Run Al, Run!
The Noble Candidacy.
The Nobel Peace Prize announcement in Oslo, Norway is scheduled for Oct. 12.
Newsweek is suggesting that if the Nobel Committee picks Al Gore, together with an Academy Award's Oscar, it could be the tipping point for a groundswell of crossover voters' support. But time is running out for America's 2nd chance at Al Gore, for sure. Deadlines for petitions for state primary ballots provides the biggest squeeze. Some Gore backers think he's already decided to run, but speculate that he doesn't want politics to interfere with his Nobel chances. If he wins? Roy Gayhart of the California Progress Report says,
'What's in it for him?' I've always argued.
However, there's a lot at stake for America. He's definitely more than a stop-Hillary candidate. He's America's best Repudiate-Bush Candidate. Though I'd bet against him running, I'd freaking bet on his winning. Big. Stakeholders in his candidacy are wide-spread. World wide.
The Nobel announcement comes in three days' time.
But I can wait. I've had my GORE '08 bumper sticker on since Dec' 04.
The Nobel Peace Prize announcement in Oslo, Norway is scheduled for Oct. 12.
Newsweek is suggesting that if the Nobel Committee picks Al Gore, together with an Academy Award's Oscar, it could be the tipping point for a groundswell of crossover voters' support. But time is running out for America's 2nd chance at Al Gore, for sure. Deadlines for petitions for state primary ballots provides the biggest squeeze. Some Gore backers think he's already decided to run, but speculate that he doesn't want politics to interfere with his Nobel chances. If he wins? Roy Gayhart of the California Progress Report says,
We feel that if Gore wins the Nobel Prize … then he can’t not run for president.Myself? I've always believed that Al Gore has already earned his place in history. By virtue of being denied his presidency by SCOTUS after having beaten the shit head in 2000 (who eventually morphed into the worst president in American History), Al Gore deserves Rushmorian status.
'What's in it for him?' I've always argued.
However, there's a lot at stake for America. He's definitely more than a stop-Hillary candidate. He's America's best Repudiate-Bush Candidate. Though I'd bet against him running, I'd freaking bet on his winning. Big. Stakeholders in his candidacy are wide-spread. World wide.
The Nobel announcement comes in three days' time.
But I can wait. I've had my GORE '08 bumper sticker on since Dec' 04.
posted by Vigilante at 10/09/2007 08:36:00 AM
13 Moderated Comments:
Yes. This is not the time to ask who best to succeed George Bush. This is the time to ask who best to repudiate him.
I don't know that Al wants to run. I think he feels that global warming is a cause that needs a boost, and he can't do that as much from the oval office. Although, I think with the jump start he's given it, he could do more with the Presidency. If he runs, I'll support him.
After the Nobel, the Presidency.
he is the ONLY one i want to vote for.
The world can't wait much longer!
I've been slightly uncomfortable with some of the traits Hillary been showing lately and far more than uncomfortable with how the media has seemed to crown her the winner of the nomination before one vote has been cast. And I don't think I'm the only feeling that way. If Gore did drop his hat in the race after accepting his shiny Nobel Prize the sheer momentum it would give him would do a lot to busting Hillary's bubble. The question I have is what would Bill and Hill do then? I wonder what dirty secrets they might expose or create to keep their dynastic plan on track. But no matter what if Gore ran I would vote for him.
For some people it's always been about stopping capitalism. First with Marxism, then with socialism, then with government, and now with environmentalism. Gotta stop freedom, and screw everything else, huh?
Not buying the premise that climate change is the result of human activity, the premise that the temperature we had yesterday is somehow superior to the temperature we'll have tomorrow, or the premise that the benefit of regulating the temperature of an entire planet is worth the cost.
Get past those faulty premises, and I'd be happy to discuss government's obligation to deal with legitimate externalities.
I agree with Beach Bum re: Hillary. Our paths diverge on Gore. I just don't think he can win, no matter how much we like him. He has no campaign organization created, all the good staffers currently work for the other candidates, money, blah, money, blah blah, and money.
Trophy Wife laid this WHAT-IF scenario on me the other day:
What if Al Gore Calls up Barack Obama tomorrow and tells him he's willing to serve as the Senator's Vice President and that Obama is free to announce it anytime he wants to?
Think about it before you discount it:
* Obama already has an organization.
* This team will become a neutron bomb in terms of campaign contributions.
* Gore would serve as a Democratic Cheney (elder-statesman and political guru)
* Instead of waging war against Iran, Gore's special assignment would be to halt our appeasement of global warming.
* The best revenge is a meal served cold.
If Gore & Obama did this, they would be waving the banner of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Would this be a good thing?
And, I almost forgot to ask, Who is John Galt, anyway?
Coop, I have no problem with the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. No issues at all.
I like the idea of Obama/Gore; but how affective was Gore as a VP the first time?! Clinton was not economically progressive. I don't think Obama is looking for an elder--he's running on his own vision and intellect.
As for Mr. Ayn Rand's logic that the world is flat (the daily temperature seems fine to him); good luck with that view of our shared externalities, here's hoping your absolute rejection of balancing our physical needs with global survival works out for everyone (not just you).
Post a Comment
<< Home