The Man, The Myth, The Legend — Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore

I’d kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
– Stephen Wright Comedian

The Man, The Myth, The Legend — Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore
by: Joe Leonardi

First and foremost, I would like to Congratulate Al Gore on winning the Nobel Peace Prize. His victory has sparked renewed calls for him to run for President circling the internet he invented. I know, I know all you Gore-a-maniacs will yell he never said that, he just implied it.

Al Gore deflects calls for his entry into the race by suggesting he is having too much fun.

Translated. Ya’ll are nuts, I’m making way too much freaking money and I don’t have to do a dam thing to earn a penny of it.

Citizen Gore has been a master salesperson for the carbon credit industry. He has used a combination of fear and guilt to CONvince people to pay to pollute. In a nutshell carbon credits work like this: people who over-pollute, like celebrities and former politicians who have ten thousand plus square foot homes for two or three people, utilize private jets and get driven around in gargantuan, gas guzzling limos can alleviate their gullible guilt by paying to pollute. Yes, I know they are buying “offsets” that go into green industries.

Please. These liberal elitist are sending the message, to the majority of Americans who live pay check to pay check, that it is okay to pollute if you can afford to pay for it. I have a novel idea — pollute less.

Nobel Prize winner Al Gore has made statements to the effect that the work he is doing is too important to stop now; or he needs to keep the issue of global warming in the public eye.

My response — Huh?

The U.S. Presidency is the most visible bully pulpit in the world. If Gore wants to change the world’s attitudes about global warming; what better position could there be?

Sorry my bad, that gig only pays four hundred grand a year and it requires… well it requires work.

I know many people like Al Gore and that is fine, it is their opinion. I like Al Gore too, out of office. I will admit that Gore does not lack the qualifications. I may not agree with him but his resume, if not his ideology, is impressive. However, former Congressman, former Senator, former Vice-President Al Gore will not run for President for one major reason — if he loses again, he doesn’t get to cry about how he really was the next President of the United States.

My Gore supporting friends have never gotten over the 2000 election. I often like to point out one nagging fact the Al-a-holics never discus. If then Vice President Al Gore won the state of Tennessee, his home state, the state that sent him to the Senate twice, he would have been President of the United States of America.

We like to think of the presidential election as a national referendum, however it is not. Our system turns the race for president into a series of state wide elections. The goal of which, by calculated electoral math, is to attain a majority of the electoral college.

Forget the Florida fiasco, which I will admit it was, if he won Tennessee he would have won. The 2000 electoral college results Bush 271 Gore 266. Take Tennessee’s 11 electoral votes away from Bush he gets 260, give them to Gore he gets 277— Al Gore is victorious. I know it lacks the conspiracy theories we like so much. This simple truth takes the blame away from the evil Supreme Court and mean republicans and makes Al Gore responsible for his own loss.

Sacrilege?! How dare I suggest Gore actually lost instead of being robbed.

Al Gore had previously won two Tennessee state wide elections, but he lost the state wide election for Tennessee’s electoral votes in 2000. It makes you wonder — What do the people of Tennessee know that we don’t?

Wishing for Al Gore to run is like me wishing there was a conservative candidate for president. Neither is going to occur.

Gore must maintain the illusion that he is a legend — if only in his own mind.

Joe Leonardi

Advertisements

11 Comments

Filed under Al Gore, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Environment, Gore, Liberal, Nobel Prize, President, Primary

11 responses to “The Man, The Myth, The Legend — Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore

  1. Al Gore never claimed to have invented the Internet.

    In an interview on CNN in 1999, Gore, who was then the sitting vice president and a candidate to succeed Bill Clinton in the White House, said this by way of reviewing his record:

    “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth, environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.”

    Notice that Gore took credit for leadership in Congress in creating the Internet. He never said he “invented” the Internet. Was his claim to such leadership legitimate? Well, here’s what Republican Newt Ginrich said about that:

    “(I)n all fairness, Gore is the person who, in the Congress, most systematically worked to make sure that we got to an Internet, and the truth is—and I worked with him starting in 1978 when I got [to Congress], we were both part of a ‘futures group’—the fact is, in the Clinton administration, the world we had talked about in the ’80s began to actually happen.”

    Way back in 1988, The Guardian, a British paper, reported this:

    “American computing scientists are campaigning for the creation of a ’superhighway’ which would revolutionise data transmission. Legislation has already been laid before Congress by Senator Albert Gore of Tennessee, calling for government funds to help establish the new network, which scientists say they can have working within five years, at a cost of Dollars 400 million.”

    Years later, when Gore was vice president, computer scientist Vinton Cerf, widely known as the Father of the Internet, had this to say:

    “I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the vice president.”

    History shows that Gore’s claim to leadership in congressional action regarding the Internet was ignored by the media and not distorted into a claim that he invented the Net until the Republican Party cooked up that falsehood a few days after the CNN interview.

  2. Al Ritter

    I feel I need to disagree with your statement,”I will admit that Gore does not lack the qualifications.” As reported in 2000 by the Washington Post his grades in college relating to science are as follows.”Natural Sciences 6″ “D” “Natural Sciences 118” “C+”. Let’s face it here he was given this award because he is a messenger, granted it is a flawed message, but he is nothing but a messenger. He is no more qualified to “educate” a world of people on Global Warming, then Michael Moore is qualified to teach health care to anyone. To me I think the definition of a “documentary” should be MUCH more closely scrutinized. It’s title gives way too much validity to propaganda. Mr Gore grow some cojones and debate real scientists on man made global warming, and stop saying the debate is over when it hasn’t even started.

  3. Hi Al,

    Thanks for commenting.
    Just to clarify, I meant qualifications for President. I agree with you 100% — Al Gore has zero qualifications to speak out on climatology.

    Again thanks for commenting and keep up the the dialogue.

    Joe

  4. christopher moore

    Well written article. As much as I hate to agree with you, I do believe you are right regarding the reasons to which Al Gore refuses to run. But I, along with countless other Americans of my age set (18-25), have to come a certain apathetic concession that the days in which a vote counted are gone. The democracy that we so cherish is just an illusion and it no longer matters who the people want it office. The corporations choose for us. When the corporations finally decide that “going green” is profitable, then they will elect a president to do the job. I’m sorry if this sounds like a conspiracy theorist rattling on and on about unsupported truth. But I am just trying to speak on an observation that I have made amongst several hundred of my peers. This is a sad time in American history. You have a generation coming into adulthood who have been scarred to the point of permanent apathy. And with that fact I wish to point out one more thing. Our parents generation is to blame. Sorry. But it was their job to protect that incredibly fragile document that we all know as the constitution for us to eventually inherit. Instead, the squabbled over blow-jobs and SUVs. Thank you 1960s generation America. On behalf of the late 80s generation.

  5. Christopher,

    Thank you for taking the time to post. It is a challenge, I understand, to accomplish anything.

    Many of these large corporations today were started by one person with vision, guts and the attitude that quitters never win. People like Milton Hershey and J.C. Penny had been broke and filed bankruptcy at some point in their lives. Henry Ford and Harry Truman never went to college. Both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates dropped out of college. Ronald Reagan, the standard for many conservatives, was a “B” movie actor.

    Sometimes non-quitters still lose, but it is how you do battle that counts. I took a chance running for Congress and due to circumstances beyond my control things didn’t go as planned. I could easily have dropped out, however I made a commitment to myself and other. My run cost me plenty, both professionally and personally, but I don’t regret it for a moment. I could look at myself in the mirror every morning and be proud that I didn’t turn tail and hide.

    I, like you, am unhappy about many things. I am still trying to fight to make a difference, I encourage you to do the same. Placing blame and giving up because of something you can not control is, and please don’t take offense, cowardly. Excuses do not get things done. Dialogue and the appropriate action do. The fact that you took the time to post demonstrates you still care, you have not given up and you have the courage to state your opinion.

    To quote Margaret Mead;
    “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

    Once you allow apathy to gain the upper hand defeat is near.

    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  6. mieses

    Isn’t Ron Paul a viable conservative candidate?

  7. Hi Mieses,

    I have been taking a closer and closer look at Congressman Paul. I may be doing a post on the republican presidential candidates in the near future.

    Thanks for the comment and keep up the dialogue.

    Joe

  8. tom thumb

    Regarding your response to Christopher, Joe, I think you fail to address his most pertinent point–not that it is right and correct to be apathetic, but that the rising generation is in fact apathetic due to the reasons that Christopher stated. Regardless of the merit of this apathy, whether or not it predominates in the minds of the generation that will be running this country in twenty to thirty years is a question of fact–it is not a question of opinion, but a question of sufficient evidence. I think that a valid question to be asked in addition to whether you believe such apathy to be immoral or “cowardly” is whether or not you believe it to exist.

    Christopher attributes the apathy he perceives to changes to our political system that have only materialized in the years since the “baby boom” generation took power. He says that they “squabbled over blow jobs and SUVs” instead of doing their “job to protect that incredibly fragile document,” the U.S. Constitution. Regardless of how you feel about the moral imperative to accept personal responsibility for one’s actions (or in this case, inaction), would you not agree that Christopher’s characterization of the baby boomers’ effect on American Democracy is apt?

    But regarding that moral imperative of personal responsibility….You state, Joe, that “excuses don’t get things done,” and that “placing blame [is] cowardly.” Although I also detest the idea of trying to escape accountability by making excuses, I nonetheless believe that apportioning blame where it is due is an essential step in identifying the source of any problem and fixing it. I would ask you, if no one places blame, does that mean that we are all blameless? If no one deserves blame, does that mean that no one is accountable? Can someone be accountable for a mistake, without being blamed for it? And should we leave it to the people who are making the mistake to identify that mistake on their own, or should they be held accountable by those who are affected by the error? In other words, should they not be blamed?

    “Please don’t take offense,” Joe, but it seems to me that your response contains much of the mixed-up thinking that is so typical of the generation that is currently running this country, on both the left and the right. [Don’t get me wrong, I’m not accusing you of being a baby-boomer, only of writing like one.] You instruct Christopher on how he should change, giving him examples of people he should emulate, without recognizing your own role (or even the roles played by your role models) in contributing the situation in which he finds himself, and in which we all find ourselves. Read Gen 4:8-10. I’m sure you’ve got more to say on this.

  9. Hi Tom,

    I don’t take offense. The people I mentioned were examples, not role models. My most important role were my parents. I do not have a problem with finding fault or placing blame. I have a problem when it is an excuse to sit back and do nothing.

    Apathy is a choice. You can look at the problems and say I don’t care or you can look at problems and formulate a solution and try.

    In the 60’s there was much of the same complaints that exist now. The “generation” gap was the excuse. Eventually many in that generation saw that getting high and hoping things change were not the answer. They got involved, the formed groups had sit-ins, protested, etc…

    If you have a problem with how things are done, find a group of like minded people and try and change it. Next year’s election can be one of historic change, or it can be one that keeps the status quo. Young people, those with the most interest in the future, are the least likely to vote. Mobilize that group and you can make changes. Unfortunately, through the news and my own experience, that is the group not willing to go out and vote. That is the group less willing to sacrifice.

    I am the last of the baby boomers, born in 1964. I was raised by a generation that believed in and practiced self sacrifice. Fortunately I still hold those values and beliefs. Unfortunately, it appears that succeeding generations are less and less willing to sacrifice and do the work to make change. They look for reasons, not to get involved. I hope you and Christopher prove me wrong.

    Thanks for the comment and keep up the dialogue.

    Joe

  10. rudon

    He didn’t even imply anything of the sort, he was using congressional jargon that the media loved to take way out of context…

    But anyways, it’s not average individuals who are to buy carbon credits. It’s chemical corporations and factories and other major contributors of green house gases. A similar system for sulfur dioxide has reduced acid rain, so why can’t we regulate the most egregious carbon offenders too? Although it does suck that China and other developing nations outpace us in carbon output anyways, that doesn’t mean that we don’t all share the same earth, and pointing out the irresponsibility of others does not justify not doing the right thing. We all still have to do what we can.

    So stop projecting your infantile fear of responsibility and ludicrously harping on Gore for not running for president. People shouldn’t run for president just to push any agenda, whether it’s good or bad. People should run for office because they’re currently genuinely interested in governing and leading their people and taking on all aspects the job. By your logic, Ghandi should’ve overthrown the Brittish infrastructure of India and named himself president of India.

    And seriously, where did the “he’s in it for the money”idea come from? WTF?

  11. HI Ruddon,

    He is in for the money because he owns an interest in the industries that broker Carbon Credits.

    He is the one who teased folks with the idea of running for president. He is the one who cries about how he was robbed.

    BTW, I do take responsibility. I recycle, I have mini-flourecent lights, I moved closer to my business, etc. I don’t yell at people to do it I do it myself and I make no extra money because of it.

    Thanks for posting and keep up the dialogue.

    Joe

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s