Al Gore: A Time for Truth or Holocaust
We Americans live in a society predicated on lies of corruption, sloth and greed in our political institutions and in our so-called “mainstream media.” We live in a society where the best person we have to lead us in a path of redemption and survival is still mocked by millions due to the lies of the press. We live in a society on the eve of destruction from ecological holocaust.We live in a world where civilization plays the role of a cancerous parasite, extinguishing species and habitat at a geological rate. One of our reknowned scientists, James Hansen, tells us that we may have as little as ten years to act before losing the final chance to save world civilization. We live in a world that is essentially willing to change course and walk on a path of life rather than death, EXCEPT for the United States!
That is why the upcoming American presidential election is the most important political decision in human history. Individual action on climate change is necessary, but not sufficient. Without systemic, international action we cannot succeed. Without American leadership on this issue as soon as possible, i.e. 2009, we may well be doomed.
Now to the American problem. The biggest problem, and yet our only hope, is the Democratic Party. The GOP offers no solution because it is beholden to interests dedicated to convincing misinformed citizens to vote against their own economic and survival interests. The mainstream media offer no hope because of their mendacity and corruption. Those journalists who promote the most pernicious lies and illusions (viz. Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Ceci Connolly and a host of others) are promoted and financially rewarded.
It is now left to the American people to respond to the only leader who provides hope in the most desperate hour humanity has ever faced. The people must use the vehicle of the Democratic Party to put Al Gore back in the White House.
What of the other Democratic candidates? In a normal election year, they would serve as a fine slate of candidates, but as this critical juncture, none of them is adequate. Two things have stood between necessary action: 1) raising the consciousness of the American people; and 2) a leader who is willing to place the fate of the planet above his own political fortunes. Al Gore is the only leader in America who has dedicated himself to giving the American people the knowledge necessary to make political action possible on climate change. Likewise, Al Gore is the only leader who has demonstrated his willingness to put principles above politics and risk everything to solve our global crisis. This is a key point for those who naively say that he can do more as a private citizen than as president. He has already accomplished more in the White House than he could ever do as a private citizen. The place was Kyoto. As detailed in The Prince of Tennessee, by David Maraniss, pp. 287-288, in 1997 Gore personally saved the Kyoto talks at the eleventh hour and thus Kyoto was implemented in 2005. Gore did this against the unanimous political advice of his inner circle!
Now the American people are poised to support even greater political action PROVIDED the necessary leadership is shown in the general election by raising the clarion call to put the planet on a war footing in combating global warming. Only Al Gore is willing, indeed he is locked into, making the climate crisis the centerpiece of his campaign.
There are those who say that Gore will not run under any circumstances and that we should “move on” to our other candidates. This is simply not true. In 2002, when Gore said he would not run in the last cycle he said:“I personally have the energy and drive and ambition to make another campaign, but I don’t think it is the right thing for me to do.” I believe this is a reference to the lack of support in the Democratic Party he had at that time, which will be made clear below. He has since made it clear that he will not rule out running in 2008. But a press corps still carrying animus against him and desirous not to have their ubiquitous lies in 2000 uncovered, still avoids him as much as possible. Tim Russert unbelievably ignored the Nobel Prize on the Meet the Press TWO DAYS after Gore’s historic achievement. Russert was a major perpetrator in the War on Gore in 2000.
The historical problem is not Gore, it is the Democratic Party. In the last critical week of his campaign in 2000, at least one major Democrat exhibited a major lack of message discipline by criticizing the Gore campaign on national television! In the immediate aftermath of the most scandalous American election in over a century, there was a deafening silence from Democratic leaders who should have been shouting their support, as in fact their counterparts were doing for the infamous George W. Bush. Then came a string of cowardly calls in November and December 2000, from Democratic leaders for Gore to concede! This at the very same time that it was being widely reported around the globe that the election had been stolen by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris by purposely deleting tens of thousands of innocent black Floridians from the voter rolls. Only in America was this story squelched by a pusillanimous press, unwilling to speak the truth for the sake of their republic.
Then came the worst presidency in the history of the republic and 9-11. Spineless Democrats not only voted for the IWR, the Patriot Act and other crimes against humanity and the republic, but one current candidate went so far as to co-sponsor that IWR!! As election 2004 approached, many prominent Democrats publicly stated that Gore should not run. Many of those same “leaders” then went on to support candidates who voted for the war in Iraq. Mind boggling to say the least, especially in light of Gore’s courageous opposition to the invasion in 2002, for which he was mocked.
Despite all that, Gore’s resurgence has been incredible. Polls now indicate he would win a plurality of primary voters and be the most effective candidate against Giuliani, the likely nominee of the GOP. Gore has made one of the most incredible political comebacks in US history and stands poised to be the nominee we desperately need.
Are we willing to sacrifice the lives of our children (and their children) on the gamble that James Hansen is not right? Are we willing to risk everything on a candidate who may not have the commitment, skill or focus to do what only Gore has proposed? The time for cowardice and politically self-serving votes has ended. This may be our last chance to survive as a country and as a world civilization. It is time for bold, proven, visionary leadership. It is time for the Democratic Party to redeem itself from slick, vacuous, half-stepping, unworthy leaders. It is time to say no to politics as usual. It is time to end the insane war in Iraq. It is time to begin an all-out effort to save humanity from the impending apocalyptic climate crisis. It is time for the only leader who has been right all along. It is time for Al Gore.
Al Gore is now running for president.
Last year Ezra Klein introduced me to a word I had never heard: disintermediation. Simply put, Klein (and others) were saying that Gore was bypassing the American press in order to get his message out directly. In 2003 he began a series of speeches on the decline of America due to Bush’s disastrous foreign policy and contempt for our Constitution.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_new_new_gore_031906
He has continued that path with a movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, which has fundamentally changed the American debate on this most important issue. Along with publishing a companion book for the movie, he has also published a book (The Assault on Reason) on the decline of American discourse, due to the corporate control of television and other media. He goes on to talk about the power of the Internet to change American discourse so that it is two-way in nature (rather than one-way like television) with access for all citizens so as to re-vitalize our democracy.
I believe Al Gore is now running for president. He is using these principles of disintermediation and democratic discussion to run the kind of 21st century campaign worthy of his visionary record. On Friday he held a news conference acknowledging his latest international honor, the Nobel Peace Prize. Toward the end, he stated
“I will be doing everything I can to try to understand how to best use the honor and recognition of this award as a way of speeding up the change in awareness and the change in urgency. It is truly a planetary emergency and we have to respond quickly.”
Gore has stated in recent months that he is waiting to see if the Democratic candidates will give this issue the attention it deserves and that he isn’t currently satisfied with what they have done.
Today, Gore launched his new version of Current (formerly current.tv, now current.com). Not only did he launch it, for the first time he added content. Today he took three major positions:
- We should get out of Iraq as quickly as practicable;
- Universal, single-payer health care for all Americans; and
- The need for new protections for all Americans from governmental spying.
http://current.com/people/algore
In other words, he has taken common sense positions on major campaign issues that leave Hillary and Obama sucking his dust. Of course his concrete proposals on climate change are also light years ahead of any viable Democratic candidate. Soon, I believe he will follow up on his promise to reflect on how best to use his award to help save our civilization by formally announcing his candidacy. It won’t be a traditional campaign, but a visionary one.
Just as 1960 was the first campaign where television changed the race (television viewers thought Kennedy won the historic debate, while the smaller number of radio listeners thought Nixon won), the 2008 campaign will be the first where the Internet plays a major role in determining the outcome.
In 2000, the press framed Al Gore as a liar. That is why some people still believe that Gore said he invented the Internet, or discovered Love Canal, or the Love Story lie, etc., etc. This is why some people still believe that Gore didn’t emphasize the environment, because of the lies of the press. In 2008, Al Gore will be speaking for himself to a much greater extent, aided by fact-checking bloggers. That is a truth which could be much more than convenient, for us and our planet.
How to Make Al Gore President
To all who care about our country and our planet:
On October 10, 2007, Al Gore’s former Chief of Staff in the White House said of a possible Gore candidacy, “He’s not ruled it out in the future.” When asked by a reporter what “the future” meant, Neel said, “Sometime later than today.” <http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZz3lpn7C9NjjE3JdFBu… >
We can change the course of the future by working together now to get Al Gore to run.
What to do:
1) Sign the petition to draft Al Gore
2) Participate in the “My Two Cents” campaign
3) Write letters to the editor of your local newspapers
4) Join an existing Gore group or form a new one
5) Send this e-mail to at least five people.
How to do it:
1) To sign the petition, go to http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/algore2008 /
2) To participate in the “My Two Cents” campaign, send a letter to Al Gore telling him why you want him to run, and tape two pennies to your letter. Explain that you’ll send real support when he becomes a candidate. Send as many letters as you can to:
Office of the Honorable Al Gore
2100 West End Avenue, Suite 620
Nashville, TN 37203
3) Write a letter to the editor of at least one local newspaper explaining why Al Gore should run for president (i.e., leadership on global warming, right on Iraq from the beginning, world-wide respect, etc.). Make the letter heartfelt.
4) Join a Gore group in your area or form one if there isn’t already one. Go to http://www.algore.org/get_involved/gore_groups, enter your zip code, and see if there’s a group near you. If there is no group in your area, consider starting one of your own by following the directions. If you have problems joining or forming a group, contact Karen Wunderman at krw@superlink.net .
5) Send this e-mail to at least five people on your e-mail list. Also consider printing out hard copies of this letter and distributing them wherever appropriate.
Thank you on behalf of future generations and our planet.
Sincerely,
Steve Robinson Campaign Director, AlGore.org
Jim Tate Field Director, AlGore.org
Karen Wunderman Chief of Staff, AlGore.org
‘Twas The Night Before Nobel
‘TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE NOBEL
by Anonymous
‘Twas the night before Nobel, when all through the house
Not a liberal was stirring, not even my spouse;
The draft was grass-roots and built with great care,
In hopes that The Goreacle soon would be there;
The volunteers nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of Iowa danced in their heads;
And mamma in her ‘kerchief, and I in my cap,
Had just settled down for a long autumn’s nap,
When out in the Netroots there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from the bed to see what was the matter.
Away to the browser I flew like a flash,
Tore down all the pop-ups and threw Salon cash.
The prize was awarded for scant Arctic snow,
In hopes that humanity still could say “whoa,”
When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature sleigh, and eight tiny reindeer,
With a kind and calm driver, so ready to cope,
I knew in a moment it must be our hope.
More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;
“Now, Churchill! now, Roosevelt! now, Franklin! and Truman!
On, Washington! on Kennedy! on, Jefferson and Lincoln!
To the top of the Net! to the top of the polls!
Now dash away! dash away! dash away all!”
As dry leaves that before the wild hurricane fly,
When met with an obstacle, mount to the sky,
So up to the house-top the coursers they flew,
With a plan for the planet, and humanity too.
And then, in a twinkling, I heard on the roof
The prancing and pawing of each little hoof.
As I drew in my hand, and was turning around,
Down the chimney The Goreacle came with a bound.
He was dressed all in black, from his head to his foot,
And his clothes were all tarnished with Chris Matthews’ soot;
A bundle of hope he had flung on his back,
And he looked like a peddler just opening his pack.
His eyes — how they twinkled! his dimples how merry!
His cheeks were like roses, his nose like a cherry!
His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
And the beard of his chin was no longer in tow;
The stump of a pipe he held tight in his teeth,
And the smoke it encircled his head like a wreath;
He had a kind face and a voice strong and bold,
That rang, when truth to power was told.
He was tall and broad, a right jolly old elf,
But I cried when I saw him, in spite of myself;
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread;
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
And bypassed the press corps; mainly made up of jerks,
And casting his voice into powerful prose,
And giving a nod, up polls he rose;
He sprang to campaign, to Roy Neel gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like the down of a thistle.
But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
“Happy Nobel to all, and to all a good fight.”
Vote for Gore in DFA poll.
Democracy for America is conducting a poll at the address below. Al Gore’s name is not mentioned for president, so you have to vote for “other.” While I am an admirer of DFA and a participant in DFA activities, I believe it has made a mistake by not including Gore’s name, for several reasons.
First, this is the 21st century and it is the people, not money for slick campaign ads which should determine the outcome of the nomination process. Al Gore is a close third behind Obama and therefore is already a viable candidate. Why not let people select him, if they choose?
Second, Gore is simply the best candidate. I think we need to run the best candidate to optimize our chances of winning back the White House. Gore is already surpassing Clinton and Obama in some polls against likely Republican opposition and will present the strongest possible contrast on Iraq, national security in general and the climate crisis.
Third, DFA alluded to a possible endorsement. Al Gore has left the door open to a presidential run as recently as January of this year, when his spokesman, Michael Feldman said that Gore reserves the right to run. DFA’s endorsement could tilt Gore closer to running. That would set a precedent for the people selecting a nominee, rather than voters being restricted to those who declare. It could be used earlier in the process in the future, to help create a “people’s primary” based on merit rather than money. I think DFA can help the reform of our democratic process by further weakening the noxious influence of money in politics while, emphasizing the need for nominating the best possible candidate.
If we build it, he will come.
OK, I’ll take the bait. (Gore 2000 press)
John Stodder is offering a paradoxical challenge: First, asserting “I will say unequivocally that the following presidential candidates were hit by more media bias than Gore 2000,” following with a list of all elections from 1964 through 1996. Then he says (without having presented any evidence for the previous premise): “Stop being such wimps about the media! You’re wrong about 2000, but even if you were right, it’s the wrong thing to be talking about.”
http://johnstodderinexile.wordpress.com/
Well, thanks for your invitation to don the intellectual straight jacket, but I decline. While my blog is about drafting Gore in 2008 (and related subjects), rather than discussing campaign 2000, I will not let a specious assertion (that other campaigns in recent decades have exhibited greater press bias) pass by. It’s too easily disproven and history demonstrates that not attacking untruth leads to people believing that untruth.
One caveat: I did raise the issue in a comment to Mr. Stodder’s entry. I did it mainly to determine the intellectual honesty and awareness of Mr. Stodder. It is a side issue, granted, but now that he has thrown down the gauntlet, I have no intention of letting such uninformed comments stand unchallenged. So here goes:
Did Al Gore receive remarkably hostile coverage in 2000?
Of course. First, the press hated Gore in the 2000 cycle for whatever reason. Exhibit 1 is the public booing they gave him at the first Gore-Bradley debate on October 27, 1999:
At one primary debate with Bill Bradley, reporters watching in an adjacent room actually booed and hissed at Gore’s answers (although it should be noted that Gore’s responses were at their most pedantic in certain instances). Slate.com columnist Mickey Kaus, no liberal by any stretch of the imagination, was surprised when he went to New Hampshire during the primaries and began talking with other reporters. “What I underestimated,” Kaus wrote, “what, indeed, has startled me — is the extent to which reporters aren’t simply boosting Bradley for their own sake (or Bradley’s). It’s also something else: They hate Gore. They really do think he’s a liar. And a phony.”
http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/24/waldman-p.html
Mr. Stodder does not deny he was booed. Rather he argues by bald assertion (and reference to cliches) that the coverage in other cycles was worse.
A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism gives evidence for my claim:
If presidential elections are a battle for control of message through the media, George W. Bush has had the better of it on the question of character than Albert Gore Jr., according to a new study of media coverage leading up to the Republican convention.
http://www.journalism.org/node/355
Finally, for now, I will close with a passage from Jane Hall, who studied the issue and concluded that the press had indeed showed bias against Gore. The full story is found at:
http://archives.cjr.org/year/00/3/hall.asp
A new study by the Pew Research Center and the Project for Excellence in Journalism underscores this. Examining 2,400 newspaper, TV, and Internet stories in five different weeks between February and June, researchers found that a whopping 76 percent of the coverage included one of two themes: that Gore lies and exaggerates or is marred by scandal. The most common theme about Bush, the study found, is that he is a “different kind of Republican.”
The survey (which included editorials and news stories) focused on The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Indianapolis Star, the San Francisco Chronicle, and The Seattle Times. It also included the evening newscasts of the major broadcast networks and talk shows such as Hardball, which alone accounted for 17 percent of the negative characterizations about scandal.
Right Wing Lies Help Us Draft Gore
Now that the Man in Black is all the way back, the right wing smear machine is taking it up a notch. (Brother, can you spare a Swift Boat?). A link to the right-wing smear is included at the bottom.
All the way back as in two, count’em two, Oscars for his opinion-shaping movie, An Inconvenient Truth. All the way back as in a growing and enthusiastic draft movement to put him back in the White House. http://www.meetup.com/topics/polact/cand/ All the way back as in even reporters who formerly made stuff up about him are finally calling him a winner.
All the way back as in his favorability rating is above water for the first time since the 2000 campaign (7% net positive rating in a Gallup poll published February 26, 2007). http://brain.gallup.com/ You remember the 2000 campaign, right? The one where the Pravda-like character assassination engineered by the “mainstream” media made Gore into a cartoonish, dissembling joke? All that while they held out the likes of George W. Bush, John McCain and Ralph Nader as “authentic” men worthy of respect. This is why Americans and Iraqis are being killed and maimed in Baghdad. But don’t get me started.
Anyway, the latest smear started the day after the Oscars from an obscure right-wing “think” tank in Tennessee. They are upset because Al Gore uses electricity in his house! Their lies have been ably rebutted by Dave Johnson and James Boyce on Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-johnson-and-james-boyce/a-far-too-convenient-mea_b_42171.html
How do these lies help us draft Gore? First, it brings more attention to the best candidate for the Democratic nomination. (Ain’t no such thing as bad publicity, at least not when it’s generated by crackpots.) Second, it brings more citizens, bloggers and talking heads (e.g. Keith Olberman) into the cause of defending Gore. Third, it motivates Gore-illas to re-double efforts to take back our country from the right wing clique which has engineered the greatest foreign policy debacles in the history of the republic.
So bring it on. I’m looking at you Hannity! And you (fill in the blank with Coulter, Limbaugh, etc.)! Do your worst, baby. You are grist for our mill. Please lie about our candidate the Chicago way: early and often.
So let’s hoist one for all those Freepers and other assorted nut jobs. You Rushbo-wannabes are our biggest allies at the moment. Pop an OxyContin and make up another whopper. Keep talking smack and we’ll keep working and growing. And then sometime after Labor Day, maybe after the Nobel Prize vote, we will thank you for helping us achieve your worst nightmare. The candidacy of the greatest American of our time.
Right wing smear:
Gore’s Oscar night was predictable (but still spectacular).
First of course, Gore’s movie won twice (best documentary, best song). I was very confident about the Best Documentary category, but I thought Best Song (I Need To Wake Up, Melissa Etheridge) was slightly better than 50-50. But Gore getting his hands on some hardware was close to a certainty.
Also near certainty was that the press would misreport a casual remark as a definitive statement that he would not run:
Backstage, Gore put speculation to rest, saying “I do not have plans to become a candidate for office again.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070226/ap_en_mo/oscars_gore_2
This is the third time in two months a major corporate outlet has misinterpreted his remarks. See my previous entry on February 18, 2007. As of today, three times and counting on misreporting the same story.
Right wing disinformation on Al Gore from ABC
A strong rightward shift in ABC News (and The Note) has been discussed and documented by writers like Eric Boehlert, for example in his fine book Lapdogs, How the Press Rolled Over for Bush.
Al Gore represents a nightmare scenario for the right. If he runs, for example with Obama as VP, he could be well nigh unbeatable. Even a well known Gore-o-phobe like Chris Matthews admits as much.
It serves right wing interests to repress the emerging draft Gore movement. Obama at the top of the ticket will allow them not only to attack his middle name (Hussein) but to question his national security credentials in an uncertain time. And Clinton allows them to muddy the water on Iraq because of her ambivalence about the invasion (e.g. unlike Edwards, she has refused to apologize for her vote. Gore at the top of the ticket solves all aforementioned issues and provides a gravitas on national security and the climate crisis unrivalled by any Democrat alive today.
So repressing the draft Gore movement is a plus for the right. ABC News recently played along with that agenda by promoting the idea that Gore has recently ruled out a run in 2008:
http://www.bc.net.au/news/newsitems/200702/s1850162.htm
Unfortunately it was even picked up by the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/topics/al+gore
All of it is silliness. Reuters made the same gaffe recently and was quickly debunked by Gore’s spokesman, as quoted in the Huffington Post (after they had repreated the gaffe in the Reuter’s instance as well):
“Absolutely nothing new,” Gore spokesman Michael Feldman said of the report. “He’s been saying the same thing for six years – that he’s not running but has not completely ruled it out – and depending on where he is, it’s reported differently.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/01/16/huffpos-melinda-henneber_n_38770.html
So now ABC is spreading more of this cyclic misinformation.
You know what? Having to fight the “mainstream” press again is no big deal. Once you learn to anticipate journalistic malpractice at every turn, you learn to adapt. Like coastal residents who are experiencing rising hurricane insurance rates, it simply re-inforces the sentiment in the public that the system is broken. That sentiment, fortunately, fuels our movement.
So spread the word. As no clear frontrunner emerges in the Democratic race and as Gore keeps his powder dry, we can expect more journalistic malpractice from the likes of ABC News.
Here’s my tally: two major instances in this cycle of right-wing-favoring disinformation on Gore’s potential candidacy status so far (Reuter’s in Tokyo, ABC News in LA). And counting.
Corporate Media, apply directly to the forehead!
Corporate Media, apply directly to the forehead!
Corporate Media, apply directly to the forehead!
Corporate Media, apply directly to the forehead!
Many people have heard that obnoxious TV ad, but may not realize its pertinence to modern political “reporting.” In campaign 2000 the Corporate Media cost Al Gore millions of votes by a relentless attack for 20 months, starting in March 1999. The result was a significant rise in Gore’s negative poll ratings, first in the summer of 1999 (“Invented the Internet”) and then culminating in election day 2000 exit polls indicating a public concern for Gore’s “exaggerations,” which were invented from whole cloth by the CM.
Gore may well be the nominee in 2008. Every campaign is different and this will surely be no exact repeat of 2000. They will not be able to repeat their lies, because the bloggers are starting to provide accountability. Also Iraq, the mounting hurricanes (climate crisis) and two terms of BushCo will make 2008 very different, especially for Gore. But it is important for us to understand what they did for two reasons:
1) There are definitely vestiges of the anti-Gore treatment in the press; and
2) The pro-McCain press lovefest continues albeit with some early criticism of his hard-right strategy.
If you do not know what the press did in campaign 2000, I recommend reading Bob Somerby’s archives in dailyhowler.com. He deals both with the anti-Gore treatment and the pro-McCain treatment.
Why do some people still think Al Gore is boring? (They need to quit getting propaganda from the CM and watch An Inconvenient Truth, now out on DVD.) Why do some people still think McCain is a “Straight Talker” and a “maverick,” when he is one of the greatest self-promoting flip-floppers in modern political history?
Same answer for both questions: Corporate media! Apply directly to the forehead!
Those who don’t understand history are doomed to repeat it.
Drafting Gore 