Decker

OSLO, Norway - Former Vice President Al Gore was nominated for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his wide-reaching efforts to draw the world’s attention to the dangers of global warming, a Norwegian lawmaker said Thursday.

“A prerequisite for winning the Nobel Peace Prize is making a difference, and Al Gore has made a difference,” Conservative Member of Parliament Boerge Brende, a former minister of environment and then of trade, told The Associated Press.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16920923/

DOMS

Yasser Arafat won a noble peace prize too.

Decker

So did Henry Kissinger...the death of Irony.

I hope you're not comparing the farsighted Al Gore to either of those two.

DOMS

No, I'm just saying that prize is only worth the money that comes with it.

KelJu

Bah... Gore hasn't done squat other than push an agenda.

DOMS

That's not true. He's contributed to global warming by flying all over the globe to warn about global warming.

ALBOB

If you ask Al's proctologist you'll find Al's actually nearsighted.

(Yes, I meant PROCTologist. )

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

KelJu

I think Gores biggest achievement was pushing for funding for Arpanet which later evolved into the internet. He fucked up by saying he invented it, rather than his decisions led to the development of.

Either way, the guy isn't very good with words, and I think his global warming stuff is just a way for him to keep his foot in the door for a later run at the presidency later.

NordicNacho

We would of been alot better off with gore as president Funny thing is he had 1,000,000 more votes then GW and were the ones spreading democracy

http://www.roqofthe80s.com/#

Decker

Gore never said he invented it. That was republican spin point that the liberal media picked up and ran with.

Is it a matter of pathetic self-interest to keep his foot in the door that causes Gore to take on his role in the global warming debate? Is he supposed to sit around and wait for a team of advisors to tell him what to do with his life?

Gore was right with his farsighted effort to develop the Internet.

Gore was right about the folly of the Bush's Iraq invasion.

And Gore is farsighted again in his take on global warming.

Only in a seriously flawed popular culture like our own can a man like Gore be so right so often yet ridiculed as a self-serving buffoon who couldn't find his fucking couch in the living room.

BigDyl

Untrue. Gore does do squat. I believe his 1 RM is around 575.

Total ownage.

KelJu

Here is his actual quote.

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."


So, yeah you are right. The word "created" was replaced by "invented" which changed the entire meaning of the sentence.

why were there no stoies correcting the mistake? Why did Gore demand the truth be known?
Gore was too much of a pussy to stand up for himself and show that the republicans had put a spin on it. Why?

That is one of the big issues I have with democrats, is they are mostly pussies who let the big mean republicans run all over them.

calalily1972

He NEVER claimed to have invented the internet and there are TONS of stories correcting what was said. It was Bush that claimed that Gore said that during the campaigning. AND if it wasn't for Gore, we wouldn't have the internet we have today.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_10/wiggins/
http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/col/...net/index.html

Decker

It's not just the right wing owned media but the million dollar 'liberal' pundits that spread that crap around. They are lazy and follow bullshit scripts. Was Al Gore claiming to invent the internet? Or is Howard Dean crazy b/c he yelled at a pep rally? No. But it sure is fun to turn that stuff into comic relief and pass it off as informed political discourse that lazy reporters--especially 'liberals' --pass off without challenging the accuracy of the statement.

Fact is he didn't say he 'invented' the Internet. We can deconstruct the sentence but to what end? The paraphrase by Dick Armey is inaccurate. End of story.

While in the Congress Gore took the first steps to help bring about the implementation of the Internet. That is an accurate paraphrase. That shit about inventing the internet is republican spin designed to denigrate Gore to show what a disillusioned habitual liar he really is.

Words mean something.

Decker

Thank you for seeing through the bullshit propaganda and supporting your view with some terrific links.

maniclion

I like Al Gore, it's Tipper Gore whom I can't stand...

"We are like tenant farmers chopping down the fence around our house for fuel when we should be using Natures inexhaustible sources of energy — sun, wind and tide. ... I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that."
Thomas Edison: In conversation with Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone

brogers

Al Gore is a corrupt asshole.

Go read up about Occidental Petroleum.

Sandy42

an agenda which would help the world

FishOrCutBait

Help prolong what would be essentially inevitable?

Humanity will be wiped out

Thats all there is to it,

By Apocalypse or Ice Age, whatever you do or dont believe.

This is my journal. Click it and such

"tried and true theory on one's self is probably the only non-biased proof that something works for someone." - juggernaut

http://www.ronpaul.com/

Decker

Yes, he was hypocritical. But his forays into environmental education are at odds with his hypocrisy so he is moving in the right direction. I wish we could say the same about the current administration in any endeavor.

KelJu

I didn't know about that shit. I just got though reading it. Nice job Gore.

I don't trust him a bit.

DOMS

I like the way you think, Decker.

Heck, I'm going steal some money from an orphanage; but I'm going to give 5% to St. Jude's, so it's okay.

Decker

I would advise against that.

Gore's hypocrisy is only such in the most narrow sense. Oil is necessary to the operation of the modern world. I would think that you would be thrilled about Gore's investment. Instead, you characterize it in an oversimplified way: He owns oil stock so he is a hypocrite b/c fossil fuels contribute to global warming thus Gore should be dismissed outright. How wrong that is.

How does his ownership of oil stocks diminish his (correct) global warming theses and activities? The fact of the matter is that he's pushing for responsible/efficient uses of the fossil fuels in which he has a stake.

Or is the only way for Gore to argue plausibly of the dangers of Global warming is for him to bike everywhere he goes//heat his house with sunlight and flatulence//fly around the world by flapping his arms?

I suppose if I lived in a world of white knights and evil dragons, I could be as righteous as you over this matter. Everyone is a hypocrite. Everyone is a saint. There's just a lot of overlap. Fighting the good fight is still meritorious/worthwhile.

Or should we just throw in the towel and run with evil much the way the Bush family did with it's ownership of investment shares of Gestapo during WWII? http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...312540,00.html

"...the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he (P. Bush) worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power."

I understand that Gore's narrow hypocrisy and the Bush family's evil are two different things, but don't you see that even they can do good things? At least Gore can do good things.

DOMS

I like how you're trying to redefine things. That's very...lawyer-ish of you...

He is just like you and every other pro-human made global warming schumck out there: you talk about hard sacrifices, but you're not willing to make them yourselves!

You don't want to give up plastic bottles and your cars, and Gore doesn't want to give up a source of income.

That is the epitome of hypocrisy! "Do as I say, not as I do."

Decker

Once again you stunningly overstate a point you are trying to make.

Oil is necessary to the operation of our way of life for now.

Gore knows that.

Gore advocates responsible use of petroleum until we develop an alternative energy source. Hence his view that we should try to limit our greenhouse gas output.

You are impractical in your criticism.

zombul

I have not read the thread yet but the title alone made me lol.

DOMS

Well, by golly, if "oil is necessary to the operation of our way of life for now" then why should I stop using it? This same mis-begotten logic can apply to nearly anything that's blamed for global warming.

Again, you and people like you, are hypocrites. You can stop using oil this second, but there is a price to pay. Actually, there are many prices to pay. There goes your convenient travel on land and in the air. There goes all the mass-manufactured clothing that you enjoy. There goes the majority of the rubber items that you use daily (if not hourly).

You're not willing to do that. If you really held to your convictions, which you don't, you'd give up all these thing right now. But you'll blather on how it's not convenient to do this. That it's "just the way things are now".

So we need to merely curtail our use now, huh? How often do you think gore walks to his destinations? How often do you?

Decker

You are making nonsensical statements in the face of life's demands and complexities.

Like it or not, oil is the lifeblood of the economy as sure as worker productivity. Should we be concerned about our collective output of greenhouse gasses? Yes. Should we minimize that output? Yes. Should we abate all uses of oil? We could but that would devastate our economy and way of life. Does that mean we should just go on the way things are? No. We have a responsiblity to our progeny.

Are we asswipes for not putting our best efforts into finding a fuel alternative to oil? You better believe it.

DOMS

You're also an asswipe for not minimizing your own personal roll in global warming; because, in other words, you're not willing to change until someone makes you do it.

Bravo...

Decker

Oh impetuous youth. If by "personal" you mean me, you're changing the topic.

If you mean that anyone that gives one whit about living responsibly with respect to curbing global warming should go cold turkey with fossil fuels, then you are as practical as you are persuasive in your arguments.

If each person does the following: reducing energy use at home by purchasing energy efficient home appliances; planting trees to absorb carbon from the atmosphere; walking or taking public transportation instead of driving; making smart consumer choices by purchasing environmentally sound products and energy-efficient vehicles; and practicing waste minimization, product reuse, and recycling

then, in the aggregate, something is being done to battle global warming.

In case you're interested, I practice all of the above save one. But that's irrelevant.

Anyway, we do what we can individually to curb greenhouse gases while still acknowledging that petroleum is a necessary evil.