Gore hits Chicago to chants of 'Run, Al, Run'

Al Gore had his chance. His failure to carry his home state is inexcusable.
He can make a valuable contribution in many ways.
I believe that it is time to turn to a new generation of political leaders and strongly support Barack Obama for President.

Ted,

Big Al actually won in 2000.

Gore's 2004 campaign was disappointing, so why would 2008 be any different. There are already good declared candidates in the race.

Gore for Secretary of Energy or Interior!

He won it before. He can win it again.

Johne E;
Yeah, and Sandy Berger didn't stuff classified docs down his pants, 9/11 was an inside job, and no dem voted for the war...

Get on with life John

Gore LOST in 2000 !!
Even liberal controlled newspapers that conducted THIER OWN reviews agree he LOST
Now he's trying to Globally Warm himself back into our lives

He and Carter(another fine example of stuck on stupid) should work like hell to disappear into obsurity with due haste!!!

Now you libs will fire up your usual Bush rants....

Same old same old

Woooo hooooo! Go Al go!

I had more respect for Al Gore when he was running for president than I have had since his schlock-umentary. On the other hand could he be any worse than Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama?

Yes, Al, RUN!!! Run as fast as your fat little tushy will let you run, and run right to France. Ooops, France wised up some and elected a conservative. Run to Antartica, Al, run!!!

I wish he'd get nominated as a Republican. That way we'd get a choice between two decent candidates, for once.

Wendy - John Kerry ran on the dem. ticket in 2004, Gore ran in 2000. Both elections were disappointing (and depressing) if you ask me. Question, can you really have too many "good" candidates in a race?

Re: Wendy's comment that "Gore's 2004 campagn was disappointing..."

Wendy, he didn't run in 2004.

Al Gore was the people's elected president in 2000. He won the majority of votes.

With the lies, deceptions, and destruction of our American Democracy by the Bush administration, the only Democrat that has spoken up against the Iraq war, the secret torture and spying on innocent Americans, the continuation of the US's massive poisoning of the environment....well, you get the point.

Al Gore needs to stand up against this insidious assault on our Democracy and on reason in this country.

This time we will not allow the presidency to be taken from us again.

Run, Al, run. God knows we truly need you and, in your soul, you know that too.

I unfortunately think his time has passed. However, he would make a great EPA Administrator.

John E - Tony

Paraphrasing James Coburn from his role in the movie Magnificent Seven: “He lost”.

I also think he is smart enough not to run, knowing a similar fate would most certainly be in store which would destroy the social and political niche he’s worked so hard to create (and the gravy-train of cash that comes with).

I hope he does run...he'd be an easy beat!

Mary Margaret !!!!

What plant are you from?
Are you off your meds or is your aluminum hat on too tight??

Do you have ANY grasp of reality or to follow the teachings of Rosie O?

Gore LOST
If he should burden us with another run at president...he'll LOST AGAIN

Like Kerry..he's a LOSER!

Have a nice day and watch out for the black helicopters

Notice how Gore has not specifically said that he will NOT run in 2008? I guess there's a glimmer of hope yet. If the power-hungry (yet spineless) Hillary gets the Democratic nomination I'm voting 3rd party, and investing my vote for more choices in the long term...

Re: Mary Margaret's Comments

Well said. We need Al like never before. Run Al, we are all behind you.

GORE WON IN 2000 and HE WILL WIN AGAIN IF HE RUNS!

Reagan, Nixon, and Bush 41 won the Presidency after losing a General election. Al Gore should absolutely run.

Mary;
you say he was 'the people's elected president'- you scare me because you sound like a communist. Everything communist is 'the people's', don't you know?

And, if you don't like the constitution, change it. The laws are there for a reason, it's happened before, and it will happen again. You can't pick and choose which laws you like to complain about and then change your mind when things don't go your way.

You're one those people who drive a mid nineties subaru with "Gore '00" and "no blood for oil" bumper stickers aren't you.

Older and wiser. Yes Al run. May the best man, or woman win!!!

The presidency was not taken from you.

You lost.

Do you know what the electoral college is?

Go back to elementary school and retake cicvcs class because you obviously flunked it the first time around.

Actaully, the NY times and other papers found that Gore won in Florida in 2000 with a fair recount, unlike what the poster above said.

Gore is the best candidate for the democrats - he has the resume, has issues he can run on, is an experienced candidate who cannot be "swift boated", and is a true national candidate who can win Ohio, Missouri, Florida, and other key states.

JOhn E., for months now you've been in Baracky's camp. Now you're jumping ship to Gore?? How many people are running around in that little brain of yours??

Correction: Al Gore actually won the election by popular vote in 2000. George W. Bush won the coup, however, and was subsequently installed by the Supreme Court. There is a difference.

The shenanigans of the Republicans in Florida are and will remain forever a disgrace to this country. That it was let to stand by the Supreme Court was just appalling and almost unbelievable.

Hmmm, let's see...George's campaign manager in Florida just happens to also be the Secretary of State who runs the elections department; no conflict of interest there!??? Blocking routes and access to polls is certainly not fair play and NOT "the American way". I could go on and on, but Al's put it behind him, so I guess I can.

I think he is probably one of the best and most experienced for the job, and certainly one of the most intelligent. For those of us who actually care about the world we leave our children, he would be a great choice, IF he runs.

Yeah, I can't imagine why he would continue to not close the door on a Presidential run... to stay relevant, in the news (like this) and sell more of his book, perhaps?

So reporter John McCormick took 10 minutes off from being Barack Obama's press flack to be Al Gore's press flack?

Won't your boss Barack get mad at your moonlighting, John?

I would love to see Al get re-elected.

Forget the Electoral College. He couldn't even carry his home state. If they didn't support why are you?

Of course the NY Times would say that Gore won in Florida.

not a trustworhty source.

The NY Times is a slanted biased mouthpiece for the socialists, I mean democrats.

Whats a "fair recount"?

Recounting ballots only in areas controlled by the lying, lowdown, despicable, cheating Democrats instead og recounting the entire state

I think he has a real chance!! People take him seriously now since "Inconvenient Truth" came out... is it enough?? probably not. I stake more in Hillary or Obama. But there are a lot of 20-somethings that now really respect him!!

Let's see, Al invented the Internet. Oh no, that really didn't happen. Ummmm, I know, Al served in Viet Nam, in combat. Oops, that really didn't happen, either; he was WAY behind the lines. I've got it, Al is helping to save the world by conserving energy! Sorry, I forgot about his home in Tennessee which uses about four times the energy of the average American household. Whatever, he'd be a great President. Run, Al, run...far away from the rest of us-please!

Tom Karczewski

We use the electorial college system because otherwise, presidential candidates will only visit "population centers" during any election. You can just hit places like NYC, LA and Chicago, and stay entirely out of states like Wisconsin and Michigan (both "blue"). By having an electoral college system, small population centers actually get representation (and federal money for projects/etc). Its actually a pretty smart way of doing things, considering it was thought up 230 years ago.

Now, for those of you insisting that the Supreme Court illegally or otherwise "gave" the presidency to Bush, I ask the following questions.

Why, if the Supremes are Rightwing Nazis along with Bush, who "gave" the Republicans (right wing)the election, why did they vote to uphold Roe-v-Wade since then? Why did they vote to uphold affirmative action? Two subjects your "wing nuts" are passionate about. Makes as much sense as the Israelies pulling off 9/11 so we would elimiate their Arab foes.

Al is just like Jimmy Carter...irrelevant.

The guy standing outside Borders today selling Al Gore T-Shirts would have been better off handing out bags of sour grapes, because this is all I've heard from Gore since 2000. I wish the guy would just shut the hell up and go away.

Folks are advocating for an Al Gore presidency?

Geez...

That's all we need in this country: an intelligent, cogent, thinking president.

He'll mess up all the good stuff that has been going on here since 2000, like...

Um...

Like...

Uh...

Let me get back to ya' on that.

I think Al's a great guy, smarter than the loser in office right now, but I think that the conservative base would tear him apart with their BS agenda. Would rather have him fighting for his causes without having to pander to the idiots that forget he won the popular vote and that the supreme court put Bushie in place.

Let's see. Gore misinterpeted who invented the internet. He thought he did. Now he misinterpetes the weather. And the election Al gore ran in was not disappointing..HE LOST

Great to see my talking points being used. You know, the ad homium acqusations to those who don't understand how right we are of being "communisits", or "supporters of Rosie", or talking about the kinda car these liberals drive and their bumper stickers". Remember our "No Spin Zone" is true fair and balanced reason

Good job, gang. Keep it up. And please stay away from what Al Gore calls "reasoned debate". It's much too dangerous for us.

FACT: Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000. The election was decided by the Supreme Court when it stopped the recount in Florida.

There is even more reason for Gore to be President in 2008. Global warming won't be noticed by Bush until there are not ice cubes for his martini.

Al Gore is the only potential candidate who truly understands the mess we're in and who has the will to pull us out of it.

His time has come.

Mary Margaret
Gore lost the election
because Bush won the majority of the electoral
votes-something you were
sleeping through in Civics
class??
Gore had his chance and now
we have to listen to his wisdom on global warming
based on his invention of the internet?
I think his next path should be to find out if Humpty Dumpty was pushed or
on "record hot day" passed
out and slipped.

If anything has been proven by the past 6 years, it is that we would have better off had Gore won. He's consistently opposed Bush's tragic war and he has chosen to spend his time passionately pursuing an issue on which he has a great deal of expertise. Those are better qualifications than than the current pool of candidates.

Gore won the election in 2000. The Republicans stole it through a right-leaning US supreme court. But that is what they do when things don't go their way... they cheat and even change their own rules when it no longer benefits them.

Enough with harrassing this man already! Here he writes a prescient book telling the American people what WE need to do, and all peopke can do is beg him to save them. It is getting very redundant.

You know in your heart he was right for America in 1992 and 1996 and 2000 and I sincerely believe he is right for America for 2008. I ABSOLUTELY would vote for him again!

You know in your heart he was right for America in 1992 and 1996 and 2000 and I sincerely believe he is right for America for 2008. I ABSOLUTELY would vote for him again!

I'd 2nd that.....

The Trib's report ignores the fact that there were some serious demonstrators at the book-signing calling attention to Gore's refusal to debate his global warming and other views. Gore speaks only in controlled forums, and invariably ducks debate. Lord Monckton has openly challenged him to public debate but Gore's only response is silence. Gore is an intellectual coward.

1) Name one candidate from either party that is more qualified for the presidency than Al Gore.

2) If he does run and win the Dem primary, name one candidate from the republicant party that can beat him.

3) If you think that person can beat Al Gore, why will they and how will they do it?

I have to laugh about those who think Gore won in 2000. He never was ahead in Florida and several newspapers, who did detailed research, concluded that too. If there was other evidence, all of the newspapers would have jumped on it. Instead, we only hear about conspiracy theories from lefties.

The other big thing is to ask who Gore picked to head up the vote fight....Bill Daley. Gee, why do you think he picked a Daley? Could it be it's because they have a lot of knowledge and know a lot of people who know how to cheat at elections?? If you picked "yes", then you are right!

They don't use the term "Democratic Machine" because of efficiency...it's about manufacturing votes. The machine produces votes - both legal and fraudulent votes.

Who were the first people to stay in the White House after Kennedy was elected in 1960? If you guessed Richard J and Sis Daley, then you care correct! That's why Daley only wanted to cherry pick where the votes should be recounted. He knew where they could "find" some more. (And don't you find it strange that the voting process is run by party people? I have a lot of confidence in it. Not.)

As for the people who say the Supreme Court put Bush in, I suggest you read up on what happened. It was very clear that the Florida courts overstepped their bounds. Look up the Florida Chief Justice's comments.

Bush won fair and square and those who think otherwise are really using kindergarten logic.

Dan stated: Everything communist is 'the people's', don't you know?
*******
For instance, that old piece of paper that starts, "We, the People..."
*******
Left winger are silly at times, but right wingers are malevolent idiots.

For those of you who aren't Gore fans, consider what the Bush administration and the army of Republican congressment have provided for your and my kids:

Massive delays on global warming relief efforts.

An expensive, bloody war that we cannot afford and are losing.

Huge deficits (If you have one ounce of true conservative blood, this should remind you that Bush is a pretender.)

Loss of privacy through illegal wiretaps.

I could go on and on, but it is to depressing.

Just think how that will weigh on our kids.

REELECT GORE 2008!

Gore won the popular vote over Bush in 2000
50,999,897 to 50,456,002.

Gore has quietly worked for a long time on this global warming issue, and recently it's finally getting the attention it deserves. Good for him, and good for us that it's catching on, even to an extent with President Bush.

I think the right-wingers are acting like brats and are just angry that they didn't see the issue coming before Gore. Phil Valentine, Rush Limbaugh, all the crap radio hosts. They fire up the right wing with pseudo-logic to keep their ratings high.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same pseudo-scientific crap about "well the hot sun makes us hotter, not greenhouse gases" or "warming happens in cycles every few centuries, it's not humans causing it"....

Come on! Most reputable scientists are on board with the conclusion that humans caused an INCREASE in global warming and it's a big problem.

Lucy Johnson are you kidding or what? Al Gore lost the 2000 election, and he would have lost by an even larger margin had there not been massive voter fraud in Wisconsin and New Mexico. Now, if he had any core values, he would have denounced the totally unprofessional, immoral, and very sleazy behavior of President Clinton and that would have greatly helped his stature as a Presidential candidate and he most likey would have won. By his not saying anything about what Pres. Clinton did, he basically was saying he was okay with what Clinton did, and that he condones that kind of behavior if the person is his friend. Now how creepy is that, Lucy?

Not only did Al Gore win in 2000, he is possibly the only one who can win in 2008. I hear people blaming Al Gore for losing his home state of Tennessee, but do they really think that Barack Obama is going to pick that one up? Go sign the petition and allow America to redeem itself for the tragic mistake that ocurred in 2000

Hippo..Read the most recent issue of Discover magazine. There are many in the science community even today who disagree with Al on the effect of humans on the earth's temperature. And if you are pretty ignorant to the fact if you don't think that the sun does not have an effect on temperatures here. HELLO!!!!! What planet are you from. I think we all, even us Republicans would like to breathe clean air. I just don't want to destroy our economy in doing so. If you do some research, you will note that the countries that signed the Kyoto have actually increased their CO2 emissions, whereas the US has actually decreased slightly. I find it odd that those that are on this Global Warming kick are also the ones that complain about gas prices. I can't wait until I hear them start complaining about food prices. Never mind the fact that Ethanol is more expensive to produce, emits more CO2 gasses and we would have to replace every crop produced in the US just to replace about 70% of the energy we get from petroleum products.

If people are causing global warming, then why are Mars, Venus, Jupiter, etc also warming?

Quite frankly, having met Mr. Gore in the mid-80s when he was Senator Gore, I think he is a very smart individual. If he's smart this time, he'll sit back, selling books, and let the other candidates fight among themselves until the convention. Then, when the delegates can't decide between the lessers, he should offer to step in as a compromise candidate for the Dems. Just a thought.

LindaJ

Al Gore...the other choice for the Big-Business-Sell-Out-America- And-The-Global-Worker-For-The- Benefit-Of-The-Super-Rich.

Please Al...stay home. We have enough brain dead drones praying at the altar of globalization.

As an American ex-pat, I've lived the past ten years in the UK, watching as a seemingly reasonable Prime Minister subjected his nation and its military to the gross humiliation of involvement in a military conflict for which there remains no conscionable justification.

If we are ever to find a sustainable peace in this world, ideology must resume its role as an inspiration to serve the common good, while staying out of the business of government.

In Gore, we find a man who respects the value of a strong moral compass, but has the wherewithall to temper his faith with well-informed reason.

When he runs, I will cast my absentee vote for him.

Gore won in 2000, unfortunately his brother wasn't governor of Florida.

Loony Lefties: Republican shenanigans in Florida in 2000? Hmmm, the three counties Gore wanted recounts in are counties controlled and operated by Democrats. You had Democratic voters who apparently did not know how to use a butterfly ballot, something many parts of the country have used for years -- including here in CHicago.

The Supreme Court stopped the recounting because you had folks using one set of rules in one county and another set of rules in another. You had people "interpreting" how one may have voted depending on how the chad was.

And for folks screaming about Bush subverting the Constitution, the Constitution says presidents are elected by electoral votes, not popular vote. Bush won the electoral college, thank God!

Jeb Bush in 08!!!

Jeb Bush in 08!!!

RON PAUL 2008

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

where do they stand beyond the television soundites? what's their voting records?

http://www.ontheissues.org/

i've leaned liberal most of my life. though, as churchill said, "if you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. if you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain". government should decrease. we should have a reserved foreign policy. government should be out of stay out of peoples lives. we should protect our borders. and most of all we should stop pissing all over the constitution.

Yes John D, France elected a "conservative". Wonder if they're still supporting gun control, universal healthcare, & other conservative ideals.

On a different note, Gore had his 2000 election stolen by conservative lackey supreme court justices. Gore will not run again. End Of Story.

When Gore lost in 2000 I was nine years old and even I knew the difference between winning the popular vote and the electoral vote! There is a reason we have the electoral college and in this case it was so morans like Al Gore don't get elected to office. I would suggest to everyone that thinks Al Gore won in 2000 that they go back to 4th grade and learn why our countries forefathers instituted an electoral college. Then, let me know who won?

Hey McCormick, this type of garbage is just junk journalism. Hopefully, Sam Zell cleans house with you the first out the door.

""Run, Al, run," some chanted on the third floor of the Borders on State Street"

And SOME yelled that fat Al is a phony.

You Al gore lovers are pathetic! He lost in 2000, Kerry lost in 2004, and Fred Thompson will defeat Hillary rodman Clinton in 2008!! Dems are all socialist losers!!

It doesn't matter whether Gore won or lost in 2000. He ran a weak, timid puppet campaign that year. He let consultants dictate his every move -- consultants who led the Democratic Party to a decade of humiliating defeats. Gore is a new man now. Unlike the Democrats of old -- and unlike even Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, despite their front-runner status in a more Democrat-friendly climate -- Gore no longer has any fear. He can speak his mind without hesitating or dissembling. He can lay out the plain truth to voters. He conscience is his guide now, not the consultant class.

A Gore presidential candidacy would be a force to behold, as would a Gore presidency, especially if backed by a friendly Democratic Congress. I believe this man will be the salvation of a country teetering on the brink of its own doom.

How did Gore lose his home state of TN in 2000? How did he lose every southern state in 2000? Anyone remember his little pep talk with Willy after the impeachment vote? Gore put his hand on Bill's shoulder and mouthed something about how Clinton would go down as the greatest president in history...Al Gore Sr must still be spinning in his grave at the TN loss.
Oh, and for the "wiretap/privacy" types, try to grasp that Food Lion, Safeway and other grocery stores, not to mention Amazon keep more info on you and actually "data mine" that info for targeted marketing way more than the feds. Also, do you really believe that Big Al would have not brought the wrath of Jehovy down on the Taliban and then gone looking for more targets after 9/11? I guarantee that he would have been a one-term prez if he looked like Willy in his "it's a law enforcement issue" response to Sept 11th (which, for the Gorebot types, actually happened and was actually done by bad people--but that's for another day; you've had enough already)

Listen to the Wingnut crowd cry about Al Gore.

If big Al had actually been awarded the job that he WON in 2000 the Republican party wouldn't be going down the crapper right now thanks to the current Chimp in Chief and we wouldn't be stuck in a civil war in Iraq.

That would have been a win-win situation for the Democrats and the Wingnut Party:)

Please substitue the faith for ideology in the preceding comment and excuse the egg on my face.

Tell me right-wingers: In 2000 if Gore lost the popular vote and won the election via the Supreme Court halting the recount thus giving him a microscopic lead and squeezing out an electoral college victory, would you be as adamantly pro-electoral college as you are now? You know you would be saying the exactly OPPOSITE now if that were the case. You are just happy that your guy won and could give a #%@& about what's actually good for this country.

Mindless drones and hypocrites you are, all of you.

I didn't realize we were voting for Dog Catcher again so soon. In the words of another favorite cartoon character - WHAT A MAROON!
Al Bore is such a loser. It's just amazing that there are so many stupid people who think my wife's SUV is the cause of our planet's weather & not the SUN - which if you remember your science class is CLOSER to us in winter and FURTHER AWAY in summer? So if our warmer temperatures can be reached when we're further away from the sun, doesn't anyone think it possible that maybe it is the SUN causing this and not an SUV?

Certainly, no one expects that you are going to support Al Gore if you are a conservative because that would violate your core principles. But, please, let go of the "he said he invented the internet" thing. The claim that he made that boast has been widely discredited for years. There's plenty to disagree with the man on but no one can really believe that he thinks he invented internet technology. It's truly tiresome and undercuts your credibility.

Who is John Galt??
Answer: He's an idiot.
And another thing ..
The problem with the current crop of lemming Republicans is that they have no moral compass. they simply believe that winning is everything.. it is the goal unto itself, and it justifies all. ( read all these posts form these kool-aid drinking/not thinking Repubs). What you do after you win, or even how you 'win' is immaterial. As long as you win. When you claim to be the winner, you can call everyone else losers and marginalize their thoughts, ideas, lives and dreams .
Know your enemy, folks . It's greater and much more insidously evil than you imagine.
I think Al Gore understands ... that's why he won't run.

I'm a conservative and I believe that Al Gore would be a great President.

I will not vote Republican in 2008 if Ron Paul does't win the GOP nomination. If anyone except for Dr. Paul wins, I'm voting Democrat.

First time for everything.

Al and Bill Did nothing to stop terrorism when they had the chance. So far the Bush administration has kept terrorism at bay since sept 11. I can only imagine the effect that a propaganda slide show presented by "president Gore " would have had . Also the supreme court only enforced the laws in 2000 and gore never won A SINGLE RECOUNT.

Al Gore is a big phoney with his wasting energy at his home in Tennessee, his autos, the silly "carbon credits" from which he receives some money, his Global Warming lies in "An Inconvenient Truth" and his personal life style as he surpasses Michael Moore in weight.NICE MAN!

I see that the neo-cons are in full bloom on the issue of both Gore running again and the 2000 election.

On 2000, the familiar "...liberal media..." nonsense shows how out of touch these people are. They may be getting their news from FoxNews and probably believe that Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter are paragons of journalistic integrity and honesty.

Here's the truth according to an independent survey conducted by the Pew Trust. They found that during the 2000 campaign there were more negative articles written about Al Gore than George W. Bush. So much for the "liberal media".

I'm a Barack Obama supporter, but Gore/Obama sounds like a great ticket to me.

Anyone but "Shrillery." Having to listen to her for four years would be enough make me vote Republican!

Rickster,

Clearly you don't truly understand the global warming argument if you think people don't think the Sun is part of global warming.

No paper or responsible media outlet has EVER claimed Al Gore won Florida. Besides, the election was "called" two hours before the polls closed in the west by the media. If that hadn't of happened, Gore would have lost in a landslide.

Rickster:
You are an idiot. Thake your knowledge of how the sun and the seasonds work to a 5th grade science class, and listen as they laugh you out of the classroom. Ever heard of the 'tilt' of the earth , ol buddy? Here's a news flash... when it winter in Chicago... It's hotter than hell in Argentina.. Get it ??
By the way .. it IS you wife that's causing global warming .. with all he rancid pussy farts . It's got nothing to do with her SUV.. Other than the fact that that where she parks it.

Gee I guess the debate ISN'T
over

Yes Al, please run. His candidacy would make sure the GOP held onto the WH.

are there any nations out there that want texas for free? we don't it anymore.

DAC,

You call Republicans hypocrites. FYI, if you paid attention to the pre-election in 2000, many political experts predicted this very predicament. Except however, they predicted that Bush would win the popular vote and Gore would take the electoral college. I don't remember Democratic outrage at that scenario. For that matter, I don't remember Republican outrage either. Get over it! It's over. Look to the future. This country would be much better off if the "hate bush" crowd would have kept their mouths shut.

We need Al Gore.

All the other candidates don't have near the experience or will needed.

Time for
a COOL
Change
Al Gore
2008

Rickster:

You little Dumb***. Stupid conservative retard who still doesn't seem to be able to face the facts. You think the SUN's doing it? well then i wonder why it's getting warmer than it is usually? is the sun like flying straight at us? no, it only moves closer at a rate of wat? 6 inches per year? that makes almost no difference unless you look at it in like a BILLION year scale. Right now, slightly contributed by your wife's SUV, the temperature goes up at a significant rate ANNUALLY.

Considering the royal mess that the current president has made of EVERYTHING he has touched its a wonder that anyone with half a brain would even consider more of the same. Didnt realize monkeys could type. Yeah lets put another republican idiot in charge and polish off whats left of a great country...ours, Wake up. We would be fortunate to have Gore. The pathetic torture crowd are beyond comprehension.

"Run Al, Run" That's the bumper sticker I have on the FRONT of my car.

Wow. A lot of wingnuts out tonight.

Gore Derangement Syndrome afflicts the simple minded.

Laughing my butt off at KTS....Ever heard of Solar Flares? The sun has different cycles. Sometimes it burns hotter, sometimes cooler. So......I'd love to have seen those SUV's that melted the ice caps post "the ice age"

Umm... the only modern president to win the presidency after losing a presidential election was Nixon. Al Gore, the Democratic Nixon?!

Al won the popular vote but lost the EC. The EC was put in place 200 years ago because people were getting their information from the Pony Express. It is a broken system that needs to be fixed, and yes, the r's would be screaming mad if the SC went the other direction. Typical hypocrites.

Man-made Global Warming is a fact that is proven by thousands of scientists whose work has been peer-reviewed many times over. The only 'scientists' that claim it is a hoax are meteorologists on the payroll of big oil. All quacks.

Al Gore did not lose in 2000 because he was tied to Bill Clinton. He lost because he distanced himself from BC. If he would have had BC by his side every time he stumped, there wouldn't have been a need for the SC. He would have beat the chimp in the EC as well.

And, if Al Gore would have won in 2000, he would have actually listened to Sandy Berger and Richard Clark and it would have been much less likely that 9/11 ever would have happened.

We would also not be caught in a civil war in Iraq at the expense of 3400+ soldiers, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's, eventually around a trillion dollars and the respect of most of the world.

Wire-taps, bungled hurricane responses, bungled appointments, support for torture......

Anybody that would take the last 6 years of this admin. over what could have been under Gore is frighteningly stupid.

Let us not forget the first gulf war, when Gore was a senator, and he went to each of the leaders, Dole and Mitchell, and said that whoever gave him the most time on the floor would get his vote. Mitchell offered 12 minutes, Dole offered 15, so he voted for the war. He sold his vote for war based on who would give him the most tv time. Is that the kind of guy you want as President? Seriously?

Wow. A lot of wingnuts out tonight.

Gore Derangement Syndrome afflicts the simple minded.

Run, Al, Run ----- the sky is falling!

Yes, Gore won the general election in 2000.

No, Gore lost in the electoral college in 2000.

CNN and NORC did an interesting studying in Florida after the election. Here is the link if anyone is interested.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html

As an aside, the SCOTUS from their opinion stopped the recount in Florida because the Florida Supreme Court appeared to be endorsing a recount procedure that was contrary to Florida election law at the time.

Basically it was, and to this day remains a mess.

Although if I had one wish it would be that people would hang up their sound-bites and actually learn something about the issue before recitinng the same tired of memes.

Al Gore never qualified for a hand recount based on the election rules of law that but they did it anyway. You people really need to get over it, Gore lost in 2000. The only thing the Supreme Court did was up hold the election laws that were in place. You can’t change the rules when things don’t go your way! I am sure we would have all
Felt really safe with Al Gore as President during the 911 crisis, what a scary thought.

Wake up you crying liberals Gore lost and that it!

Stewart, You replied- therefore I assume you are a right-winger- but you didn't answer the question.

We all know the political parties are in this to win but I addressed the question to individuals who either truly believe or have been brainwashed by right-wing ideology. If you can distance yourself from your party affiliation for 2 seconds to answer my question truthfully you KNOW that you would not be for the electoral college if the 2000 election results were reversed. Can you step up and admit that much?

And no, I won't "get over it" as you parroted. Have you ever heard of legal precedent?? The mess created by the legal fiasco of the 2000 post-election period for future elections remains to be seen but, you can be sure, we will be feeling it for generations to come.

Who would want a crying wimp like Al Gore? Now he is trying everything to get elected again by saying things about global warming. He is nothing but a cry baby!

Bush won 2000 by the Electoral College. Plan and simple. The fact of the matter is that if this had not gone to the Supreme Court, it would have gone to the house of representatives. There is precedent with the 1876 election. Almost identical circumstances with Hayes and Tilden. It states in the Constitution that in the case of not winning the plurality of the vote (270 to win), the election can go to the House of Representatives. The House at that time had a Republican majority. Three big reasons for Gore not winning - one, he lost his home state of Tenn by 90,000 votes, two - Ralph Nader and three, the country wanted a change from Clintons antics. Good night!

Ok, all of you who voted for GWB once or twice raise your hand.........
As I thought.....you get what you vote for.
As for some you I highly recommend some independent research. Somehow "parroting" what you hear on FOX NEWS just is not very original especially when you quote, without reference, Shawn Hannity.
As for the 2000 election, that was yesterday. Should Al Gore run? Absolutely. It will make the 20 or so who are running currently just that more uncomfortable.....sorry, folks, mother earth IS running out of gas, both the kind you put in your tank to the very air you breathe.
Ignoring the message because of the messenger is dangerous to your health. Sorry but this is an "inconvient truth".

Al Gore will be running in 2008 and Barak Obama will be his running mate.

Gore/Obama is the winning ticket for America

Intelligence ,common sense ,style and grace .

RUN, AL, RUN!!!!

For anybody who has doubts about him,watch & LISTEN to this true patriot...Video: Gore Speech on Executive Powers (Martin Luther King Day 2006): http://tinyurl.com/3yr3gw

Protect OUR Constitution: GORE in 2008!!

Oh, Mary Margaret: please for the sake of the country do all that you can to make certain what you say actually happens (Run, Al, run & get the Dem nomination) so that Fred Thompson can become POTUS. Please make him the Dem nominee: just as the USA beat the Brits twice (and bailed 'em outta two World Wars) as well the Germans, Algore can actually be BEAT twice by the true people of the USA.

"Al Gore was the people's elected president in 2000. He won the majority of votes.

With the lies, deceptions, and destruction of our American Democracy by the Bush administration, the only Democrat that has spoken up against the Iraq war, the secret torture and spying on innocent Americans, the continuation of the US's massive poisoning of the environment....well, you get the point.

Al Gore needs to stand up against this insidious assault on our Democracy and on reason in this country.

This time we will not allow the presidency to be taken from us again.

Run, Al, run. God knows we truly need you and, in your soul, you know that too.

Posted by: Mary Margaret

Amen: run him again!

To Steve Tatham,

You are partially correct. Al Gore did not say he "invented" the internet, he said he "created" the internet. The exact quote, in an interview with Wolf Blitzer, March 9, 1999, he said "I took the initiative in creating the Internet." For full transcript go to http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/03/09/president.2000/transcript.gore/

Regardless, the fact that he sold his vote for the first gulf war for face time on TV is reason enough not to ever vote for him.

Oh, I thought they were chanting like "Run Forest Run"!!!

Forest Gump that is.

Hopefully Al Gore will be able to pay for his massive electricity bill with proceeds from the book sales.

What a phoney! Everyone else should live like a caveman while Al Bore uses more energy than 20 households, not to mention using a private jet instead of commercial air and using big SUV's to drive around in. typical liberal phoney. Do as I say, don't do as I do.

Having carefully considered all the above, it appears the liberals have won another one.

Dr. Lawrence Fratesch, no bold please. And Larry, leave my heart out of this, my heart would stop before I would pull the democratic lever!

Al Gore is a PHONY. He is nothing more than a lousy lying politician who will do whatever he has to do in order to sell his books and sell the world on global warming. He has investments in the so-called "Carbon Offsets" field of business so of course, he wants everyone to believe his BS. Don't listen to real scientists who contest that humans are even remotely responsible for the global warming that is occurring. It's a shame that people can't and won't do the research themselves and figure things out for themselves. Has anyone stopped to think "Hey, maybe the fact that the sun is getting larger and hotter might have something to do with it." I guess thats to hard to do for some. There is no thinking involved in being a sheep and following the herd. Sad.

Al Gore......who???????????

There is only one name that will rise above the pack and become our next president>>>> Fred Thompson !!!

Read'em and weep, you wacko Dems!!!

KTS, you little dumbs*** stupid lefty retard, please explain why Earth has had ice ages, no ice ages, why Chicago was buried under a mile high glacier and no longer isn't? Please explain why INCREASED solar flare activity is said to be the cause of the polar ice caps on Mars melting?

And LIBune censors, I sure as hell hope that since KTS can use that exact same wording in his comment then I better as well!

They just don't get it-HE LOST PEOPLE. By the system set up by our founding fathers, he lost.

It doesn't matter if we all stay home on election day and not one of us votes..

It doesn't matter because who ever we vote for and whoever "WINS" will simply go to Washington and answer to the same corporations that truely RUN our country.

Americans have let democracy die a quiet death..

How have they done that..?

Everyone in America today thinks that standing behind the GOVERNMENT whether it be the democratic party or the republican party.. is eing an American Patriot...

And that is the opposite of PATRIOTISM.. Patriotism is standing behind your COUNTRY which is "WE THE PEOPLE" and the government as we all know is NOT the people and consistantly ignores the "PEOPLE" and does what it wants regardless..

The government is run by corporations and therefore we do not elect our LEADER under a democracy.. the voting process is kept in place to give everyone the illusion that we can make a difference.. we all know we can't if the government has forgotten the "WE THE PEOPLE" part of the constitution...

So stop arguing and get back to work... that is what our NEW LEADERS WANT.. employees not citizens...

Perhaps those chanting "run Al run" were all Republicans

Gore is an idiot. his global warming arguement is a crock....and if you believe it..you may as well start wearing tin foil hats and start hand feeding rosie odonell (which is quite the task, if i do say so)

America had been wrong when they didn't choose YOU as our president,as a result we end up in this very chaotic situation. If you run for president this time, You will give AMERICA a second chance to correct things that went wrong and strengthen our weaknesses, and AMERICA thinks that YOU are the RIGHT GUY for this POSITION...so please run Al, run,.for PRESIDENT....

To Mary Margaret...He is the only democrat to speak out against the war? Oh OK

Al who? Thank goodness for an 8 year George Bush presidnecy that overcame an incompetent Clinton/Gore administration that came into office with an economy that was already on the rebound, yet couldn't deal effectively with Al Qaida, Saddam Hussein, Sudan, or Rwanda. The Clinton/Gore administration handed Bush a tanking economy, corporate scandal, unchecked terrorism, and Iraq. Bush has managed to deal with all of it. Yea, "Run Al Gore"... and go hide under some "Green Party" rock somewhere.

Terry,

Do you still have that GOP W./Little Dickie 2000 bumpersticker on your ***?

How silly Al Gore is going to look in 5 years when this man made global warming hysteria is shown to be science fiction. Actually it’s just anti capitalism propaganda. I love the way Bore I mean Gore is trying to silence any questioning on the subject, typical lib if you can’t beat them with your argument try and silence them. Not very democratic if you ask me.

"There is a reason we have the electoral college and in this case it was so morans like Al Gore don't get elected to office.

It's MORON not moran... Perhaps you should learn to spell the word before you try to insult someone with it! :)

In my opinion, Mr Gore's intention is to make Hillary nervous about his getting into the race. But, in all honesty, I would love to see Al get in the race. He takes out Hillary and leaves JOE BIDEN as the Democratic nominee for president.

KTS,

Can you site a specific reference of where global warming is supposed to be able to be measurable annually ? I thought that at best it can only be measured in tenths of degrees per decade, and on the order of degrees (in single digits) per millenia.

*If* there is is global warming, it is much more likely to be caused by solar cycles and water vapor than by CO2 from cars.

How many carbon credits will I get for eating a side of beef each year, thus reducing the cattle population, and reducing the methane from it's flatulence ? I'll be happy to sell these credits to Mr. Gore.

I think by Run! they were warning him that there was a possibility of intelligent debate ahead and that he should run away fast.
"I'd rather be a Conservative nut job than a liberal with no nuts and no job."

Oh yeah, and George W. won his home state in 2000, right? Oh, I forgot all the Bushies still think George is from Texas...

Amazing the amount of mental illness that strikes this nation. Do not believe me? Look at all the gore supporters, pure mental illness at its best.

Libs, you really need to stop trying to shift history to YOUR liking you bunch of losers.

Have you Dems ever read a book on the rise and fall of civilizations ? If you did you would all realize that you are directly causing the downfall of our civilization right now by handing America right over to our enemies.

I do not think you will appreciate Bush until the war is on our home soil and attacks happen here everyday. At this time you will be begging for Bush to be back in office and complaining why we are not at war with these savages and protecting our homeland. Do you idiots want to fight in America or Iraq ? Make up your minds !

GW is a natural phenomenon man will not understand. It is in cycles and you libs need to accept that. During the Dark Ages, Earth was MUCH more hotter than it is now. Guess what. We survived that and we also survived Global coooling aka Ice ages.

We all see it as his time, but he must follow his gut.

Please, Mr. Gore, your party needs you now, more than ever. Please run.

David J
Vallejo, CA

This is the reason why I recently moved from the dump of Chicago to the Great State of Texas. While riding in a Chicago public transit bus, I fondly recall an able-bodied woman talking about how she was waiting for her government check because she didn't work.

You know what? I just read a whole bunch of these posts, and it's become clear to me that this is a waste of time. It has been reduced to name calling and fabrications.

here are some important TRUE THINGS that you should understand and/or look up for yourself:

1. AL GORE NEVER SAID HE INVENTED THE INTERNET. He said he helped in it's creation which is true, he invested quite a bit of money into it at its inception.

2. AL GORE DID WIN THE VOTE IN FLORIDA. There are lists of voters, hard evidence, who were disenfranchized.
Something like 30,000 votes which would have certainly put him over the top. . .look it up. Yes, technically, he lost the election. He conceded.

3. GLOBAL WARMING / CLIMATE CHANGE IS OCCURING AND IT IS A RESULT OF HUMAN ACTIVITY. Nearly every scientist in the world who approaches this problem agrees. Look it up. Read the actual scientific reports instead of letting FOX news tell you about them.

Let me make a general observation. Republicans have 1 very straightforward platform on mostly all issues. Democrats differ on issues person to person (you always here people proclaiming that they don't have a unified plan).

I'd like to put forth that this is due to the type of person who is a democrat; a free thinker. Republicans tend to be willing to hear something, true or not, and repeat it (i.e. al gore invented the internet) regardless of it's "truthiness" in order to promote their ideas.

I know smart Republicans. I know smart Democrats. I urge everyone here to actually take some time - think - look up facts for yourselves and come on---- STOP THE NAME CALLING. This is a Democracy we are trying to run, not a 3rd grade lunch room.

AL GORE HAS MY VOTE in 2008

Whoever on this board still loves Bush, and it shocks me how many they are, obviously cares nothing about actual job performance or outcomes, or about the future of this country, or even the present of this country. Thanks to Bush, we've mortgaged our future to foreign creditors, and we've mortgaged our reputation to Islamist thugs. We're losing the war on terror and we depend on Chinese and Korean loans.

Run Forest run....

Oops.. I mean, uhh.. Gore

(Disclaimer: Prior to G.W. Bush's two terms in office, I considered myself a Republican).

"Run Forrest Run"....oops I mean Al.

Given the choices.....I can see why Vermont wants to secede. The political charge of the country is bound to tear it into pieces. The system no longer works. Neither party represents the will of the people. (Didn’t we already fight a war over that once....Taxation without representation?).

Bottom line is both sides are full of corruption and are more concerned about getting their lobby money than what's good for the country. America, we are in need of a MAJOR "makeover." I believe the time is ripe for us to stop trying to split ourselves into the Fanatical Religious Fascists on the Rights and Bureaucratic Appeasing Communists on the left. It's time for "rational" thought. We need a party of Moderates. People who do not close their mind and cling to stupid ideologies but are willing to keep an open mind on all issues. Unless this happens soon.....like many empires before her, the young America will collapse from within.

Having said that....I still firmly believe in a bad movie quote "What American Public does not know, is what makes them American Public” Thus, I don't think people will get off their asses and make a change. However, what I do envision happening is that Al Gore will finally decide to run (LATE in the game), and will deliver a blindsided knockout blow to the opponents. He will then take Obama as his running mate and Gore/Obama ticket will prove to be unbeatable in 2008....for better or worse is yet to be seen.

Hey Kevin...100 to 1 she was a democrat voter. That is if she bothered to vote

Al Gore has the right stuff to be a landmark president. He is a statesman and a scholar. We as a people would be honored to have him as our president.

Al Gore absolutely won the 2000 presidency. George W. Bush was a selected president, and not an elected one. The american people have been swindled out of our rights as citizens to choose the candidate of our choice. Politics has been smeared by that of corruption, conspiracy, and so forth. Bush has lied, stolen, and is a hypocrite.

Al Gore is the most likely choice for the 2008 presidency. Just think about it for one moment of your lives. Barrack Obama, decent fellow, however terribly inexperienced. The man barely finished one senator term. Hillary's just plain crazy in my opinion. Her platform isn't as good as the rest.

Republicans... Who Needs Them?!?

So really... truly think about it. Is it worth 4 more years on "war on terror?" Or are the American people finally ready to step up to the plate, and to rise to the occassion and confront this tyranny. That is the question.

It's amazing how blatantly the radical right will lie. Gore won the popular vote in 2000. It was in all the newspapers. And the newspapers who recounted the Florida ballots after the Supreme Court appointed Bush, found that, no matter whether they counted dangling chads or not, no matter which ballots they threw out, Gore won the Florida vote also. That didn't even figure in the Democratic votes that were lost to the blatant election fraud committed by Florida officials, such as denying blacks the right to vote if they had the same last name as a convicted felon.
BUT... Gore did not do himself proud in failing to fight for his presidency. The people elected him. He should have had the courage, and the simple decency to fight for the people. Certainly I would vote for him against any radical repulsivelican, but he doesn't deserve the nomination.

Kevin @ 10:58pm

Good riddance! I'm sure they don't have THOSE kind of people in TexASS!

Kevin @ 10:58pm

Good riddance! I'm sure they don't have THOSE kind of people in Texas!

Reading this blog is very depressing. American politics are so polarized right now, Republicans and Democrates vote only based on party lines and not on the merit of the candidate. This is not what the forefathers of our country intended. Besides both parties are extremely corrupt and have personal agendas. I'm sorry to say it but we haven't had a strong leader in a long time (maybe Reagen and I'm a democrate)

From a non American perspective what we need is a world leader. The major issues, Iraq, global warming et al are world issues. A Gore Obama ticket would fill the bill.

Hey libs.....Bush sucks is no platform in which to base your political theory. Socialism, misery, guilt, and envy have never amounted to anything great in any society, yet it's all you have to offer. Bush is the greatest thing that has ever happened to the left. They are getting elected and don't have to proclaim who they really are.

as for enviromentalism, it is a bastion of anti-capitalists who hate america. it is pure anti-americanism which is drowning out any intelligent debate we might have.

Go Rudy!

Those who were commenting Jeb Bush 2008, I sincerely hope you were being sarcastic... Really, do you seriously want another Bush in the white house? Don't you think that family has done enough damage in a lifetime? Because of Bush, my friends and family were sent to Iraq and within the Middle East to fight for some darn oil war. Now you tell me if that's fair you right wingers... tell me if its worth it for more to die within this civil chaos in Iraq.

Bush has never served in the armed forces, and during his first flight mission, he chickened out and hid behind his daddy. Now tell me if that's presidential material.

And Global Warming... not real? Then explain the charts relating Co2 emmissions to a rise in average temperature and melting of the ice caps. You explain that you right wingers... seriously... all of you right wingers need help if you're thinking the world needs another 4 years of bush...

Run Forest run....

Oops.. I mean, uhh.. Gore

What I find so discouraging is the lack of respect the majority of you are showing one another. I believe more than anything, if you read the comments above, that this proves the loss of moral direction people in the US have. ....and might I add it was not caused by any political leader. (Clinton's affairs/lying or Bush's war on terror)Frankly, I do not believe in global warming, or in voting for Al Gore, but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw "daggers" at the man. What reason do I have to be so hateful? I do not believe the war is going well, and obviously there were errors in going to war (the mis-information on WMG), but like it or not we are at war. Does that mean I am going to hurl personal attacks at the man who I must (like it or not) call President? The hatred and disgust everyone is pouring out at each other in the comments to this article truly break my heart. Why am I going to lash out at someone that desires for a certain individual to run for the highest office (and unfortunately, by evidence of these comments not the most respected)? I don't understand why either side lashes out at one another so personally. Discuss the issues. Debate the issues. Decide. Respect one another. Respect the office of the President, and yes, respect the President (regardless of whether you like him or not because of the office he holds). I did not like Bill Clinton, but I respected him. I do not like George Bush, but I respect him. Try for one second to fathom the pressure and responsiblity of such an office before dissolving any sort of respect for the office or man that holds it.

RE Dan at 11:02...you live in a dream world! Almost nothing you said was true. 1) Numerous counts showed gore lost Florida even with the conscious effort of the media to falsely announce his victory before the polls in the panhandle closed. Do you actually believe that people in Palm Beach really thought they were voting for gore and ended up voting for Buchannan? Also funny how the only time democrats claim voter disenfranchisement is when they loose. 2 ) No one has or can prove man has contributed to global warming. Fact- the amount of co2 man contributes is insignificant compared with natural causes for it such as the oceans and volcanoes. Mt Saint Helens spewed out more co2 than almost all of mankind in human history. And did you forget that co2 is actually plant food. Besides most scientists of any credibility question weather co2 contributes. Most seem to think it follows warming rather than preceding or contributing to it. Clouds and water vapor play the dominant role in the earth’s temperature fluctuations and of course solar activity. Funny how mars and Neptune are also warming. Go figure! Anyone who would not understand that the sun, the earth’s main heat source, would effect the temperature either is irrational or lying to themselves or has an agenda i.e. capitalism bad socialism good. One problem with socialism, somebody has to produce the wealth so the non-productive types can claim it. So nice try! Did you make up your own facts or learn them in your teachers union government run school?

Al Gore is as good a candidate as any and it would make thing far more interesting if he ran against Hilary

I like Al Snore's Views on Global Warming.

I froze my tail off this past winter and I Support Al Bore's Global Warming so I can build my beach side home on the banks of the Ohio.

Viva SoreLoserman!

People! Oh my god! I've read through some of these posts, and they are just ridiculous! I mean cmon! We all know that Co2 emmissions are the main source of global warming! I mean who are these righties posting?!?!? Little toddlers?!?! Well your common sense seems to be at that level!

I mean, you righties can't even spell moron correctly, and you expect to put up a decent arguments with such lame phrases as in Al Bore? Well I have one for you, Bush the Bully. Bush, bullied our citizens (Invaded our privacy), bullied Iraq, and bullied our soldiers!

God! I hope once Al Gore runs and WINS the election, you right wingers will finally come to your senses.

And by the way, weren't the right wingers also the ones FOR slavery? The grassroots of the KKK? The ones stuck in their rural pastimes as the north advanced into the industrial age? Think about it...

Al is another empty suit, windbag, career politician that got where he is today based on his father's connections. Getting kick-started favorably in the fraternal political arena based on dad's connections is OK, but Al's multiple-faced political standings and fair-weathered "what sounds good to the voting public" comments further proves his spoon fed upbringing is catching the eyes and ears of ignorant america. Practice what you preach Al...

Tbone... first of all, before you attempt to bash someone of such status as Mr. Gore, at least have the decency to use correct grammer... God... all you right wingers are alike... can't even spell civic... Its not cicvcs! Geez! Learn how to spell at the very least before you put anything up for debate!

The electoral college was a statement of our forefathers, saying that they didn't trust the power of decision to those who couldn't afford land or anything of value at the time... basically a mark of distrust towards the american people. You have a brain people! Use it!

Al Gore a scholar? He is far from that. His grades were the same as W's at Yale. He is not a smart man in the least. I hope that nut runs so he gets nominated and makes it that much easier for the Guiliani to win.

"His failure to carry his home state is inexcusable."

Ted's right about this and that may be all that needs to be said. However, I'll add that Gore's failure to coordinate the Democrat's effort to guard against Bush's dirty tricks - including the design of the Florida ballot - and to effectively use Clinton was also inexcusable.

Still, I think the Bushes and Clintons are in cahoots and I won't vote for Hillary or Jeb in the future.

Al Gore already won his award.......... from Hollywood!! For his science fiction movie. Someone please ask him why the temperature is rising on Mars, Jupiter etc! Not global warming, but SOLAR WARMING!!
Tell the truth Al.

George W. is a natural phenomenon? Oh...this is going to be a long year.

"GW is a natural phenomenon man will not understand. It is in cycles and you libs need to accept that. During the Dark Ages, Earth was MUCH more hotter than it is now. Guess what. We survived that and we also survived Global coooling aka Ice ages."

Al Gore is a brilliant and honest man. He has more political experience than any other candidate and would make a wonderful president. Please Al, run in 2008!

Al Gore running would be one of the few things that would absolutely nail down a Republican win in the '08 elections. He's nothing more than a sci-fi filmmaker now. And a little bit crazed-looking.

Al Gore was elected president until he became the victim of the largest non-violent crime in American history. After Bush stole the election the rest of us have had to pay for it under the worst president ever. It's time for revenge.

Dan , Get real --- Sandy Berger --- the repubs are so loaded with with bribes, corruption, scandel, that Bergers indiscretion sounds like baseball and apple pie by comparison. Get a life!!~ Go AL !!!!!

One of the funniest threads I have read in awhile. Excuse me while I drive my SUV home now and turn on the air conditioning.

Algore lost by the rules that existed at the time. Deal with it. Now what you have is a real problem, somewhat of the quintessential dilemma.... Do you Hope and conjure that we "all" get along? Or do you realize that people, none of which you know, want to hurt you in the most inexcusable ways? You know, I'll be the one at your door protecting you and my only thanks is a f^%# you.

Sleep well

As far as the other democratic candidates are concerned, he is the 800 lb. Al Gore-rilla. I think America is the kind of country that returns things wrongly taken and in Gore's case, its the presidency. He would have my vote.

Greetings from the afterlife,

Al Gore is an idiot and global warming is a farce. Any Christian can tell you that God created the Earth in 6 days and that Earth is only 5,000 years old. Read your bible , it says vote Republican.

hey Bob i thank you for protecting me and my family god bless you and all those doing what they can to protect this country that is full of whiney hipocritical liberals.

first of all al gore lost by the rules in place and thank god for those rules.
second check facts people global warming may be a reality but its not because of us its happened before we were here and will happen many more times lets remeber though the earth is a self correcting biosphere
third look up urban heat sprawl and look up temperature readings going back more than 30 years
fourth the terrorists dont care about your hippy music and dont want a hug they want to kill us
fifth take the time to thank a soldier or other protector of our country they are the ones allowing you to sleep safely at night
sixth hmm global warming global cooling global warming well wich one is it.
seventh just because the temperature goes up in your back yard and makes you sweaty doesnt mean that everyone on the planet is troubled by it some people like the idea of climates zones where they can grow something hmm wonder why the hot muggy jungles have so much life hmmm
eighth why is it that so many places just reacently reported record snow and cold temperatures.
ninth learn how to vote if grade school kids can do it florida should be able to figure it out
and tenth once again thank those protecting us they deserve more than your crap.
oh also try to imagine what it would be like without oil it does more than keeps your car running in fact it plays a part in just about everything you do eat or touch

and once again thank you bob and all those others out there protecting me and my family.

Saying Al Gore won the election because of the popular vote is like saying the my team should have won the baseball game because it had more hits.

AL GORE NEEDS TO SAVE US ALL!

RUN AL RUN! RUN AL RUN! RUN AL RUN!

wow - alot of rightwing idiots out tonight

If I were Al Gore, I would be reluctant to run too.

Who would want to govern a bunch of wingnut morons who have lost all concept of logic and only berate you for making the country a better place.

If he does I hope the world and the media treat him just like they treat President Bush? I know the Republicans are licking their chops waiting!!

In 1996, Gore made proposals to fight air terrorism but the Republican controlled Congress fought it:

Gore announces proposals to fight air terrorism September 5, 1996
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A $300 million budget for counter-terrorism measures, better screening of airline passengers, and more teams of bomb-sniffing dogs were among the measures Vice President Al Gore recommended Thursday to boost airport security.
--snip--

"We may never see an end to terrorism, but we are sure going to do our level best to combat it and reduce to the absolute minimum level humanly possible the risk to American citizens traveling on airlines." -- Al Gore
--------------------
President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws July 30, 1996
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.

"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.

But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
--snip--
------------
This Gore speech is invigorating & out-bests ANY of the debates/speeches the current candidates spew.

Al Gore breaks his silence Jan. 2006

The American Constitution Society and the Liberty Coalition host a speech by Fmr. Vice Pres. Al Gore at the DAR Hall in Washington. Gore speaks about the limits of executive power, the issue of monitoring domestic communications and the authorization of the use of torture in the war against terrorism. 1/16/2006: WASHINGTON, DC

Why were the Republicans AGAINST fighting terrorism???

We need someone who will respect the U.S. Constitution...not dismantle it. Why do you PseudoRepub extremists hate the US Constitution?

In 1996, Gore made proposals to fight air terrorism but the Republican controlled Congress fought it:

Gore announces proposals to fight air terrorism September 5, 1996
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A $300 million budget for counter-terrorism measures, better screening of airline passengers, and more teams of bomb-sniffing dogs were among the measures Vice President Al Gore recommended Thursday to boost airport security.
--snip--

"We may never see an end to terrorism, but we are sure going to do our level best to combat it and reduce to the absolute minimum level humanly possible the risk to American citizens traveling on airlines." -- Al Gore
--------------------
President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws July 30, 1996
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.

"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.

But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
--snip--
------------
This Gore speech is invigorating & out-bests ANY of the debates/speeches the current candidates spew:

Al Gore breaks his silence Jan. 2006

The American Constitution Society and the Liberty Coalition host a speech by Fmr. Vice Pres. Al Gore at the DAR Hall in Washington. Gore speaks about the limits of executive power, the issue of monitoring domestic communications and the authorization of the use of torture in the war against terrorism. 1/16/2006: WASHINGTON, DC

Why were the Republicans AGAINST fighting terrorism???

We need someone who will respect the U.S. Constitution...not dismantle it. Why do you PseudoRepub extremists hate the US Constitution?

Al lost against Bush. Any candidate that lost to Bush does not deserve the Democratic nomination.

The grassroots wants Barack Obama in 2008!!

To John McCormick,
I would like to decide for myself whether Gore's humor is "corny" or if he or his policies are "wonky". I think it is important not to insinuate opinion into an article disguised as given fact, whatever the writer's personal bias
Christine

JOhn E., for months now you've been in Baracky's camp. Now you're jumping ship to Gore?? How many people are running around in that little brain of yours??

Posted by: John D | June 6, 2007 4:55 PM

Listen to yourself stooge. John D I knew you were simple, but not this simple. Way to be open minded neo-nutters. Remember Nixon lost one. God help us. If the guy wants to run then more power to him. He's qualified and competent. Something Mr Bush can't be accused of!!!

Al -a man for global warming issue!

it would be a pleasant change to have a President who could read and understand what he/she read.

The detractors of Al Gore are scared for one reason: They know that if Al won the popular vote in 2000, he would be a shoe-in in 2008 after the Bush record of waste, greed, and incompetence. Nothing would be better for them than for Al to buy a home in Greenland.

Don't forget it was Sen. Lieberman who "won" with Gore in 2000 too.

It was a very different Al Gore (Lieberman remained the same) I voted for back then.

He's gone but I suspect he'll be candidate again with Obama as VP and will lose decisively this time.

Smart huh? Hell, he flunked out of Divinity school. What does that tell you?

Smart huh? Hell, he flunked out of Divinity school. What does that tell you?

I really hope Al runs a second time just to show how the rest of the nation thinks he's just as much a loony.

The Facts are BUSH is CRAZY. Face the facts. Bush has mental problems. He is a megolomaniacle child.
Gore was a great choice in 2000. The media was too slow. Many Americans were fooled by the republican propaganda that painted a false picture of Gore. He knows this.
He might run again. Smart people learn from there mistakes.
Bush is clerly not smart and may even be...Retaaahded

Americans have let democracy die a quiet death..Roger R .....
I am tired of people who say things like this. Democracy is as alive as ever. Look at some of the comments being added here today. If we were in North Korea, Venezuela, Iran or Cuba there would be armed men busting through our doors arresting us for speaking our minds. God Bless America!

Al Gore is the Dem version of Rush Limbaugh, he creates fear in people then exploits it for his own personal gain. Wise up!

wow, from these comments if I.Q. and sanity tests were required for voting, there would be no liberals to vote...

Who's Al Gore?

Please run again Big Al
and we will whip you again.
Paul J.

Al Gore uses junk science and lies to run around like chicken little and scream the sky is falling. Why dont all you liberals give the fat man a break and just send him cash so he can continue to practice his "eco-friendly" lifestyle. Another example of the "do as I say, not as I do" and "the rules are for the moronic masses not the elite enlightened leaders". Al Gore is a FRAUD.

I am an independent who would vote for Gore. I think the Republican party is very afraid that Gore will run. They know that their nominee will have to defend the Iraq War which is a no-win scenario and against a popular candidate like Gore would have tragic consequences for them.

The fact is simple, the American people blame Bush, the leader of the Republican party for the bloody mess called the Iraq War. The next election will bear fruit to this.

THIS COMMENT WONT BE PRINTED BECAUSE I DONT PLAY BY THE RULES. BUT HERE GOES ANYWAY. LOL. AL GORE BLOWS. AND TO THE IDOIT THAT STATED THE GORE HATERS ARE SCARRED OF GORE HERES A LITTLE SUPRISE FOR YOU. WE HOPE THAT LYING PIECE OF DUNG RUNS, HE WILL GET BEAT EASILY. HE'S A LIB AND THIS COUNTRY IS NOT A LIBERAL ONE. WORSE GORE IS A LOONEY NUT WHO WORSHIPS THE PLANET AS HIS GOD. PEOPLE THINK THIS GUY IS A FRUITCAKE. LOL. PLEASE AL. RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL

So many left-wing nuts in America buying into Al Gore's politics of fear. But, it is understandable. The uneducated lemmings of the Left simply react to outside stimuli. They are easily manipulated by their puppet masters. Now, all bow to Mother Gaia and pledge your allegiance, just like Al, you gorons.

Do liberals even make an attempt at posting equal to a 3rd grade level? Too funny als!

READING THESE POSTS, I CAN SEE THE CON-ARTISTS MOST DEFINITELY FEAR AN AL GORE RUN MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

I am an independent who would vote for Gore if he runs. I think he truly believes the Global Warming is fact and that it'll destroy this planet if not stopped. Whether it really is true or not is irrelevant to me, but what is relevant is that he is a passionate man. I believe the Republicans party is terrified that he'll run because their candidate will not only have to defend the Iraq War, but have to run against a popular candidate. One undeniable fact facing the Republican party is that the majority of the American people blame Bush for the Iraq War.

Gore should run. With the war and immigration nightmare, no one could do more damage to this country than George Bush has done. It's shameful.

as clinton said ALgore is the worlds only living brain donor

It's amazing (actually it isn't because the Loony left is completely deranged), how moronic the Left is.

Mister says newspaper recounts show Gore won. Sorry, Mister. Most of the recounts by the newspapers had Bush winning Floria. Only in the most liberal of interpretations of the chads did Gore win.

Then Kevin says the GOP designed the ballots. Sorry, Kevin, the butterfly ballot has been used throughout the nation, including here in Illinois and in Chicago. The ballots in the "disputed" Florida counties were designed and approved by DEMOCRATS!

But then if you folks are whining because a butterfly ballot is to confusing for the Dumbocrats, then you folks don't deserve to win elections!! You're all too friggin dumb!!

Comparing the currrent list Democratic Presidential candidates, Al Gore could have been their nominee but there is still some of the bitterness of the past election lingering in him, and that may show up in his campaign and ultimately lose another election.

Al Gore has a very important role in government after his loss in Florida. First, Al should have a How To Use the Voting Machines classes. Second, Instead hiring Attorneys to spy on the cheating Republicans,hire nurses to make sure the people have taken their medication before they VOTE!

There was enough methane at Borders yesterday to power John Edwards 30,000 square foot house for a year. Still he is probably better than President Fredo.

Duuuh....what a dunce....Al Gorrilla is so lame

to think Algore has all the answers about everything confirms that the majority of the people who support him are what Lenin called "useful idiots."

Did you know he invented global warming...

Now seriously...this man is a joke... claims to have tried to sto global warming for years...and yet sat in office for 8 years and not 1 peep about it then... BUT NOW... oh lordy its a problem.

We need a president for the people, by the people... and to be honest nobody i see running on either side of the fence is anywhere near that kinda man/woman...

Eliminate ALL advertising for elections...make these people go door to door and you will again see a true president in office again... not someone out for personal gain or to advance an agenda that is not in touch with what real americans need or want... Im tired of the BS...

RE:...Posted by: Kevin | June 6, 2007 11:31 PM ...Hey Kevin I hate to break it to you but your friends and family members were sent to Iraq because they volunteered to serve.

If Al is so smart, why is his undergrad academic so ordinary (worse that George W. Bush) and his post grad so utterly disgraceful (5 F's at Vanderbilt Divinity School)?

RE: Posted by: Mister | June 6, 2007 11:22 PM ...Hey Mister...your nuts the recounts never showed gore won Florida every one showed that bush won. And loose the black disenfranchisement BS. Funny how the only time democrats complain about voter disenfranchisement is when they loose.

Al did not win in 2000. He could not a student President election. He has no substance. He had to make a movie called Conveient Lies. A won a phony award.

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

The Heartland guys have a point about Global Warming.

First, there is obviously a very strong opposition. Why won't Al Gore debate?

Second, does global warming cause an increase in CO2 or the other way around?

The scientific data looks like the other way around and Gore is slamming us with lies. This inaccuracy will kill his stealth campaign.

Gore, McCain, Clinton, Rudy, it does not matter. Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like "America Deceived' from Amazon America Deceived (book), stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and end this madness.

Gore for the democrats ..
Ron Raul for the Republicans ...

Bush for war crimes trials

Al Gore gave an "impassioned" speech on "global warming" in 1995. Then he ran in 2000 for prez and hardly mentioned the environment at all on his advisors counsel that it would make him look silly. Now, he is making money hand over fist on his crusade, movies, books, selling carbon credits. Whne it was profitable to scourge the environment, Al Gore made money from salt mine and Occidental Petroleum stock. By environmentalists standards, the Clinton regime was a HUGE sellout, and Gore spent most of his energy doing what? RAISING MONEY. Al Gore is one sexy big dollar whore. Is it any suprise he charges $10 to tell us about the end of the world when even the most loathsome hellfire preachers do it free? Al Gore's response to Global Warming wasn't to start an international people's movement. It was to start an INVESTMENT house and line his pockets and his cronies' wallets. It's Halliburton with a Green Face, and all the little hero-worshipping children are buying the GoreBull Warming Snake Oil Show tickets like they were cute little Che T-Shirts.

RE: Posted by: Kevin Y. | June 6, 2007 11:51 PM ...Wow are you out there. 1st who proved that co2 is the main source of global warming? Man made co2 is a fraction of the total in the atmosphere. 2nd it was the republicans who pushed the civil rights act through while most of the democrats opposed it. 3rd Al gores father was a big time segregationist as was Bill clinton's mentor William Fulbright, segregationist extraordinaire. . 3rd maybe if you weren't educated in a government school you would have learned that the north fought the south in part to end slavery, led by Abraham Lincoln a republican. My God you liberals are so uninformed its not only scary but dangerous.

This blowhard could not get elected by his own state (TN for those of you who dont know)

Why should he be president? or "That Woman" or Boracccck?

Of course Gore was running with the ball and chain of the Clinton scandals and he still got robbed by the hire-a- mob republican operative thugs that insured there would be no recount and a criminal supreme court of neocon dinosaurs.

Lucy Johnson:

It was the shenanigans of the Florida Supreme Court that caused it's own Democratic Chief Justice to say he was ashamed of his own court's behavior.

You people keep repeating the same Democratic nursery rhymes in unison with no regard for the truth.

Al should just go away he lost in 2000 fair and square, get over it alredy!

to Mary, Lucy Kirt et al - what is wrong with you people? you rant and rave about florida - Bush rigged the Supreme Court, the Florida polls etc. What about your operatives in the media? Dan Rather, Jennings, Brokaw, CNN, etc., etc., etc.? They gave florida to Gore BEFORE THE POLLS IN THE STATE HAD CLOSED!!! Remember that there are two time zones in Fla. by declaring the state to Gore before the polls had closed, how many people decided not to vote? and what about the military? they were shut out as well. you want to make an argument about that election, you should look at everything. and as far as gore running in the next election - you can forget about it - he is too scared about losing to Hillary - you think he's had a hard time the last eight yrs? imagine the rest of his life if he has to think about losing to Mrs. Bill Clinton? And don't start with how the republicans will lie to get anything they can. the dems invented the art of deception and lies - look at how they have manupulated the news from Iraq - the dems are so vested in failure in Iraq just so they can win the White House - the dems will do anything - ANYTHING - even if it jeopordizes our national security just so they can be in power - wake up people - they are a scary bunnch!

This is indeed a popular blog. Al Gore is an opportunist. I say that because he does not have the courage to tell us he really wants to run again. Instead, he is waiting in the mist for the right moment. I at least give Hillary, Edwards, and Obama credit. They have been getting slashed and cut up since the begining.

For those who believe Al won. Al did not win Florida. NY Times and other (liberal) papers acknowledged that he lost. Many independent groups did a study and found that each time a recount was done Bush actually had more votes than the time before.

Its ashame all won't debate global warming. We are a nation of discourse. Al's projections in his movie are grossly overstated. The IPPC's numbers are a fraction of what Gore (non-scientist) predicts.

The country has moved on. We need to move past Bush and Gore. 2008 is an opportunity for something new.

Its ashame that Gore won't debate Lord Monckton. It's to bad he would not acknowledge The Heartland Institute (www.globalwarmingheartland.org) at the book signing yesterday. If he can't debate global warming how is he going to be able to debate and support himself in a presidential race?

I am hoping Al runs it will finally make him put his money where his mouth is.

Anyone want to pay his 36 thosuand dollar a year electric bill? Prince of Green I think not!

RE: Posted by: Mr. Middle | June 7, 2007 8:47 AM ... Hitler was passionate as well, would you vote for him? WOW what an argument. BTW by no means am I comparing Gore to Hitler just pointing out the ridiculous point made my Mr. middle. And can anyone tell any accomplishment ever made by a moderate?

OBAMA ,, please,, this man would be as bad as BUSH ,, lets not get some rookie to be president ,, we have seen the damage that can do.

conservatives hate gore... hell they hate everybody who isn't like them! one person commented on the liberals starting they're bush rants... who wouldn't, bush is an insane, dangerous man who had no intentions of doing the peoples business.. he does what he damn well pleases. why is he not impeached
over his lies and deceit in this insane war? why would gore NOT be better than bush? the 2000 election was , to say the least "flawed" and bush bullied his way in and has done his destruction and now we can't ditch the bum! after seeing bush's performance why would't anyone want gore in there??? you can't do worse than bushturd!

For all those saying "Gore lost, he had his chance"

Well, Nixon lost to Kennedy once... and then 8 years later came back to win.

I think Gore played his hand poorly in 2000. Bowing to polls to often. Not always just speaking his mind.

He seems to be a changed man, not tied down by the same sort of political perceptions of 'what it takes to win'. I think he's learned his lesson.

If he wanted to run, he'd bring a lot to the table. He has great foreign policy experience and is respected around the world.

How many candidates from either party can say that?

LOL at the drudge morons. Gore won in 2000, and if he ran in 2008 he would win in a landslide.

Please, whoever said that the media outlets reported Bush would have won anyway, is just another Republican Hack...here's what the Miami Herald reported from an independent survey by an accounting firm:

"Without counting a single hanging or dimpled chad, Gore won by 662, The votes below were crystal clear votes as determined by the Herald's accounting firm, BDO Seidman. Under Florida law, all of these ballots should have been counted by election officials on Election Day. Their failure to do so is Official Misconduct, not "Voter Error"!"

Al Gore IS an assault on reason and democracy. Let us give a few examples:

1. As a senator, his wife Tipper Gore founded the Parents Music Resource Center that wanted to label all music with not only questionable lanuage but questionable ideas with a warning and prevent youth under the age of 18 from purchasing such items. Among the artists' work up for such sales restrictions/censorship included Brecht's Mack the Knife (about a pimp), John Denver's Rocky Mountain High, and Bizet's Carmen (about a whore). Truly threatening and outrageous works, eh? Al fully supported his wife's misguided and un-Jeffersonian efforts.
2. While extolling the need for Americans to leave less of a carbon footprint, Big Al does not fly "commercial" to any event but flies in a private plane. To offset this, he buys the ecological equivalent of papal indulgencies since he can afford them in the form of carbon offsets. If the global warming menace is so real, perhaps he should learn to budget his time better and either fly commercial or drive a natural gas powered bus or hybrid car to each of these engagements. Show us really how eco-friendly travel will slow the world down.
3. Knowing high school civics as well as studying the great law of the land, even though Al lost the electoral college vote (the only one that counts according to the Constitution), he did nothing to help heal the wound in this country from such a polarised election and did not disuade his fellow party members from spewing the invective that the election was "stolen".
4. When President Clinton used excessive force in dealing with cults and dissenters within the US in using shock troops in the form of the ATF and FBI in such places as Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Miami (to retrieve a little boy), Al Gore did nothing and said nothing to clarify his views that a government should not do this, so by silence he assents to using this kind of force on US citizens. Meanwhile the US does nothing about Al-Quaeda except shoot off a few cruise missiles when the WTC, military ships, and embassies are attacked by the same extremists.

Yes, that is somebody we should look to for guidance on how to repair our country... NOT!!!

Democrats = Thesis
Republicans = Anti-Thesis

Both political parties are like variations of beer, some minor differences but otherwise they all stand for the same thing and have the same effect.

After all how many Democrats voted to authorise the use of force in Iraq?

How many Democrats voted for the Patriot Act?

How many Democrats helped Alberto Gonzalez navigate through the confirmation hearings for AG and did nothing to stop him?

Until the 2 Party system is replaced by multi-party competition or is replaced with a parliamentery style representative democratic republic that can be much more held accountable to the wills of the US people, we are being railroaded.

Al Gore should run. He ws right about the war and globalwarming and there is no one else on the national scene who got those 2 issues right. Also he should run to keep the disingenuous Hillary Clinton out of the White House for good. Al needs to run for the people of the US. We need a smart and honest leader. and Al would be that.

Obama can't Win! Not because he is Black but because he is Muslim. Think about it, RETARDS. Hillary has no heart. She let Bill walk all over her. Gore would work but he faces having to have Hillary as VP. No way is he going for that.Help me MR. Wizard!

ALGORE LOST! Get over it.

Bush may not be the best president we've had but he sure beats the likes of Jimmy Carter and I can't shudder to think how many more terrorist attacks would have happened on US soil had Gore been president the last 7 years..........

And two words for those who think Gore would be unbeatable.......

FRED THOMPSON!

i hope he runs and wins the all the primaries...

it will make it easier for the conservative candidate to win the actual election...

It is really easy to stand up against things when they have no political ramifications on your career. He is simply campaigning to the tree huggers that are obsessed with bra burning and the 60's. The electoral college was in force before Bush won in 2000 so the republicans did not change anything that was there. Gore can go back to his mansion and roll around on his bed with all the money he making from the idiots buying his books.

Wow looks like a link from Drudge, brought out the mindless conservatives out from the woodwork. Looking at the repubs at the last debate The only candidate with a brain was Ron Paul. All the rest was more of the same. Run Al you have this!

I wish the trib forced commentators like Ted and Al to fill out an aptitude test before signing in. That being said, I strongly believe Gore is the most qualified person for the job. He can keep his word about "not planning to run" but I do hope that Obama and Hilary split the party enough that he'll have to come in and heal the rift. We can unite behind him -- and we should.

RUN AL RUN !

Run to complete your trifecta:

Lost to Bill Clinton !

Lost to George Bush !

Lost to Mrs. Bill Clinton !

Gore Blows - RUN ZELL RUN

OK all you Dittoheads and Hannityites (bunch of little suck-ups that you are). Bush is now...all of a sudden...discovering global warming. Hello..wake the f up. Oh yes, by the way we won the war...the banner said so . Lets get out now. Or better yet send all of those who espouse the war to see first hand. What a bunch of rabble. All the right wing needs is a beer and someone to tell them what to think ! I have a DD-214 to show that I'm a patriot. Most of you crybabies don't know what that is do you.

Does Al Gore or Ms. Clinton or Mr. Obama know what a DD-214 is?

When are you Dittoheads, Hannityites, MoveOn.org-ers, and Deaniacs going to wake up?

The extreme left & right are demonising each other but yet they still come together on such issues as raising taxes, funding programs that do not make your children any smarter, getting into foreign entanglements around the globe (Kosovo, Somalia, Iraq, Columbia, & Philippines to name a few), trade and immigration laws which continue to depress wages in this country and reward companies for outsourcing such basic jobs as telephone customer support, and increasingly tightening the amount of freedom of expression we enjoy with the Partiot Act and Digital Millenium Copyright Act.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Just wait until enviro-friendly laws eliminate whatever manufacturing jobs are left in this country and make staples such as toilet paper and food expensive through such things as conservancy taxes and peak fuel transport levies.

When are all of you going to wake up and demand other choices and more from the people that want to represent you?

The Democrats and Republicans are both selling you out

Jeb Bush and Guiliani would be an unbeatable ticket. And Fred Thompson has a hot young trophy wife. Fred Thompson and Romney maybe could win. Wow those Republican look awesome, who need Democrats. The Republican really know how to keep the peace and screw up the whole country. Al Gore should come in and kick some ass and take no prisoners. He can do it.

Jeb Bush and Guiliani would be an unbeatable ticket. And Fred Thompson has a hot young trophy wife. Fred Thompson and Romney maybe could win. Wow those Republican look awesome, who need Democrats. The Republican really know how to keep the peace and screw up the whole country. Al Gore should come in and kick some ass and take no prisoners. He can do it.

Jeb Bush and Guiliani would be an unbeatable ticket. And Fred Thompson has a hot young trophy wife. Fred Thompson and Romney maybe could win. Wow those Republican look awesome, who need Democrats. The Republicans really know how to "keep the peace" and screw up the whole country. Al Gore should come in and kick some arse and take no prisoners. He can do it.

I've just done an assessment of every message listed below this one. I was facinated to learn that "right" leaning messages were significantly angrier in tone, and plagued with quite a few more spelling errors.

A poster above quoted" I think he has a real chance!! People take him seriously now since "Inconvenient Truth" came out... is it enough??"

i stop taking him seriously when he made the claim "I invented the internet!" Anyone remember that one?

Then he expect to cut back on our energy usage at home but refuse to set an example by doing the same at his home (his one month energy usage is enough for 20 single family homein ONE Year!) - Sorry, I can't take him seriously.

He expect to use the reducing of his carbon foot print to cover his waste at home and at the same time demand us cut our carbon foot print as well as the use of our energy usage. then globe trotting to promote his book producing more carbon foot print - I can't take him seriously.

When he praised the European countries for signing that Korvo(sp) Treaty and criticize Bush for not signing it, he fail to check his facts that since those same European countries are no where near their projected carbon reduction and are now producing way more carbon than were BEFORE they sign that treaty - sorry, I can't take him seriously.

then finally this "I invented the internet" have been using natural resources that will cut down carbon to print his best seller book instead of using the internet paper free website and acrobat PDF file to sell his Information - sorry, I can't take him seriously.

As a Conservative ( but not necesarilty a Republican after Bush's support of the amnesty bill), I am hoping for Al to run. I'm not sure Obama can edge out the powerful Hillary machine, but Al could. At least with Al we would have a clean atmosphere, instead of Socialism under Hillary.

People! Oh my god! I've read through some of these posts, and they are just ridiculous! I mean cmon! We all know that Co2 emmissions are the main source of global warming!

And by the way, weren't the right wingers also the ones FOR slavery? The grassroots of the KKK? The ones stuck in their rural pastimes as the north advanced into the industrial age? Think about it...

Posted by: Kevin Y.

Kevin,

It's incredible how you can be so smug and yet so incorrect...lol! The idiot is seldom aware of his own lack of intelligence.

Your knowledge of science appears to be as limited as your knowledge of history.

The greatest "greenhouse gas" in both volume and effect is water vapor.

Slavery was supported by the southern Democratic institution. Got it? The north was a Republican stronghold.

You must be able to spell "moron" as a result of its continual use in reference to youself.

Hi, I'm a liberal. Please tell me what to think and say, and I'll repeat it until you tell me something else to think and say...

I'll wait.

Is it me, but why are the majority of Democrats scapegoaters and whiners! Blame game is the tag line and no blame is ever in the direction of a democrat. Sandy Berger..all but forgotten and certainly never mentioned.

Heck, I'll join in because I blame Bush and the administration for my unahppiness with me wife....I know he's got something to do with it! Idiots!

RE: Posted by: Kevin | June 6, 2007 11:31 PM ...Following up to my previous comment to you. As to the other points you made, 1. FYI... Oil = national security and as a side benefit some oppressed Iraqis gained their freedom in the process. I.E. woman voting and going to school. 2. Gore misrepresented the facts. Fact is a rise in co2 actually follows warming. Glad I could help educate you. Just in case you missed my original reply to you I will repeat it ...Hey Kevin I hate to break it to you but your friends and family members were sent to Iraq because they volunteered to serve.

do you libs like higher taxes? do you think the people who bust their tail to become successful should have most of their success stripped from them and given to someone else? if so, it's too bad [for you] Karl Marx isn't alive and an American (you guys probably wouldn't care if he was American or even in the country legally - but that's another discussion) or else he could run for your side's nomination. take heart, you probably have the next best person in sHrillary though.

RE: Posted by: craig | June 7, 2007 10:41 AM ...Sounds like you have a lot of "love" in your heart. LMAO

Kevin - "We all know that Co2 emmissions are the main source of global warming"? oh really? do us all a favor and cite the scientific evidence that supports this argument. This is so typical of you libs - you've taken the argument posed by gore and his like - and adopted it for yourself - only because it fits in with the liberal platform - FYI - there is no scientific correlation between Co2 emmissions and global warming!

I just do not understand how people claim that Gore won in 2000. The rules to a presidential election have been laid out since the beginning of this great nation of ours. In true liberal form, these people want to change the rules to reflect their personal opinion. For your latest history lesson, the popular majority was abolished to give smaller and less populated states a voice in the elections as to not give all the power to NY and CA. If you liberals knew anything about anything you already would have known that.

RE: Posted by: craig | June 7, 2007 10:41 AM ...Sounds like you have a lot of "love" in your heart. LMAO

Gore is the man with the plan – the only Democrat with the strategic vision to see us through the mess of George W Bush.

He has demonstrated leadership in the areas of Global Climate Change, Alternative Energy and moral issues such as African debt relief and aids research. He is exceptionally qualified for the position of the presidency.

Run Al Run!

Bill G.,

Big All never said he invented the internet, that's a Fox Noise/KKKarl Rove smear job.

He said he helped pass legislation to get the internet started.

Leave it to the 28% dead enders from the RR/ Wingnut party to miss represent science and technology again.

Tswain - You are an idiot. While "solar warming" has been reputed as true, such as here: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/MediaAlerts/2005/2005100320576.html

The exact same people note that this contribution may only be 10-30% and that they do not disagree with global warming's main causes (the link above illustrates this in the 2nd paragraph), which is anthropogenic gases released in part by humans.

Before you try and shut me down as being a tree-hugging lib, note I am a meteorologist who happens to be republican. I applaud Al Gore for bringing this to the public's attention, although it is sad that its only real opponents are those in the political arena.

Get your facts before spouting out crap, which you only say because some politician told you it's true. The scientific community IS in agreement, and that is what really matters. NOT what any politician says. Perhaps you should look in the correct arenas for your information.

Run Al Run! I think they might have been asking him to RUN instead of taking those expensive private jets? Or perhaps they were asking him to leave? Or maybe they were Republicans? Can't think of any OTHER reason anyone would want Al Gore to run.

Um yes, Al Gore would know what a DD for 214 is as he actually served his country during Vietnam as opposed to hiding in Alabama like our old friend W.

Also, Al Gore was a HUGE and CRITICAL piece of the National Information Infrastructure plan that, like it or not, assisted in making the INTERNET a reality for average consumers and allowed for the commercialization of the Internet. While it is not the same as inventing the Internet, which is one of those urban myths attributed to Gore, he did play a vital role in creating the playground in which you get to leave your comments on a daily basis.

Check out the NII when you get a chance and if you like, read Gore's speech from December 1993 about the creation of the NII:

http://www.ibiblio.org/nii/goremarks.html

Gore would definitely carry Illinois, a state that elects and reelects an idiot like Dick Durbin to the Senate.

RE: Posted by: Jeremy | June 7, 2007 1:56 PM ...Hey Jeremy your all wet. The scientific community is by no means in agreement. You either have your head in the sand or up something else or your a typical agenda driven type. How much money are you or your employers getting to study Global warming anyway?

I lik tha GOP thy let me keep me shotgun so dat I's can shoot myself a squirrel for dinner.

"fire up the micro-wave Ma, I got me another one for us to be eatin tanight"!

Could someone please direct me to the actual quote of Gore's claim of inventing the internet. According to Bill O'reily that is false. But like most misinformation, its just to juicy to quit repeating.

I'm so sick of the Hillary bashing. She's an intelligent, experienced, well-spoken individual who has some very good ideas on how to lead our country. Al Gore needs to get behind her campaign and take a position in her cabinet- his time has passed.

RUDY GUILIANI in 2008
go Rudy go!
Rudy can do for the US what he did for NYC

RE:Posted by: goober | June 7, 2007 2:31 PM ...
Typical elitist lib

I likes the demacrats theys knows how to win us over like a used car salesaman make us thinks that we is gonna get healthcare free. I already get free rentz with bill 580, i think that is great i dont pay rent , go AL Gore,

I TRULY hope Al decides to run. The '08 election, without Al, would be like a circus without a clown...

oh, and btw, for the math-challenged: Gore lost in the final, post-decision, full recount in Fla.

Now, go back to sleep...sorry to have attempted to make you think...

It's amazing how dumb you people are. The popular vote means nothing. It's the electoral vote. That is the system. Quit embarassing yourself with your ignorance.

I think they meant that in a Gump kind of way like "Run, Forrest! Run!"

Jeremy: Bush was also in the military too, probably as involved in the "operations" of the military being his daddy's boy as GWB was. Everybody knows if you were privileged enough during that time, you either were moved into the reserves or stationed someplace "safe" like Germany. At least GWB didn't frag himself as Kerry's comrades suggested or did you not read "Unfit".

What a bunch of children hurling stones at each other. Spend some time educating yourselves or making a difference, not just calling eachother names.

If Al Gore could have won more votes than Patrick Buchanan in one Florida precinct, he probably would have won the election. But Floridians saw Albert Arnold Gore as being more extreme than even Pat Buchanan.

Al Gore is a total joke. His first book, Earth in the Balance, was riddled with scientific innacuracies. He did not invent the internet and he and his wife were not the basis for Love Story. However, he did declare in the Rose Garden while Vice President that Bill "Impeached" Clinton was the best President ever.

Finally, he tried to subvert the electoral process and fortunately, the US Supreme Court stopped him and the highly partisan Florida supreme court.

In the minds of the irrational Left, this somehow qualifies him as Presidential timber. But in my eyes and most of America, he needs to go to a fat camp and truth telling school, rather than the White House.

Darrin: Before you go off and start spouting about Gore was huge in making the internet what it is today, actually read the history on the internet. While Gore was living off daddy's money in the 70's, DARPA actually created DARPAnet which was to link computers of the military and research instutes in a networked and uncentralised sharing of computer networking to foster communication & research as well as be invulnerable to a nuclear attack in having those multiple hubs. Gore had about as much to do with inventing the internet as Reagan or Nixon did.

Gore in a few years will say that he came up with "global warming" as a phrase too!

Nevermind the fact that scientists have been trying to foist climate change in the form of human induced Ice Age and/or Global Greenhouse since the 70's, nobody listened because the science was specious at best since we still can't predict the weather 10 days from now much less 50 years from now. Also, the climate models Gore quotes from don't account for ocean effects on climate, sunspot activity, and numerous other factors which effect day to day temps nevermind long range climate activity. Why are ice caps on Mars melting at a similar rate as Earth's. Are the Transformers burning too much diesel fuel or are the few probes we launched sullying the environment there?

Gore probably has Munchausen's disease. Be very careful. Fat lot he did about the environment while vice-president in the effort to be business friendly. Don't be bamboozled by this snake oil huckster.

The fact is, Algore's always been right about everything since the days that he jumpstarted the Internet right up until now, whereas the Redstater's guy - Bush, remember him? - has been wrong about almost everything, and his administration has been a disaster. It took 6 years for enough of the hypnotized, lame-brained Redstaters to realize this for us to overwhelm all the Rovian election-stealing stratagems in 2006. Unfortunately, there are some Reds out there who will never embrace reality, as evidenced from some of the comments here.

meteorologist = someone who can't even tell me if I need to have an umbrella 10 days from now = infant science that cannot predicatble tell how forces interact unlike more mature sciences such as geology, nuclear physicists, etc.

so when a meteorologist says "trust me about global warming," I'll take that with the same grain of salt as a phrenologist or eugenicist say they can tell me about the character of a human being.

Alan D,

You think the cuurent Republican President from Texass isn't an "elitist"?

It would seem that about the only chance America has right now, is to plead with Mr. Gore to run for the office of President! I voted for him in 2000,( like the rest of the country ), and i will vote for him in any office he would run for;he's the best choice for the good of the country. So, I plead with you Mr. Gore, on behalf of millions of American's who need and want the change you will bring. God Bless you and your family. Sincerely, Tracy Pratt

Alan D,

You think the current Republican President from Texass isn't an "elitist"?

Al Gore won it, Kerry won it. The Republicans stole it(disenfranchisement, caging lists). Read, people, get the facts.

Bonko,

Way to defend the already discredited "Swiftboat Veterans for Truth".

John Kerry - SHOWED UP FOR VIETNAM.

The current Republican Cheerleader in Chief hid out in a home bound National Guard unit during Nam and got drunk as a skunk.

Little Dick Cheney - "had better things to do" during Nam and got 5-6 military deferments.

Yeah, these Republican chickenhawks are real "patriots"....not!

Gore won? Kerry won? and Bill didn't do anything with that woman Monica right.
The democrats sent 60 lawyers to Flordia in 2000 while Bush sent James Baker...one man coup, that's pretty impressive.

Please oh please Al, run again for President. With you and Hillary on the ticket or even running apart, the Republicans are sure to win the White House. Please Al, run, buddy, run.

"Tbone... first of all, before you attempt to bash someone of such status as Mr. Gore, at least have the decency to use correct grammer... God... all you right wingers are alike... can't even spell civic... Its not cicvcs! Geez! Learn how to spell at the very least before you put anything up for debate!..."

NEWS FLASH TO KEVIN Y: You can't spell, either! Learn how to spell 'grammar' before busting someone else's chops on their poor spelling habits. You could stand another lesson as well....

...and now back to our regular program of sniveling Americans, most of whom just don't get it.

Yes, we know what the electorial college is. Something that should have been abolished years ago. Please do everything you can to support a constitutional ammendment to kill it.

John Kerry spent three months in Vietnam and manufactured superficial injuries in order to get three purple hearts and a one-way ticket to his Chateau in Nantucket.

He also referred to his supposed band of brothers as rapists and killers who pillaged villages in a manner similar to ghengis Kahn. Then he tried to claim he was a Vietnam war hero when he ran for President. How could you be a hero when you were involved in such activities? He actually makes Al Gore seem believable. Thanks for the internet Fatso.

As for stolen elections, the Democrats have been doing that for years. How soon we forget the 1960 election when the son of a boot legging Nazi sympathizer stole the White House from Nixon.

I find it curious how these comments always lead to name-calling and insults but do not actually discuss the issues at hand. Attacking each other and spouting off propaganda (using poor grammar and spelling) does not help in intelligent discourse.

While Al Gore did eventually lose the presidency (by whatever means) in 2000, I do not know why that would preclude him as an acceptable candidate for 2008 (or even 2012, 2016, etc.). As a non-American looking in, I found the debacle that the 2000 election turned into more embarrassing for the US, “the paragon of democracy”, than anything else. And one cannot say whether someone other than Bush would have been better or worse for your country (or the world, even), because you can’t know.

As for Bush’s track record, I have no qualms about ousting the Taliban. I have no qualms ousting Saddam, though the reasons should have been truthful. However, detaining suspected terrorists as prisoners without rights is not something any “free, democratic” country should ever undertake – how does that make you any different from the terrorists? And running up a $1 trillion tab for an on-going occupation of a foreign country is not fiscally wise for a country running such huge deficits.

Al Gore’s lecturing on global warming may be somewhat sensationalist; however, the scientific consensus is that it is predominantly man-made. At least 30 scientific societies concur with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that global warming is man-made – only the American Association of Petroleum Geologists disagree (conflict of interest?). For a quick reference see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming. And while CO2 has been implicated as the main culprit in global warming, it is not the only one (for a primer see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas).

A little research goes a long way in supporting facts and the Internet is an amazing resource, as long as you keep objective and know how to filter the mass of information.

It's true that some of the Swift Boat veterans were lying according to many sources but not all of them. Kerry is the one who chose to make the election on Vietnam "reporting for duty". Three purple hearts and no time in the hospital would irk many veterans and so would the trashing of troops after he came home, throwing medals over the fence, etc. He had a spotted record at best and should not have made the election about that.

Regurgitate regurgitate, My fellow Humans, awake individuals with differing opinions. before slinging mud make sure you can spell properly first.
Secondly Al Gore Did have quite a bit to do with the construction of the internet as we know it, by helping to institute the commerce system safety regulations and govt funding for building of fiber optic cable lines that are the basis of the net around the globe. Goes to show that conservatives take one wrong sentence and run with it for years.
Thirdly if you cant look at pictures of vast snow fields Glacial formations and the ICE CAPS from 10yrs ago till now and see that there is RAPID damage being done to the planets eco system you are an IMBECILE, in 1962 a woman named Rachel Carson wrote a book called Silent Spring she was laughed out of the U.N. for proposing the world would suffer for its over-usage of resources by the human population that was even then expodentially growing.
this is the lineage of nay-sayrs and pocket lining beauracrats and some of you swallow it whole everyday. WAKE UP!!!
Lastly the electoral college is there to control you I say disband the College and really give power to the people not a communist statement a statment of freedom that is in the first lines of our constitution, not the added control clauses, made to befit man of ignorance in the 17 and 18oo's none of you are that ignorant are you?

Let's all try to imagine how much better the world would be right now if Al Gore had been president for the last 8 years instead of George Bush. We wouldn't be involved in Iraq and we would have some seriously good energy policies in place, windfarms and solar collectors would be getting built. Instead we're bogged down in a corporate war for oil resources.

And to you all you redneck idiots out there, Gore would have won in 2000 if the Florida recount had been completed instead of being cut short by a bunch of appointed conservative supreme court judges.

Al please save us from these truck driving, gun toting, inbred, white trash, redneck, jesus freaks!

It is easy to see that all you Dems live in a fantasy world. Bush won, fair and square - get over it.
QUOTE OF THE DAY

This from Fox News Channel boss Roger Ailes, commenting on the Democrat candidates who refuse to participate in debates televised by Fox News:

"The candidates that can't face Fox News can't face Al Qaeda."

Well said. The amazing thing is that there are actually some people in this country who believe that there are Democrat candidates who can face Islamic terrorists in the first place.

I can't laugh enough at the "Al won in 2000"...
Good gracious, I mean get over it. Gore is fraud, a failure and has no business in power at any level. No wonder dems love him.

"Run Al Run, Run Al Run..."

The reason you hear that call is that the dem's field of candidates are pathetic---OBama is the best of the mix in my opinion but I am from Illinois.
None have enough experience (outside of richardson) to be taken seriously. Rodham-clinton has about as much leadership skill as Deputy Fife (but I am from Illinois). Hillary would be laughed off the stage if the media made an honest assessment of her brilliance, attention to detail (except the pre-iraq war intelligence report) and focus (on the targets of bill's wandering eyes). She has poll numbers around that of the former speaker from the great state of georgia. She ain't nationally electable.
Al is crazy to dedicate his life to global warming and should leave scientific debate to scientists looking for funding.
Well, given the state of affairs with the dems I guess I'll jump in the voices calling for a serious candidate to run. Where's ma richards when ya need her.

RE: Posted by: John E | June 7, 2007 3:46 PM
...His texas ranch is a prety humble abode, not to mention truly eco friendly. Cant say that about your boy gore

Please, Al, DO NOT run fo president again. Even though you won, you did not continue the fight. If I had won the election, I would still be in court today.

If I lost on one issue, I would have brought up another, and another, and another (there were plenty) until I went broke. If I had really wanted to be president, I would have fought it until my obvious victory was recognized. You did not want it enough then. Don't covet it now.

You have gained back respect and won converts to a very important and noble cause. Don't blow it all away because your ego wants to run again.

We love you now. We'd hate you if you lost a second time. Don't do it!!!

RUN AL RUN, IT WILL HELP YOU LOSE WEIGHT AND MAYBE THE FAT HEAD YOU HAVE MANAGED TO SUPPORT ALL THESE YEARS. GLOBAL WARMING IS GOOD FOR SOMETHING AFTER ALL.

OH...DON'T FORGET TO SPRAY PAINT YOUR BALD SPOT

What's any of this have to do with military records? Wasn't it Bill Clinton that was dodging the draft?

Doesn't everybody remember that every recount Gore demanded Bush's lead grew?

Confusing ballots in Palm Beach? There are old ladies down there that can run 24 bingo cards at a time but can't figure which hole to punch?

Run-Al-Run farrrr away so you cannot cause anymore harm to this great nation!!!! Man made global warming is junk science and your nothing more than a liberal hypocrite.

wow. a bunch of people still pining over history. sounds about right. why doesn't either hillary or osama give any real policy preview behind all the "fluff"? oh, obama, my bad.

Whoever on this board still loves Bush, and it shocks me how many they are, obviously cares nothing about actual job performance or outcomes, or about the future of this country, or even the present of this country. Thanks to Bush, we've mortgaged our future to foreign creditors, and we've mortgaged our reputation to Islamist thugs. We're losing the war on terror and we depend on Chinese and Korean loans.

This is the type of comment I LOVE to respond to. Let's see...where to start...ah, look at the "job performance" of the last two Democrat presidents, Carter and Clinton. Carter couldn't fix a broken economy with rampant unemployment, ridiculous interest rates, and run-away inflation. Jimmy allowed himself to be abused by the USSR, and the PLO, couldn't deal with Iran, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and even gave back the Panama Canal (which we built-and is since falling apart). Then we foolishly boycotted the 1980 Olympics. In comes 12 years of Reagan and Bush, Sr...we save Central America, fix the economy, deal with Norriega and Hussein and demolish the USSR. Then we get Clinton..comes into office riding an economic boom...of which he had nothing to do with, yet didn't realize the corporate fraud that was partially fueling it. He couldn't deal effectively with Rwanda, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan, or Afghanistan, but managed to screw Israel by putting an empowered PLO right in their backyard. The US suffered attacks on Khobar Towers, 1st attack on the WTC, twin embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, and of course the USS Cole. But hey, we made Europe happy by committing to peace keeping in Bosnia and Kosovo, which supported WHAT U.S. interest???? Clinton leaves office with an economy already tanking and an emboldened Al Qaida. The rest of the world thinks we are a joke. Bush comes in, gets handed the bad economy, 9/11, airline collapse, stock market crash, corporate scandal, a United Nations that can't handle Saddam Hussein, and a bunch of whiney liberals who can't comprehend the Electoral College. Bush acted. He dealt with the problems. Do I care if we "upset" the U.N.? After 22 years in the military, EXTENSIVE service in the Middle East, and involvement in a LOT of U.N. operations, I could care less about what the rest of the world thinks about our actions. Bottom line: since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, all the fighting is over there, not on American soil. Not one significant attack on a major US target. As for Al Gore, he should have shown some leadership when his boss committed gross misconduct and perjury which led him to be impeached. The internet? The idea came from the US military. Gore just happened to be on the Armed Forces Committee.

Wake up people!

John E:

How do we know Kerry wasn't drunk when he fragged himself? What about Gore?

Many of the Swift Boat vets weren't discredited, newsflash, son.

And I'm sure many Vietnam era Alabama Guardsmen would take offence to your portrayal of them. Bush served, never went AWOL, and was discharged honourably...

And he never accused soldiers of phantom atrocities for political gain or dishonored his brothers by throwing medals into a body of water as political grandstanding.

Kerry is not a class act.

How many vets do you know re-encted their exploits on camera for future gain? Not even son of Satan- GWB did that did he?

How come we never hear anything about Al Gore's exploits? Did his daddy give him a cushy post too?

Greg says: "Let's all try to imagine how much better the world would be right now if Al Gore had been president for the last 8 years instead of George Bush."

Let's see:
1) the towers would still be down.
2) Osama would still be in Afghanistan with all the attendant atrocities and mayhem.
3) Saddam would still be in Iraq with all the attendant atrocities and mayhem.
4) Kim Jong-Ill would be lobbing missiles at Japan because the US would not do crap unless it was in Eastern Europe or Africa.
5) Darfur would be the bloodbath for our troops instead of Iraq on an ill definied humanitarian mission.
6) Probably a few other splinter cells would have launched attacks on the US because we were concerned with the terrorists civil liberties.
7) France & Russia would be our best friends.
8) Oil would be $100 a barrel because OPEC would just love to yank Gore's chain.
9) China would have annexed Taiwan.
10) Stock market in the toilet from the resultant devastation of the attacks and our ineffectiveness with dealing with the crisis.
11) Explosion of alternative fuel technology, but no capital free enough to take it to market.
12) Record tax hikes and record unemployment as more companies left our shores for "safer" Canada and ports beyond.
13) .002% reduction in greenhouse gases

Yes, that sounds like utopia... at what price?

AlanD: You are simply wrong. You claim that the scientific community is not in agreement. You probably believe this because either the media or a politician told you so. There are constant blurbs from certain so-called "experts" that dissent. These are hand-picked stories with biased political undertones.

I will repost the exact number, but there have been on the order of 900 submissions to PEER-REVIEWED journals regarding global warming, the most prestigious and apolitical publications in the scientific community. These journals have no patience for any political undertones, papers are solely scientific. Of these 900 submissions, all expressed the concession that global warming exists and humans are likely to be responsible in some part. There were 0 that dissented from this view. That sounds like agreement to me. So you are simply wrong

As for your lame and overused propoganda that myself or others in meteorology or related fields whore their research is simply a stupid and ill-informed statement. Those with any reputation do not participate in such practices. I have no agenda other than finding and reporting scientific fact.

Again, I am a meteorologist, pursuing a Ph.D., so you are wrong in calling me wet. I am writing what is truth, from within the field. So quit being a media or political follower and actually read the peer-reviewed material before spouting nonsense.

Jeremy Gibbs: Peer review if you have a bias towards the hypothesis means nothing:

Studies in the failed science of phlogiston, phrenology, and eugenics were also conducted.

There were people pursuing PhD's in those fields of study at one time. Meteorology as a science is in its youthful stages, there's more you don't know about the mechanics of weather at this point than you do know compared to the other earth sciences. It's not a knock against the branch, it's OK to say we are still figuring out the interactions, it just means that caution has to be taken before jumping to false conclusions.

Why did the head of NASA and the Czech republic (who is a climatologist) even express skepticism at man made global warming as presented by Gore & co.?

RE: Posted by: Jeremy Gibbs | June 7, 2007 10:27 PM …
Hey Jerry, 1st of all, the all wet comment was a play on you being a meteorologist. I thought it was pretty funny. 2nd, Your claim that there are not people in the scientific field financially benefiting from the frenzy of man made global warming is naive at best, more likely defensive as a result of some repressed guilt. Money to study man made global warming has created an entire new industry fraught with political agendas. The fact that you are a meteorologist and studying for your PHD does not impress me. While you no doubt have a better understanding of climate than a lay person does the combined knowledge of the meteorological sciences are in their infancy. Can you tell me what the weather going to be like next month? Let me guess, hot. I suppose you discount the scientists in the documentary the great global warming swindle because they don’t conform to your biases? (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=the+great+global+warming+swindle)
How do you explain the correlation to sun activity and temperature increases followed by, yes followed by higher level of Co2? Not to mention temperature increases on Mars and Neptune. Anthropologists have documented higher levels of Co2 than we have now on earth before man ever had any influence on the planet. If you really believe the matter of man mad global warming is a proven fact I will paraphrase what I said in my first post. You either have your head in the sand are fooling your self or are on the payroll. Or quite possibly you have been cheated by your university; maybe your money would have been better spent planting trees that feed off of Co2? One fact that I am sure that you will not agree with is that 95 plus percent of universities are bastions of anti capitalism, socialist leaning utopian dreamers. I will say it again, there are more credible scientist who have not bought into the so called "consensus" of Man made Global warming then there are those that do. FYI…Consensus does not equal science. I think I learned that in the sixth grade, so nice try with the PHD argument that you know better. I must say it again, you are either uninformed, meaning wrong, or on the payroll directly or indirectly. I suggest you plant your feet back on the ground, loose your biases and buckle down and study the science with an open mind and you may surprise your self. Good luck with your quest for the truth if you are honestly seeking it.

Following up to Bonko’s insightful response to Jeremy…
Reprinted without permission from dictionary.com. Definition of Peer - a person who is equal to another in abilities, qualifications, age, background, and social status.
Jeremy, may I suggest that you reach out of your peer group once in a while, you may learn something.

Bonko: I agree with your assertion that peer reviewed material is only as good as the ethics of those doing the reviewing. However, I strongly disagree with the implication that those in the field have a bias towards the hypothesis. This is no more true in meteorology than it is in any other field. Are cancer scientists or geneticists biased? I am not naive enough that I don't realize people can sway results based on preconceived notions, however, to generalize an entire field as being such is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Based on that logic, the public should never believe in anything scientists produce again.

(Note this is a single case so don't knock me for only giving one instance, I understand that) one of my professors Dr. David Karoly, who is from Australia and could give a care less about U.S. politics, served as a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s 4th assessment.

http://www.ipcc.ch

This is an international group of thousands of scientists who released a report indicating that a warming trend was occurring and that man was likely a substantial culprit. They are not swayed by U.S. politics, so that is not a valid argument in this arena. Regardless of your position, you should read some of their findings.

I am well aware that we are, compared to several other fields, still in our infancy. However, the strides made in meteorology are rather remarkable considering the length of its study. I agree that there is nothing wrong with noting we are still learning. In fact, I think papers in which people say "we failed" or "we did it wrong" are just as valuable as those with substantial findings. But I disagree with your inference that we have jumped to false conclusions. The fact is that findings are being released after years of research and not a quick run through based on biases. I assure you that bad science is not tolerated for all respected peer-reviewed publications.

As to your last remark, if you had read the post on NASA's chief, he said he had "no doubt that a trend of global warming exists." but that "I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with." This is a perfect example of story being twisted to suit political needs. He said that a trend did exist, period. It should be noted that he would question the need to fight it because he has come under fire for cutting global warming studies because they were eating into his space budget. Who has the agenda now?

Just to reiterate, scientists from over 170 countries are in agreement that global warming is occurring. The only widespread debate is how to quantify man's influence, if any. I appreciate your civil debate, it is what makes America great.

AlanD: Caught the joke and yes it is a funny one.

First, working down the line, I never asserted that no one in the field financially benefited from global warming. I said no one that was respected whored their research to produce results consistent with those of the funding agency's view. I have ZERO guilt Dr. Phil. People in science all benefit from research. It is like any other job. A service is provided for compensation. Using your logic, doctors should feel guilt for benefiting off those who die or are ill.

While I agree that the field of meteorology is in its infancy, the strides made in the last 50 years is remarkable. The roots of meteorology, at the core of atmospheric understanding, is continuum mechanics, applied physics. Climatology is a branch of meteorology. You show your lack of complete understanding by generalizing meteorologists as forecasters like those you see on T.V. We will never be able to accurately tell anyone what will occur in one month (that's a very token challenge and childish at best) due to a little concept called chaos. But I challenge you to think a little. Think how incredible it is that we are able to produce 5 day forecasts with the accuracy of 3 day forecasts of less than 20 years ago. We have numerical models that can accurately forecast precipitation over 180 hours in the future. Due to chaos, it is unlikely we will ever become accurate enough to pinpoint an exact county, but don't dismiss us as incompetent. SPC helps saves lives because severe forecasts are issued days in advance. The fact is that the majority of research meteorologists aren't concerned with forecasting.

I won't even reply to your video comment beyond asking you , do you discount the scientists of over 170 countries because they don’t conform to YOUR biases. And you again show your misunderstanding of the Temp vs. CO2 graphs. Read here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 to see your misconception. These lags occurred during glacial terminations, where CO2 didn't spark the rise in temperature, but acted to enhance its effects.

No one is an expert on other planet's complex weather system's, who knows for sure what is causing those? You yourself claim we don't even understand our own planet, so nice try, but let's focus on our planet.

Sure, there have always been fluctuations in CO2, and yes, there have been higher periods of CO2 in the past. But this goes back to the fact that CO2 doesn't trigger heating, it acts to enhance its effects. This is the heart of climate experts' findings. We have increased the amount of CO2 and other anthropogenic gases beyond that of a natural cycle, thus we have in some way contributed to an enhanced warming.

So you are completely wrong in calling me an ostrich with my head buried. I'll take my pre-Ph.D. education over your misguided attempts at science. Talk about political propoganda and biases. You again throw out a childish argument with the ever popular "you are on the payroll" statement. Are YOU on the oil companies payroll? See, those are just silly and ill-informed jabs from people who don't have anything else to backup an argument. Plus where did you come up with 95%? You had the audacity to claim pro global warming side was politically driven and then make a comment about universities that way?

Next, are the dissenters more credible because they agree with you? Agreed, consensus isn't science, it is an agreement on science.

So in short, yes I do know better. I have no biases. My beliefs are based on science, not TV or a documentary. I have nothing but an open mind. It really sounds like you should practice what you preach. Finally, I do branch out and read findings in other arenas of global warming, but the fact is that we are among the world's leading fields on global warming knowledge, so in terms of gathering facts, I will always give my field an equal opportunity.

I appreciate our dialogs, it is really what makes our country work. I appreciate your perspective. Know too that I have my own reservation on some points, but I am not a politically driven person with science. I am republican, but I agree with the findings thus far. Have a great weekend.

RE: Posted by: Jeremy Gibbs | June 8, 2007 5:45 PM

Jeremy… As for you using the IPCC report as a base for your arguments, you have to do better than that. The report is rapidly loosing credibility, almost everyday another of their contributing scientists comes out and says they were misquoted or their research was manipulated to fit the UN’s agenda. Many of them have threatened to sue to try and get their names removed from the report. Any one with a clear mind can see that the UN is looking for anyway it can to tax the United States. Climate change is just their most recent justification. In response to your comment “They are not swayed by U.S. politics, so that is not a valid argument in this arena.” No where in my post did I mention US politics, the European, Australian and American alarmists are equally off the wall on this subject.

Face it, Mans effect on the climate is negligible. Common sense would say that if we altered the climate so easily in the first place we could alter it again just as easily and bring it back to normal. But who is to say what is normal? Like the NASA chief said, it is short sited to claim that our current climate is ideal. I do not deny the climate may very well be warming. One thing an honest person can not deny is that the earth’s climate, and apparently the other planets in our solar system as well, is constantly changing. Just as solar activity is constantly changing. But it is pure arrogance to think mankind is the cause. Sure people can warm a city but to alter the entire earth and our atmosphere, at least at this stage of civilization, is science fiction. Why don’t you respond to my question? How do you explain the correlation to solar activity and temperature increases followed by, not preceded by, but followed by, higher levels of Co2, along with temperature increases on Mars and Neptune? And how do you explain the fact that anthropologists have documented higher levels of Co2 in the distant past than we have now on earth, before man ever had any influence on the planet?

I find it funny how Gore and his followers say we are almost to the point of no return. I remember Gore said 20 years ago, only a few years after global cooling was all the rage to the anti industrial anti capitalism crowd, we only had 20 years left before it would be too late. What happened? Have you noticed that nowadays the man made global warming nuts have change the term from global warming to climate change? Just in case the warming trend slows or reverses. Who can argue that the climate isn’t changing? They have also changed their doomsday predictions from 20 - 25 years to 100 -150 years, all the easier to push their agenda without accountability. I still laugh when I think about those two teachers that were trying to indoctrinate school children by attempting to showcase the effects of global warming. If you remember they had to return from their arctic expedition sooner than they planned due to the unusual cold. I think their explanation was, see global warming makes the climate unpredictable. How stupid! And as for the depleting Polar Bear myth, fact is according to Canadian researchers there are more Polar Bears today than there were fifty years ago. While I am at it, to expel another myth, there are also more trees today than there were 150 years ago…see if you can get any environut to admit that.

Forgive my sarcasm in the previous post and don’t misunderstand me, I do think that the study of meteorology is valuable and worthwhile. However any thinking person can see “the arena” has been corrupted by the man made global warming pushers. Even the founder of Green Peace admitted before he resigned that the environmental movement was taken over by socialists and nut jobs. Again I implore you keep up your studies but don't be influenced by the mob mentality. I know the whole of liberal academia will come down upon you if you question their agenda, but be brave and stay strong in the search for the truth and eventually you will be vindicated. Unfortunately, from your previous post I think you have already made up your mind. Disappointing! As I said in one of my earlier posts, how silly Al Gore and all of his sycophants are going to look in five years or so when this whole man made global warming hysteria is show to be science fiction. Or in reality just another money grab.

RE: Posted by: Jeremy Gibbs | June 8, 2007 5:45 PM

Jeremy… As for you using the IPCC report as a base for your arguments, you have to do better than that. The report is rapidly loosing credibility, almost everyday another of their contributing scientists comes out and says they were misquoted or their research was manipulated to fit the UN’s agenda. Many of them have threatened to sue to try and get their names removed from the report. Any one with a clear mind can see that the UN is looking for anyway it can to tax the United States. Climate change is just their most recent justification. In response to your comment “They are not swayed by U.S. politics, so that is not a valid argument in this arena.” No where in my post did I mention US politics, the European, Australian and American alarmists are equally off the wall on this subject.

Face it, Mans effect on the climate is negligible. Common sense would say that if we altered the climate so easily in the first place we could alter it again just as easily and bring it back to normal. But who is to say what is normal? Like the NASA chief said, it is short sited to claim that our current climate is ideal. I do not deny the climate may very well be warming. One thing an honest person can not deny is that the earth’s climate, and apparently the other planets in our solar system as well, is constantly changing. Just as solar activity is constantly changing. But it is pure arrogance to think mankind is the cause. Sure people can warm a city but to alter the entire earth and our atmosphere, at least at this stage of civilization, is science fiction. Why don’t you respond to my question? How do you explain the correlation to solar activity and temperature increases followed by, not preceded by, but followed by, higher levels of Co2, along with temperature increases on Mars and Neptune? And how do you explain the fact that anthropologists have documented higher levels of Co2 in the distant past than we have now on earth, before man ever had any influence on the planet?

I find it funny how Gore and his followers say we are almost to the point of no return. I remember Gore said 20 years ago, only a few years after global cooling was all the rage to the anti industrial anti capitalism crowd, we only had 20 years left before it would be too late. What happened? Have you noticed that nowadays the man made global warming nuts have change the term from global warming to climate change? Just in case the warming trend slows or reverses. Who can argue that the climate isn’t changing? They have also changed their doomsday predictions from 20 - 25 years to 100 -150 years, all the easier to push their agenda without accountability. I still laugh when I think about those two teachers that were trying to indoctrinate school children by attempting to showcase the effects of global warming. If you remember they had to return from their arctic expedition sooner than they planned due to the unusual cold. I think their explanation was, see global warming makes the climate unpredictable. How stupid! And as for the depleting Polar Bear myth, fact is according to Canadian researchers there are more Polar Bears today than there were fifty years ago. While I am at it, to expel another myth, there are also more trees today than there were 150 years ago…see if you can get any environut to admit that.

Forgive my sarcasm in the previous post and don’t misunderstand me, I do think that the study of meteorology is valuable and worthwhile. However any thinking person can see “the arena” has been corrupted by the man made global warming pushers. Even the founder of Green Peace admitted before he resigned that the environmental movement was taken over by socialists and nut jobs. Again I implore you keep up your studies but don't be influenced by the mob mentality. I know the whole of liberal academia will come down upon you if you question their agenda, but be brave and stay strong in the search for the truth and eventually you will be vindicated. Unfortunately, from your previous post I think you have already made up your mind. Disappointing! As I said in one of my earlier posts, how silly Al Gore and all of his sycophants are going to look in five years or so when this whole man made global warming hysteria is show to be science fiction. Or in reality just another money grab.

PS. I will respond to your latest post once I have read and digested it. I to appreciate an cicil debate.

I too appreciate a civil debate.

"His failure to carry his home state is inexcusable."

Yeah, inexcusable for the state. We learned our lesson, now all we need is a chance to prove it.

Run, Al, Run!!

Jeremy Gibbs: Ah, I have to go back to my epistemological roots because of this debate. Peer review is only as good as the peers understand the mechanics of the situation, in this case, the climate. To give you a cogent example of how a science in its infancy can cloud how we view a problem, let's examine the use of leeches to expel rhumers from the body, which were thought in the 19th century to be the source of ills in the human body. Peer review said this was a great treatment until upstarts raged against these peers at great personal cost to found modern medicine.

The problem with peer review in an infant science rests in the inductive leaps that we make in causation as human beings to get at the heart of the matter. If we see the same climate conditions, (e.g. ice caps melting) in other parts of the solar system, it would be a safe bet that human inervention is not the root cause and perhaps more money in research should be invested in alternative causes that may be natural in origin.

The ipcc released a biased document. While thousands of scientists on the climate change research dole do lend their names to the document, few of them acutally have a hand in writing the actual document for logisitcs sake. The amount of review that goes into such a document before it is released is not as large, because there is pressure to release the document amid EU/UN as well as instituional political pressure as the authors have other projects they have to move on to in the "publish or perish" state of academia we have set up. Never was the ipcc document reviewed by dissenting scientists and their critiques taken into account and an attempt made to either address the dissenting views or try and overcome them with research.

Where is the 25%-50% (depending on your source of the amount of dissenters in the debate) of the climatology community that is not of the human induced climate change condition's participation on this paper. Why was there no mention that CO2 levels "follow" the climate change in ice core samples, not preceeed it?

Nowhere in the document are the words "we don't know quite how this works," which is critical in a work on an infant science, because things are by human nature assumed to be known.

The climate has always changed on the planet. Very rarely have you had the kind of effects Gore predicts in his book/film actually happen. In the geologic record, how many times has climate change forced the eastern seaboard of the US under water, for example?

The NASA chief's remarks were made in that spirit. If it was a matter of life or death, the chief would not be so flippant to say something along the lines of "I don't think this is something we should wrestle with." In other words, in his opinion, man-made climate change is an issue that is a waste of time & money.

None of the Gore acolytes and scientists have explained how a portion of the scientific community so swiftly changed from man made ice age to man made global warming so swiftly. Usually when there is such an epochal shift in thinking, there is a very public explanation of why the lst theory was erroneous.

AlanD: To this "Why don’t you respond to my question? How do you explain the correlation to solar activity and temperature increases followed by, not preceded by, but followed by, higher levels of Co2, along with temperature increases on Mars and Neptune? And how do you explain the fact that anthropologists have documented higher levels of Co2 in the distant past than we have now on earth, before man ever had any influence on the planet?"

I answered but it was a long post so here it is. Read here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 to see your misconception. These lags occurred during glacial terminations, where CO2 didn't spark the rise in temperature, but acted to enhance its effects.

Sure, there have always been fluctuations in CO2, and yes, there have been higher periods of CO2 in the past.

But this goes back to the fact that CO2 doesn't trigger heating, it acts to enhance its effects. This is the heart of climate experts' findings. We have increased the amount of CO2 and other anthropogenic gases beyond that of a natural cycle, thus we have in some way contributed to an enhanced warming.

I strongly disagree with your statement "Face it, Mans effect on the climate is negligible. Common sense would say that if we altered the climate so easily in the first place we could alter it again just as easily and bring it back to normal."

First, true science hasn't agreeably quantified humans' effect, but it is certainly not negligible. Preindustrial CO2 was around 300ppm now it is about 383ppm, which is substantial. The effects can't be reversed sa quickly as you hope. CO2 has a life in the atmosphere on the order of over 100 years. So even if we were to stop all anthropogenic emission, it would take on the order of 50years to come to equillibrium.

To "Sure people can warm a city but to alter the entire earth and our atmosphere, at least at this stage of civilization, is science fiction." This makes no sense. Anthropogenic gases are not quarantined to a city, where do you think they go? I understand that we feel so insignificant in this world but it shouldn't be hard to see that 6 billion people can effect our climate.

Read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
or I encourage you to pick up "A rough guide to climate change" on Amazon for cheap. The author speaks in laymans terms and only presents facts and NO opinions.

Realize that I have made up my mind so far, but NOT by politics or mob mentality. My reasons are based on scientific fact. I wouldn't be a true scientist if I were swayed by politics. I have a really nice powerpoint slide presentation that clears up global warming myths and facts and is 100% politics free, let me know what a good way to send it your way would be. I could post it to my website for you.

Bonko: I find your definition of a meteorologist pretty funny. You and everyone else incorrectly bring in examples of "you can't tell me if I need an umbrella in 10days." That is a laughable example. First off, you are falling vicitim to the ideas that meteorologists are all TV forecasters. In fact, the science is deeply rooted in continuum mechanics and the majority of meteorologists are NOT forecasters. They try to better understand the interactions of the atmosphere. To say we don't have any idea how to predictably understand how forces interact is absurd and ill-informed. In fact we have created complex numerical models that can accurately produce precipitation 180 hours in the future. a little thing called chaos theory will tell you that we can never exactly reproduce anything that far in the future (See Ed Lorenz). You like to tout geologists, yet they can't even accurately predict earthquakes outside of a day or so, but forecasters can do a rather good job of forecasting storms a week in advance (again see chaos theory before attacking this statement, I didn't claim ew exactly spot the location). Geologists have to based knowledge of the core and mantle on theories since they aren't able to actually observe such things.

Additionally, you are confusing climate with weather. Weather is local in time and space but climatology takes a broader approach. Climatology is a branch of meteorology, not the science by itself.

Also, you have joined the masses who have erroneously asked this question. No doubt because some biased nut job who agreed with you told you it was so. Quoting you: Why was there no mention that CO2 levels "follow" the climate change in ice core samples, not preceeed it? This is another example of simply looking at a graph and making BAD arguments about it. Read here to see why you are wrong: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13
Bottomline, your points where it lagged temperature was during glacial terminations. Melting sea ice releases CO2 and thus CO2 doesn't trigger warming, it acts to enhance it. Just another example of believing what someone tells you.

Finally, back to the stupid argument that "we can't tell you whats going on in 10 days let alone 50 years." Again you are crossing weather and climate. We aren't trying to spot a storm 50 years from now, we are looking at global averages such as temperature, which we do a pretty damn good job. I love how you like to call us biased, when in reality, you are far more so. I know it is hard to think that humans can affect climate, but shall we remember a little thing called the ozone hole. Not too hard to consider is it?

RE: Posted by: Jeremy Gibbs | June 8, 2007 6:37 PM

Sorry it took so long to reply to you, life intervened. But here I go…

First, after reading the article you suggest here http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 I noticed a whole lot of uncertainty,

“Years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data”. “So, in summary, the lag of CO2 behind temperature doesn't tell us much about global warming. [But it may give us a very interesting clue about why CO2 rises at the ends of ice ages. The 800-year lag is about the amount of time required to flush out the deep ocean through natural ocean currents. So CO2 might be stored in the deep ocean during ice ages, and then get released when the climate warms.]”

Not a whole lot of certainty here and by no means points to mankind’s contribution to global warming, actually it does just the opposite.

Seems to me that the earth has been through temperature fluctuations many times in the past and will continue to fluctuate in the future. My point is that man’s effect on CO2 levels is insignificant. Whether it enhances temperature increases or not it is a natural phenomenon. As you know one volcano puts out more CO2 than almost all of human history not to mention the oceans. As for your statement that “we have increased the amount of CO2 and other anthropogenic gases beyond that of a natural cycle, thus we have in some way contributed to an enhanced warming” is overstated and unsubstantiated. Who is to say what is a natural cycle or normal? As you said “you yourself claim we don't even understand our own planet, so nice try, but let's focus on our planet” is ignoring proven facts, as we absolutely know that the temperature on other planets in our solar system are rising. What we are not absolutely sure of is why. But a consensus of data certainly points to solar activity. You can not deny that increases in solar activity correlate with planetary temperature increases. Besides this idea that CO2 is a pollutant is ridiculous. For goodness sake, man and animals exhale CO2 and plant life absorbs it and releases oxygen. Whether it was GOD or something else that created the earth it seems to be a pretty good system. Get out of the CO2 is bad mindset and study something worthwhile.

Responding to your “using your logic, doctors should feel guilt for benefiting off those who die or are ill” statement, my logic would be that some doctors are charlatans and feed off of peoples fears or sell snake oil to the gullible. As for your not being on the payroll, where is it you plan to work when you graduate and who will be sponsoring or funding the research? Even if you work at a university the field of study has been established because of the man made global warming crowd. In response to your question, do I not believe the 170 countries that sign on to the man made global warming theory? As I mentioned previously the UN IPCC report was not written by scientist it was written by UN bureaucrats manipulating the scientists data to meet their own agenda. Many of the contributing scientists have come out and criticized the report. And as for the question am I on the oil companies payroll the answer is no although I wish I were. I love the oil companies; they make life much better for all of us. Can you imagine how different life would be with out such an abundant source of energy? I am confident by the time we start to run out of oil, coal and natural gas; somewhere an ingenious scientist will come up with a new energy supply and probably become wealthy in the process. Your time would be better spent in productive endeavors. The man made global warming frenzy evolved from anti capitalism and anti industry roots. Capitalism and industrialism has improved life and life expectancy for everyone on the planet, it should be celebrated not condemned. Not that you have condemned it but the environuts seem to detest it.

As for you calling me childish because I point out you can not predict the weather next month. The fact that you have the audacity to think you know what’s going to happen in 100 - 200 years or more from now makes it a valid point. And as far as the five day forecast being more reliable than it was 20 years ago, that is mainly the result of improvements in technology, computers, satellites new radar systems etc. I am not arguing the fact that “the roots of meteorology, at the core of atmospheric understanding, is continuum mechanics, applied physics and climatology is a branch of meteorology”. They are all worthwhile areas of science. Nor did I call you or your future peers’ incompetent. The study of the atmosphere helps us understand our world and other planets better. I am all for increasing our knowledge. It does seem that there has been recent global warming but it also appears to be leveling off. Your field of study is without a doubt the best to determine the fluctuations in climate change. What I am arguing is that man’s effect on the overall climate of our planet is infinitesimal. My guess is we will have to wait 10 to20 years to prove that man made global warming was a hoax. According to the phony Al Gore, that’s all the time we have left. Same mentality as that renowned oceanographer Ted Danson who claimed 20 plus years ago that the oceans would be dead in 20 years. Same mentality of those that claimed 30 years ago that man made global cooling was going to destroy the planet, nothing but self-granulizing fools. Although I did love Ted in cheers. And finally responding to your “are the dissenters more credible because they agree with you” question. My problem with the believers is their attempt to shut off the debate. What’s wrong with an open discussion on the merits or lack thereof on the subject? Their guru Al gore states that the issue is proven. He went so far as to denounce any media who questions the idea. After all which side was it that came up with the term global warming deniers? Equating those who disagree or question them with Holocaust deniers. Shameless if you ask me!

Oh yeah I must say I am sorry about the 95 percent figure regarding universities being liberal, I was wrong it is probably closer to 98 percent. The fact that you choose to take issue with that point only illustrates a denial of reality or to put it another way, I am sorry to say, your head being in the sand. As for your belief in man’s contribution to global warming and whether or not you actually do know better, it remains to be seen.

Hey Jeremy don’t tell me you think that man actually created the ozone hole as well? There is no consensus claiming that. I have to ask you how were we able to fix it. I’m sure you realize that it has been getting smaller and is almost non existent today. What are they teaching you at that university your going to anyway?

To all of you who buy into the Man Made Global Warming Hoax please read on...

Freedom, not climate, is at risk
By Vaclav Klaus

Published: June 13 2007

We are living in strange times. One exceptionally warm winter is enough – irrespective of the fact that in the course of the 20th century the global temperature increased only by 0.6 per cent – for the environmentalists and their followers to suggest radical measures to do something about the weather, and to do it right now.

In the past year, Al Gore’s so-called “documentary” film was shown in cinemas worldwide, Britain’s – more or less Tony Blair’s – Stern report was published, the fourth report of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was put together and the Group of Eight summit announced ambitions to do something about the weather. Rational and freedom-loving people have to respond. The dictates of political correctness are strict and only one permitted truth, not for the first time in human history, is imposed on us. Everything else is denounced.

The author Michael Crichton stated it clearly: “the greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda”. I feel the same way, because global warming hysteria has become a prime example of the truth versus propaganda problem. It requires courage to oppose the “established” truth, although a lot of people – including top-class scientists – see the issue of climate change entirely differently. They protest against the arrogance of those who advocate the global warming hypothesis and relate it to human activities.

As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.

The environmentalists ask for immediate political action because they do not believe in the long-term positive impact of economic growth and ignore both the technological progress that future generations will undoubtedly enjoy, and the proven fact that the higher the wealth of society, the higher is the quality of the environment. They are Malthusian pessimists.

The scientists should help us and take into consideration the political effects of their scientific opinions. They have an obligation to declare their political and value assumptions and how much they have affected their selection and interpretation of scientific evidence.

Does it make any sense to speak about warming of the Earth when we see it in the context of the evolution of our planet over hundreds of millions of years? Every child is taught at school about temperature variations, about the ice ages, about the much warmer climate in the Middle Ages. All of us have noticed that even during our life-time temperature changes occur (in both directions).

Due to advances in technology, increases in disposable wealth, the rationality of institutions and the ability of countries to organise themselves, the adaptability of human society has been radically increased. It will continue to increase and will solve any potential consequences of mild climate changes.

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”.

The issue of global warming is more about social than natural sciences and more about man and his freedom than about tenths of a degree Celsius changes in average global temperature.

As a witness to today’s worldwide debate on climate change, I suggest the following:
■Small climate changes do not demand far-reaching restrictive measures
■Any suppression of freedom and democracy should be avoided
■Instead of organising people from above, let us allow everyone to live as he wants
■Let us resist the politicisation of science and oppose the term “scientific consensus”, which is always achieved only by a loud minority, never by a silent majority
■Instead of speaking about “the environment”, let us be attentive to it in our personal behaviour
■Let us be humble but confident in the spontaneous evolution of human society. Let us trust its rationality and not try to slow it down or divert it in any direction
■Let us not scare ourselves with catastrophic forecasts, or use them to defend and promote irrational interventions in human lives.

The writer is President of the Czech Republic

I am really getting sick of this. Al gore is brilliant on all topics: climate change, freedom, wire tapping, over-reach of the executive, how the senate works, foreign policy, the way the world works for petessake. He should either RUN or say he definitely will not run and close the door. We cannot take the tension out here. I will tell you this: I will never forgive him if he does NOT run and Hillary Clinton is the nominee, which it looks like she will be. I cannot and will not vote for her. I will write in the name of Al Gore if he won't run officially.

We are tired of the game, Mr. Gore, throw your hat in the ring or get out of the public eye completely. We can't take the speculation anymore and franky, we're getting a little bit mad at you.

The President of the Czech Republic is a moron. Can't we have two crises at one time? We haven't had just one exceptionally warm winter, we've had several years worth of them. I know this because I live in Minnesota and we haven't had a cold winter in 8 years.
He needs to get out more.

In case anyone is still reading this thread read on...



Local scientist calls global warming theory 'hooey'
Samara Kalk Derby — 6/18/2007 8:01 am

Reid Bryson, known as the father of scientific climatology, considers global warming a bunch of hooey.

The UW-Madison professor emeritus, who stands against the scientific consensus on this issue, is referred to as a global warming skeptic. But he is not skeptical that global warming exists, he is just doubtful that humans are the cause of it.

There is no question the earth has been warming. It is coming out of the "Little Ice Age," he said in an interview this week.

"However, there is no credible evidence that it is due to mankind and carbon dioxide. We've been coming out of a Little Ice Age for 300 years. We have not been making very much carbon dioxide for 300 years. It's been warming up for a long time," Bryson said.

The Little Ice Age was driven by volcanic activity. That settled down so it is getting warmer, he said.

Humans are polluting the air and adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, but the effect is tiny, Bryson said.

"It's like there is an elephant charging in and you worry about the fact that there is a fly sitting on its head. It's just a total misplacement of emphasis," he said. "It really isn't science because there's no really good scientific evidence."

Just because almost all of the scientific community believes in man-made global warming proves absolutely nothing, Bryson said. "Consensus doesn't prove anything, in science or anywhere else, except in democracy, maybe."

Bryson, 87, was the founding chairman of the department of meteorology at UW-Madison and of the Institute for Environmental Studies, now known as the Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies. He retired in 1985, but has gone into the office almost every day since. He does it without pay.

"I have now worked for zero dollars since I retired, long enough that I have paid back the people of Wisconsin every cent they paid me to give me a wonderful, wonderful career. So we are even now. And I feel good about that," said Bryson.

So, if global warming isn't such a burning issue, why are thousands of scientists so concerned about it?

"Why are so many thousands not concerned about it?" Bryson shot back.

"There is a lot of money to be made in this," he added. "If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"

Speaking out against global warming is like being a heretic, Bryson noted.

And it's not something that he does regularly.

"I can't waste my time on that, I have too many other things to do," he said.

But if somebody asks him for his opinion on global warming, he'll give it. "And I think I know about as much about it as anybody does."

Up against his students' students: Reporters will often call the meteorology building seeking the opinion of a scientist and some beginning graduate student will pick up the phone and say he or she is a meteorologist, Bryson said. "And that goes in the paper as 'scientists say.'"

The word of this young graduate student then trumps the views of someone like Bryson, who has been working in the field for more than 50 years, he said. "It is sort of a smear."

Bryson said he recently wrote something on the subject and two graduate students told him he was wrong, citing research done by one of their professors. That professor, Bryson noted, is probably the student of one of his students.

"Well, that professor happened to be wrong," he said.

"There is very little truth to what is being said and an awful lot of religion. It's almost a religion. Where you have to believe in anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming or else you are nuts."

While Bryson doesn't think that global warming is man-made, he said there is some evidence of an effect from mankind, but not an effect of carbon dioxide.

For example, in Wisconsin in the last 100 years the biggest heating has been around Madison, Milwaukee and in the Southeast, where the cities are. There was a slight change in the Green Bay area, he said. The rest of the state shows no warming at all.

"The growth of cities makes it hotter, but that was true back in the 1930s, too," Bryson said. "Big cities were hotter than the surrounding countryside because you concentrate the traffic and you concentrate the home heating. And you modify the surface, you pave a lot of it."

Bryson didn't see Al Gore's movie about global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth."

"Don't make me throw up," he said. "It is not science. It is not true."

Not so fast, say scientists: Galen McKinley, an assistant professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences at UW-Madison disagrees with Bryson, whom she notes is a respected researcher and professor with a long history at the university.

"There are innumerable studies that show that the shoe fits for global warming, I guess you could say, and the human causation for it," McKinley said.

"We understand very well the basic process of the greenhouse effect, which is that we know that the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases the heat trapped by the atmosphere. You put one dollar more in the bank and you have one dollar more there tomorrow. It's a very clear feedback," she said.

Carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing over the industrial period, about 200 years, and can be observed very clearly through about 100 monitoring stations worldwide, McKinley said.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing consistently with the amount that humans are putting into the atmosphere, she said.

"We know humans are putting it there, we understand the basic mechanism and we know that the temperatures are warming. Many, many, many studies illustrate that both at the global scale and at the regional scale."

She cited the work of John Magnuson, a UW-Madison professor emeritus of limnology who is internationally known for his lake studies. Magnuson records the number of days of ice on the lakes in southern Wisconsin, including Mendota and Monona.

His research shows that over the course of the last 150 years, the average has gone from about four months of ice cover to more like 2.5 months, McKinley said.

Bryson would say that it is due to coming out of an Ice Age, McKinley notes, "but the rate of change that we are seeing on the planet is inconsistent with changes in the past that have been due to an Ice Age."

The huge changes in temperature that scientists are seeing are happening much faster than have ever been observed in the past due to the change from an Ice Age phase to a non-Ice Age phase, she said.

"We know that humans are putting CO2 into the atmosphere at an incredibly fast rate, much, much faster than any natural process has done it in the last at least 400,000 years and probably more like millions of years."

The rate of change is consistent with human activity, she said. That is why so many major scientific societies are concerned about global warming, she added.

The release in February of the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) put the likelihood that human beings are the cause of global warming at 90 percent. It noted that temperatures will continue to climb for decades, that heat waves and floods will become more frequent and that the last time the Arctic and the Antarctic were warmer than they are today for an extended period -- before the start of the last Ice Age -- global sea levels were at least thirteen feet higher.

IPCC, founded in 1988, is the joint venture of the United Nations Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization. Every four or five years, it conducts an exhaustive survey of the available data and issues a multivolume assessment of the state of the climate. IPCC's reports are vetted by thousands of scientists and the organization's 190-plus participating governments.

"My views are very similar to those expressed by IPCC," said Steve Vavrus, an associate scientist at the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research.

"Reid Bryson maintains his long-standing opinions on anthropogenic climate change, and he's certainly entitled to them," Vavrus said.

"The scientific process is never 100 percent sure and it could be proven wrong," McKinley added.

"But I would say that the chances of that based on all of the best information at this current time are incredibly slim. And even though that possibility is out there, it would be irresponsible of us as a society not to act based on the best scientific information we have at the moment, which is that humans are causing the warming of the planet," she said.

"If you saw smoke in your house, it would be irresponsible not to get your family out, right?"

Samara Kalk Derby — 6/18/2007 8:01 am
Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:42 am

John Howe says:

The Professor has hit it on the head. Global Warming is nothing more than a religious hoax. Intelligent beings will not be fooled by it. Al Gore should get a real job, just not President of the United States.

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:43 am

says:

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:43 am

clay hillpointe says:

She proved his point by spouting allegory and 'common sense', neither of which amount to science.

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:45 am

Gene Mc Nally says:

The Prof is right. Gore's film is a gross distortion of facts. In five years Gore will be lumped in with Killer Bees as something we should fear.

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:48 am

Joseph Iruku says:

As an atheist I can recognize religious zealotry when I see it. These magician eyed global warming folks have all the characteristics of a religious cult. I'd rather live among people of an established religious faith that is constantly reconciling itself with society than I would these behavior control obsessed global warming parishioners who are making their faith out of, dare I say, thin air. Keep an eye on this cult. They are an increasingly hostile, prohibitive bunch that is more bent on controlling the behavior of modern society than even the modern church is.

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:48 am

mpd says:

This interesting since it also came out that there's no such thing as a 'global temperture' to generalize everything as such is a fallacy. If the world is getting warmer with higher co2 levels then in effect that creates more plant life that then generates oxygen (also higher food levels).

Also is the fact that humans by themselves exhale carbon dioxide so the easiest way to limit that would be a mass sterlization of every man women and child. So then it would be simply population growth rather than industry that is responsible.

back to top Community CommentsMon. Jun. 18, 2007 8:49 am

Sean Griffin says:

It's a shame that you have to reach emeritus status to have the courage to be a 'heathen.'

Hey Shelly... AlGore brilliant, NO, Hypocrite YES! You need to get out more. I will take warmer temperatures and freedom over a government knows best society any day!

Hey Jeremy you still reading this?

Bob Carter
June 18, 2007 12:00am
Professor Bob Carter is an environmental scientist at James Cook University who studies ancient climate change

WITH understandable reluctance, Prime Minister John Howard recently donned the political hair-shirt of a carbon trading system.
On the same day, NASA chief Michael Griffin commented in a US radio interview that "I am not sure that it is fair to say that (global warming) is a problem that we must wrestle with".
NASA is an agency that knows a thing or two about climate change. As Griffin added: "We study global climate change, that is in our authorisation, we think we do it rather well.
"I'm proud of that, but NASA is not an agency chartered to, quote, battle climate change."
Such a clear statement that science accomplishment should carry primacy over policy advice is both welcome and overdue.
Nonetheless, there is something worrying about one of Griffin's other statements, which said that "I have no doubt . . . that a trend of global warming exists".
Griffin seems to be referring to human-caused global warming, but irrespective of that his opinion is unsupported by the evidence.
The salient facts are these. First, the accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998. Oddly, this eight-year-long temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.
Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).
Third, there are strong indications from solar studies that Earth's current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades.
How then is it possible for Griffin to assert so boldly that human-caused global warming is happening?
Well, he is in good company for similar statements have been made recently by several Western heads of state at the G8 summit meeting. For instance, German Chancellor Angela Merkel asserts climate change (i.e. global warming) "is also essentially caused by humankind".
In fact, there is every doubt whether any global warming at all is occurring at the moment, let alone human-caused warming.
For leading politicians to be asserting to the contrary indicates something is very wrong with their chain of scientific advice, for they are clearly being deceived. That this should be the case is an international political scandal of high order which, in turn, raises the question of where their advice is coming from.
In Australia, the advice trail leads from government agencies such as the CSIRO and the Australian Greenhouse Office through to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the United Nations.
As leading economist David Henderson has pointed out, it is extremely dangerous for an unelected and unaccountable body like the IPCC to have a monopoly on climate policy advice to governments. And even more so because, at heart, the IPCC is a political and not a scientific agency.
Australia does not ask the World Bank to set its annual budget and neither should it allow the notoriously alarmist IPCC to set its climate policy.
It is past time for those who have deceived governments and misled the public regarding dangerous human-caused global warming to be called to account. Aided by hysterical posturing by green NGOs, their actions have led to the cornering of government on the issue and the likely implementation of futile emission policies that will impose direct extra costs on every household and enterprise in Australia to no identifiable benefit.
Not only do humans not dominate Earth's current temperature trend but the likelihood is that further large sums of public money are shortly going to be committed to, theoretically, combat warming when cooling is the more likely short-term climatic eventuality.
In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more than $US50 billion ($60 billion) on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one.
Yet that expenditure will pale into insignificance compared with the squandering of money that is going to accompany the introduction of a carbon trading or taxation system.
The costs of thus expiating comfortable middle class angst are, of course, going to be imposed preferentially upon the poor and underprivileged.
 Professor Bob Carter is an environmental scientist at James Cook University who studies ancient climate change

Jeremy some food for thought. A must read

http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/weather_stations/

Jeremy...did you disappear or just give up?

To Jeremy...I know your still looking in so here is one more. I would love to hear your response to my last few posts.

---------------
Read the sunspots

The mud at the bottom of B.C. fjords reveals that solar output drives climate change - and that we should prepare now for dangerous global cooling

R. TIMOTHY PATTERSON, Financial Post
Published: Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Politicians and environmentalists these days convey the impression that climate-change research is an exceptionally dull field with little left to discover. We are assured by everyone from David Suzuki to Al Gore to Prime Minister Stephen Harper that "the science is settled." At the recent G8 summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel even attempted to convince world leaders to play God by restricting carbon-dioxide emissions to a level that would magically limit the rise in world temperatures to 2C.

However, there was a problem. Despite this clear and repeated correlation, the measured variations in incoming solar energy were, on their own, not sufficient to cause the climate changes we have observed in our proxies. In addition, even though the sun is brighter now than at any time in the past 8,000 years, the increase in direct solar input is not calculated to be sufficient to cause the past century's modest warming on its own. There had to be an amplifier of some sort for the sun to be a primary driver of climate change.
Indeed, that is precisely what has been discovered. In a series of groundbreaking scientific papers starting in 2002, Veizer, Shaviv, Carslaw, and most recently Svensmark et al., have collectively demonstrated that as the output of the sun varies, and with it, our star's protective solar wind, varying amounts of galactic cosmic rays from deep space are able to enter our solar system and penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. These cosmic rays enhance cloud formation which, overall, has a cooling effect on the planet. When the sun's energy output is greater, not only does the Earth warm slightly due to direct solar heating, but the stronger solar wind generated during these "high sun" periods blocks many of the cosmic rays from entering our atmosphere. Cloud cover decreases and the Earth warms still more.
The opposite occurs when the sun is less bright. More cosmic rays are able to get through to Earth's atmosphere, more clouds form, and the planet cools more than would otherwise be the case due to direct solar effects alone. This is precisely what happened from the middle of the 17th century into the early 18th century, when the solar energy input to our atmosphere, as indicated by the number of sunspots, was at a minimum and the planet was stuck in the Little Ice Age. These new findings suggest that changes in the output of the sun caused the most recent climate change. By comparison, CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales.
In some fields the science is indeed "settled." For example, plate tectonics, once highly controversial, is now so well-established that we rarely see papers on the subject at all. But the science of global climate change is still in its infancy, with many thousands of papers published every year. In a 2003 poll conducted by German environmental researchers Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, two-thirds of more than 530 climate scientists from 27 countries surveyed did not believe that "the current state of scientific knowledge is developed well enough to allow for a reasonable assessment of the effects of greenhouse gases." About half of those polled stated that the science of climate change was not sufficiently settled to pass the issue over to policymakers at all.
Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada. As a country at the northern limit to agriculture in the world, it would take very little cooling to destroy much of our food crops, while a warming would only require that we adopt farming techniques practiced to the south of us.
Meantime, we need to continue research into this, the most complex field of science ever tackled, and immediately halt wasted expenditures on the King Canute-like task of "stopping climate change."

R. Timothy Patterson is professor and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University.

Al may not have invented the internet, he was however a farsighted legislator whose name became atached to a bill that sponsered the first accesible internet provider "Mosiac" which was subsidized by the federal governemnt for 400 million dollars. That investment paid major dividends and lead to the United States doing what it does best, INOVATING! My entire generation has been afected by that one farsighted bill let alone the many others that Al worked on in both the house and senate. Having served in both houses of Congress and acted as the president of the senate in his capacity as Vice president Al has the respect of that institution which will seem a breath of fresh air after the horrible contempt which has been shown to it by the executive in recent years. His book and his cable network( the cable network takes internet submisisons for that are voted on by the public to be chosen for air, this acounts for fully one third of its content and was on air two months before youtube and a full year and a half before CNN's ireports segments) have shown a level of respect for our democracy that most leaders do not show. I doubt Al will run because of the reasons he has poured into his book, primarily the need for greater discourse from the media and direct CITEZEN involvement in both the media and politics. The fourth estate is as damaged as our official branches of Governemnt. A media savvy president (he runs a succesfull cable channel and lets not forget the Oscars) could do many things, like ensure net nuetrality so that we can all converse freely on forums like this one without corporate hastling. It is also most likely that Gore would be a candidate willing to make real election reform that could help heal the wounds of the 2000 election. We would all be kidding ourselves if we said that election didn't add to the growing voter apathy in this country. Not to mention the fact that we KNOW he would take the measures needed to fight climate change or at the very least fix federal agencies like FEMA, the Coast Gaurd and the National Hurricane Research Center, which are all in need of dire repair and are our primary sources of combating foul weather that has been influenced by warmer Ocean temperatures. Its been proven by the force of his passionate arguments for this cause of preventing global climate change. A cause he was fighting long before it was a politicaly safe topic.

RUN AL RUN!!!!!!! I will let you convince the rest of the voters here that what I am saying is true.