Al Gore still not running, wins Nobel Prize

LEBBERAL CLAPTRAP I says

That nice man from the oil company told me that this "global warming" is just a liberal conspiracy to make us all take off our clothes like those filthy hippies did in the 1960s. Fuck that, I say. Turn up the aircon!

Foxnews.com has this story on the main page. Directly below it is a story that tries to smear An Inconvenient Truth. Hilarious.

Sign the petition!
www.draftgore.com

Kudos to him. And though I, like every other sane person in the world, wishes he would run again, I don't think it's going to happen. Sigh.

Excellent news to start the day with.

I'm shocked those darn commies found the time to give out awards what with all the gay sex with each other and waving flags with Che on them and hating freedom.

It's so sad that this is not issue number one on every candidate's agenda.
This developing crisis is going to displace, kill and destablize more people and societies than friggin terrorism ever will.
I can understand Gore's decision to not run though. Think of the expectations people would have if he were elected. And short of a true political and economic revolution, nothing would change enough to have an impact. He could look forward to more trench fighting with corporate lobbyists and corporate media for eternity.

Good for him.

Looks like it's time for me to get out of the New York area, or maybe I should stay so I can get some beachfront property in a few years!

It almost seems like Gore has become Obi Won. He got knocked down in 2000, but since then he's come back even better than where he was originally. Stupid analogy, but it came to me while I was washing dishes this morning.

I'm on and off the fence on the whole global warming thing.

I however give my full support to those that are raising awareness on our environmental impact. This will fuel more research, which will help us better understand what's going on.

Wow. I thought this was going to be a website trying to get the U.S. Military to draft Gore and send him to Iraq as a solider.

Where are you now? And now? And right here now? This second now?

So much fun watching the wingnuts bending over backwards to denigrate the Nobel. Such hissy fits they're having!

Congrats to Mr. Gore and company. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving fella.

Not that he hasn't done a lot for climate change, but when you compare a rich white man travelling the world and showing films to people, to say.... Nelson Mandela? Doctors without borders? Martin Luther King? It's not like Gore has braved any kind of risks to acheive this. So if we compare him to prior laureates I think we might come up with people I'd consider more deserving.

However, of at least equal note, why aren't more rich, essentially un- or under-employed people in the world out making a difference? What has Bill Clinton, for example, done in that same stretch of time?

I disagree with IPCC and Al Gore winning (note, IPCC). They've done nothing to promote Peace. Look at the previous winners. All of the previous winners had inspired or helped bring about peace, what has the IPCC and Al Gore done? They have disseminated greater knowledge of Global Warming but that hasn't resulted in peace..

From Nobel's will for the Peace Prize.
"...and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Clinton has done a lot the last 2-3 years. He teamed up with GHW Bush, google him. He turned his politcal clout from raising money for elections into raising money to combat various humaintarian issues. In the same vain as what Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have done\are doing, with the exception that Gates and Buffet went out of pocket a lot more (since they had more to begin with)

I think that you need to be a bit more subtle about this, Snaieke, to see how climate change is related to peace. Our flagrant abuse of the planet's supply of fossil fuels has created an incredible amount of conflict, especially in the 20th and 21st century. It drives us to meddle in the Middle East, and gives tyrants there a disproportionate role in global affairs. Raising awareness of climate change is just another way to point out the damage that's being done by our unthinking stewardship of the planet.

That would make a lot more sense however I don't think it was their intention but it is a good enough reason for me to move on to threads about the new Star Trek movie. Thanks for the input MissZooey

So, what do you think the Nobel Committee's intention was in rewarding him the Peace Prize ?

Billylove, the research is done but the news is not reporting that because the people responsible (or with a vested interest in the continued reliance on fossil fuels) own the news (General Electric owns NBC, etc.)

Thanks for the Draft Gore link, BobClark. I've been aware of it but didn't sign/donate until today.

So if Al Gore had done all that he'd done while afflicted with some debilitating disease or regularly got into knife fights with the CEO of environmentally unsound corporations, then he'd be more worthy of recognition?

Come on, Belethedheliel. You don't discount the good deeds of someone just because he hasn't experienced the suffering of others. This is almost as silly as saying that Al Gore is a more likely candidate because he's working for a solely altruistic goal (an environmentally sound Earth for future generations), while MLK and Mandela had personal vested interests in civil rights and ending apartheid. You don't win for what's been done to you, but rather for what you've done.

Not surprisingly -

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to DaveB again.

Get a room.

Hush, you.

No worries, I've got it covered.

Congrats, Big Al. Wish you were running again.

Now that's my kind of conspiracy!

Could care less about the Nobel Prize, but Gore would be the one guy I'd vote for next year.

I didn't discount anyone's good deeds. However, fighting for good deeds when you actually have to overcome obstacles is different than using your preexisting wealth, power, and priveledge in a pretty impedement-free path. What has Al Gore ever risked? A little cash? A little time? A plane flight? I'm not saying he's never done anything courageous in his life, but I haven't seen it in his climate change work. In my opinion, people who risk their lives in the advancement of their causes have done more than people who can advance their cause without hardship. You are welcome to disagree with me on that, but I am not likely to change my mind.

And if you don't think that Gore or anyone else has a personal vested interest in maintaining the climate of the planet.....

You name check Martin Luther King and I'm assuming you feel his work was Nobel Prize worthy. Why in your first sentence to you boil it down to race and wealth?

Global warming is and will continue to create hunger and refugee crises unlike anything this world has ever seen, and that alone is a foundation for anarchy and chaos -- the opposite of peace. Setting aside for a minute all the species our practices are wiping off the face of the Earth (destroying what is, to me, analogous to peace), the threat of war increases exponentially when the world is destabilized in such a way.

I don't think any of us are saying that Al Gore has done more in his life than MLK, from a quantitative perspective...hell even a qualitative perspective. But I don't think it has to be a race to see who risks more and has more to lose when we're talking about people taking action for causes that benefit the world/society/others. That's like comparing which one is better: mint chocolate chip ice cream and double chocolate chocolate chip ice cream...sure one's better, but both are awesome.

Incidentally, I'm really hungry right now, that may explain the metaphor.

It's lucky that you're not on the committee, then, because you don't seem to understand what the award is supposed to recognize.

The award is not given on the basis of courage, but on the basis of great deeds done in the interest of world peace. The man who runs into his neighbor's burning house to save an endangered baby may be even more courageous than Gore or MLK. That doesn't mean he's due an award for world peace.

For all I know, Danielle Steele has faced twice the hardships that Gabriel Garcia Marquez has. This doesn't mean that she deserves his Nobel Prize for Literature.

This is a side argument, but let's just say it's a little less pressing than the immediate effects that segregation and apartheid had on King and Mandela. Gore could very well be dead by the time severe effects on the environment could conceivably have any impact on his white, wealthy day-to-day life.

Actually, I do understand what the award recognizes. If the man who ran into the burning building to save the baby prevented world war 3 (and was thus eligible for the peace prize), I'd think him more deserving than if he'd just given a lecture and still prevented world war 3. ETA: Hence why I compared Gore to other Peace Prize Laureates not just some random guy running into a burning building in the first place.

I can't believe I'm still bothering, but if some guy prevents WW3, what does it matter what he went through to do so? He prevented WW3!!!

...

Seconded.

We don't have people willing to stop WW3, so it would seem. Burma, Darfur? Blips on the news radar compared to Britney Spears losing custody of her kids. Despite the fact that he's Privileged White Guy (tm), what he's doing still requires a fair bit of balls. The people that vehemently oppose what he's doing are shit-nuts, and quite a few of them are pretty frigging rich.

I get a kick out of the folks bitching and moaning about the Peace prize being "worthless" because of this. Because there was nothing wrong when Kissinger won it, right?

...

A deserving winner.

I hope he changes his mind and runs. Yes, I actually just typed that.

I personally think it's worthless period, but people like to make a big deal about it for some reason.

I feel a bit like Woody in Annie Hall. All they do is give out awards!

I couldn't agree more with this. Someone making plenty of people aware of one of the biggest problems in our lifetime shouldn't be dinged just because he might not have done as much "heavy lifting" as another guy. Just because MLK's (since he seems to be the example we're using here) contributions are imporant, does that mean that Al Gore's aren't? Why can't they both be? To me, they're equally worthy issues.

Eh, it's a stretch to give him the Nobel Peace Prize, given the stated criteria. But it's the Nobel Committee's award to give out. They can interpret the criteria as broadly as they want. Congrats to Gore and the gang at the UN.

Bel, you really don't think Gore's endured any hardship over this? Yeah, he's rich and white, but he's acting counter to the interests of the richest interests on the planet, and that carries certain risks. I mean, there are people in the media right now who are trying to denigrate the Noble Peace Prize just to discredit him. He's probably safe from assassination for the time being, but also definitely taken chances with his reputation and livelihood over this.

Also, accepting your premise that people who personally risk their lives are more deserving than someone who achieved the same result without doing so, who has done as much or more than Gore re: climate change at a greater personal risk?

Al Gore was right confirmed!

[MIYAGI]Are you telling me some Mexican chick deserves this prize for writing stuf nobody reads? More than a famous writer everybody knows, and whos probably changed allot of lives?[/MIYAGI]

"He is a kind of ex-president who was never actually president. He is a bit like a younger version of Jimmy Carter, the last American to win the Nobel Peace prize. Carter is also much respected, especially now that he has no power. And he is always listened to, though never enough." - Martin Kettle, The Guardian, 13/10/2007

I'm still waiting to hear Al explain why Mars is undergoing global warming despite the lack of Martian industrial development over the last century.

What it comes down to is this. If you truly believe that the end of the current ice age is thanks to what man has done in the last century, what are you personally willing to give up to roll back the clock? Your DVD collection made of recyclable plastics? Your car? Your job? Or should those burdens fall upon others?

Will you be able to talk the Chinese and Indians to roll back their massively growing economies to stop climate change? The smog over Chinese cities says that's not likely. So whatever minor change we make will be crushed under their respective pollution. So are we supposed to make them?

What are you personally willing to do to make Al's Utopia fall into place? Contributing to a political party won't cut it. The Dems don't have the spine to stand up to the President about Iraq, and this global warming thing is made to sound like World War II only on an epic scale. They'll never be able to get anything remotely like a Kyoto treaty passed and expect the public to stand still for it. One regional skirmish like Iraq will be nothing when compared to such an ambitious and possibly futile endeavor.