Gore and environmentalists 14

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   David Foley Posted 8:12 am
   09 May 2006

   It's all Al Gore's faultYes, darn it, that bad old Al Gore personally prevented you and me from being able to do anything at all about climate disruption.  By golly, it's his fault that there aren't more compact fluorescent light bulbs in our homes, hybrid cars in our driveways and insulation in our attics.  It's his fault that we move to the suburbs, fly everywhere, eat lots of industrial-feedlot meat, and really can't be bothered to change.  What a low-down, dirty rat he is!  When our grandkids ask us why we didn't do anything, when climate disruption was clearly happening, we can tell them that it was all Al Gore's fault.

   Permalink

2. 

   odograph Posted 9:58 am
   09 May 2006

   conventionisn't there an old quote, from one of the Adamses, about a VP being the most useless job in the world?
   in a conventional administration, he is.  he basically waits around for the President to suffer ill fortune.
   it is kind of constitutionally challenged to think that Gore had some great power which he squandered.
   ah yes:
   "John Adams declared it the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived--the only one in the world in which patience and firmness were useless."
   http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200407u/vicepresidents

   Permalink

3. 

   Tom Twigg Posted 10:13 am
   09 May 2006

   Al is not a DickThose who complain about what Al Gore failed to accomplish during the Clinton administration fail to acknowlegde that up until this current presidency, VP's have been traditionally weak, chosen for their appeal to a voting bloc rather than any enthusiasm for their personal agendas.
   It may be difficult to remember, particularly if you aren't very old, that the last 6 years of a strong and independent (albeit dangerous) VP is an anomaly allowed by a president in way over his head (the puppet and the puppeteer if you like). George may call himself The Decider, but I think most of us know better (Dick, Karl and how many others behind the curtain really run this country's policies.).
   Bill Clinton, like him or not, is a bright guy who had his own agenda. Maybe he and Al were friends, I don't know, but after serving his purpose Gore was largely just a figurehead like those in the office before him. He was not in a position to set policy ... that was to come after the Oval Office was his own. Too bad we never got a chance to see what he'd make of it.
   
   If a twigg falls in the forest but nobody is there to hear it, it's probably best because there is bound to be cussing.

   Permalink

4. 

   Biodiversivist Posted 10:47 am
   09 May 2006

   Cellulosic ethanol. Different from corn-based..Hmm, at first that sounded like a gutsy thing to say until I realized that the corn belt wouldn't vote for him anyway, making it a very safe, in fact, positive thing to say. The fact that it is also true is just icing on the cake.
   
   In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com

   Permalink

5. 

   claxton6 Posted 11:42 am
   09 May 2006

   partnership for next generation vehiclesI was youngish during the Clinton/Gore years, and not paying very close attention, but my core impression of what Gore did, environmentally, during that time was the Partnership for Next Generation of Vehicles, which seems in retrospect to have been Gore getting played by Detroit--a way to get money, not have to produce anything, and hold off increases in CAFE standards all the while. That's a very narrow issue, and it may hold him more accountable than he really was, but that's basically my assessment of his work for the environment while VP.

   Permalink

6. 

   Bart Anderson Posted 11:59 am
   09 May 2006

   we think in melodramasWe love to think in terms of heroes and villains.  Perhaps we do this to make up for the fact that we have no grasp of history or sociology.  
   These fairy tales waste our energy.  Is candidate X sincere?  Is he/she a REAL environmentalist?  Can he/she be trusted?
   These are the preoccupations of the powerless and manipulated. None of it is relevant.
   The real questions are -- what are the sources of power?  how is it exercised?  what are one's interests?  how can one form alliances to further one's goals?  etc.
   It's not as much fun as reading "People" magazine, but that's how power is achieved.
   In my few interactions with political figures, I have often been impressed with them as human beings - an interesting combination of idealism, realism, narcissism, competence.  They operate in the midst of a political system over which they personally have little control.  

   Permalink

7. 

   amazingdrx Posted 8:46 pm
   09 May 2006

   No nukesThat was very good.
   Boosting agribizz cellulosic ethanol.  Very bad. Even without fossil fuel input.
   No mention of real solutions.  Because he was cut off with that dopey presidential run question.  Oh well.
   One step forward.  One step back.  Hope the movie includes something more substantial.
   Let's hope it's not the NRDC answer, "clean" coal.
   And NRDC's lawyer RFK jr's no offshore wind.  
   Stop the revolution, big ego crossing.
   
   
   
   http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

   Permalink

8. 

   bryankwalton Posted 11:49 pm
   09 May 2006

   Gore's BTU tax and Kyoto InvolvementMany people give Gore a hard time for his years as VP, but I believe those critics have little understanding of the way the political process works in this country.  I was more critical of him during his presidency, but in reflection, I'm much more forgiving.  
   It was Gore that in 1993 got the administration to push for a broad-based BTU tax that would have incentivised (sp?) renewable energy while discouraging coal and other fossil fuels.  They got the tax through the house before it stalled in the Senate.  Think of this tax as a carbon tax.  It is still an awesome idea.  Still needed, and yet it still seems almost a radical idea given our current politcal realities.
   Also, don't forget that it was Gore, who at the Kyoto summit, proposed a binding commitment to return CO2 emissions to 1990 levels between 2008 & 2012. After that, a series of market mechanisms would be employed to drive emissions below the 1990 baseline by 2017.  The summit, before Gore spoke was stuck in a politcal quagmire, and making no progress.  His proposal (on behalf of the US) to cut emissions 7% below the 1990 levels between 2008 & 2012 got each of the countries commited to making concessions, if I recall correctly.

   Permalink

9. 

   LegumeSam Posted 2:41 am
   10 May 2006

   Why trust mainstream politicians anyway?"My inclination is to think that progressives in general and enviros in particular often have politically unrealistic expectations -- an insufficient appreciation for the real constraints that politicians work under."
   A lot of the comments echo this, anyway.  My response is, "so what?"  You'll never get anywhere with the Democrats or Republicans, anyway. Their path to power involves a capitulation to the capitalist system, with its fantasies of endless growth, its need to look at the world as a repository of extractable "natural resources" (or as a trashbin for its waste), and its endless hunger for more profit.  Now if Gore were a movement politician who put the environment ahead of capitalism, you might support him in hopes of being part of that movement.  But he's not.  And, apparently, neither are you.
   So who cares about whether Al Gore is "good" or "bad"?  When the continued operation of the system leaves everyone (or their children) stranded on the vast desert it has created, will you remember with great fondness the time you spent talking about Al Gore?  Let's get real, shall we?
   
   http://ecosocialism.blogspot.com/

   Permalink

10. 

    Kit Stolz Posted 6:55 am
    10 May 2006

    Gore's BTU taxWhat Bryankwalton said, with this note. That tax amounted to about 4.3 cents on the gallon, which at that time cost about $1.30 a gallon.
    I vividly remember Rush Limbaugh, among others, deriding the tax as pointless, unnecessary and inflationary.
    Can you imagine how much better off this country would have been with eight years of bigtime research into alternative fuels?
    Let's give Gore some credit for a good idea, and the reactionary right (among others, including auto unions) blame for killing it.
    Second, I happened to see Nobel Prize-winner Wangari Maathai a couple of weeks ago, and she spoke very highly of Gore for reasons not well known. She said that in the l980's, when a Senator, he took a great interest in her work planting trees in Africa, and subsequently pulled strings behind the scenes to keep her and other members of her group out of prison, when they encountered a corrupt and repressive government.
    I've been critical of Gore as a politician, for all the familiar reasons, but I think Gore the law-maker and environmentalist deserves more credit than he's been given to date.  

    Permalink

11. 

    rastybob Posted 7:07 am
    10 May 2006

    GoreGod yes anyone but Dubba!!!!!
    
    RASTY

    Permalink

12. 

    bookerly Posted 11:21 am
    10 May 2006

    Things Got Worse During Clinton/Gore
    
       The Clinton adminstration caved in and allowed SUV's to be classified as business vehicles.  This may go down as one of the greatest environmental crimes of the 1990's.
       Frankly, imagine if Gore had stood up, denounced it and resigned.  THAT would have been leadership.
       Sigh.
       Having said that, I don't hate Al Gore.  But I also don't have any illusions that he is going to save the planet.  However, any efforts he makes are of course welcome!
       If we need to loathe people (which I prefer to do privately (grin)), we should pick those who are actively working to keep us from addressing the issues of global warming.  Not our allies, no matter how imperfect they (and we) are.
       Nice interview.
    patrick

    Permalink

13. 

    venus1kjs Posted 9:35 pm
    10 May 2006

    Al Gore: My HeroI was devastated when Gore lost the 2000 presidential election.   Think how much better the USA would be if he had. After reading his book, "Earth in the Balance", I was made aware of so many bad things happening in the world, and ways we could change it.  He has dedicated a huge portion of his life to the environmental cause.  We need to support those leaders who can make a difference, any difference no matter how small.  And anyone who says he did nothing in office for the environment is ignorant of the way of politics.  The Clinton/Gore White House did not have the luxury of having a partisan base behind them every step of the way.  That makes an enormous difference in what can actually be accomplished.  I thank Mr. Gore for all his hard work and have every intention of seeing his documentary "An Incovenient Truth" when it comes to Baltimore.  Thanks.

    Permalink

14. 

    LegumeSam Posted 3:32 am
    11 May 2006

    I don't loathe Gorebut I do think he's part of the system...
    
    http://ecosocialism.blogspot.com/

    Permalink