pantyhose and he would still consider you a great American and a great human being.  :D

So if I tell everyone they need to stop puking carbon into the atmosphere I can drive a giant SUV without guilt or being chastised by crazy Liberals like Gore? Cool. That's way cheaper than buying carbon credits.

The whole thing is like a fundamentalist religion.  Hell they even sell indulgences.

Anyone want to buy a carbon offset?

Yeah, the fact that Al Gore doesn't live in a cave definitely proves that global warming is a hoax.

Makes sense, I guess, in a twisted, conservative kind of way.

No he doesn't live in a cave, but his energy would light up half of Vegas.

Or am I being stating something as hyperbolic as your silly post?  ;D

Okay. Take a breath. Inhale.

Now. Try to compose a complete sentence.

I know you can do it.

I'm an optimist.

The village idiot is an optimist too.  The similarities manifested are truly uncanny.

That was actually clever and amusing.  ;)

Thank you.

Without knowing the particulars of his home or his "carbon offsets" I feel confident (until prove wrong :) ) that Al Gore probably does more than the 'common' mega-rich man.  The true is that when striving to be a leader among men you are more scrutinized than the population or your friend or neighbor.  We often expect our leaders to be much like Jesus.  Reality is no one could probably run for president, globe trot talking about the enviroment without money, use of resources and some less-than-Jesus-like qualities.

Reality is, judging perceived lifestyles of Al Gore does nothing to the validity (or lack of validity) to Global Climate Change.  It's a sideshow.

An interesting and astute observation on the Global Warming issue from Pat Buchanan. From VDARE.com.

OswaldTheOsprey

http://www.vdare.com/asp/printPage.asp?url=http://vdare.com/buchanan/071022_apocalypse.htm

Once again the ubiquitous William Grey makes an appearance, as he seems destined to do in every single anti-global warming skree.

So there were people who warned of doom who were proved wrong.

There were people warning the European Jews in the 1930s. Were they proved wrong?

People warned of the hole in the ozone layer. We changed our behaviors and stabilized the thinning of the ozone. Did that prove that the warnings were wrong?

People pointed out that leaded gasoline was getting into the atmosphere and killing our children. The lead was removed. Does that prove that the anti-lead movement was wrong?

Patrick Buchanan, IMHO, doesn't accept what science is finding out about global warming because it is antithetical to his conservative ideology.

And there's nothing more to it than that.

Good to hear Gore is working with investment capital firms to kickstart the biz of green solutions.

All that proves is that capitalism controls both sides of most arguments.

OswaldTheOsprey

And Al Gore extends climate science far beyond its limits because he has a political and social agenda.

And there's nothing more to it than that.

sure, i never doubted that....capitalism should provide choice.

Choice of certain persons getting rich.

OswaldTheOsprey

choice to the consumer is what I was getting at.

Like we have now with oil companies?

OswaldTheOsprey