Let’s start with a reality check: Al Gore is not going to win the presidency in 2008. He will not be able to get organized, raise enough money, or campaign fast enough to make a dent in the front-loaded primaries, and he’s certainly not going to enter the fray as a 3rd party candidate. The question should be: does Gore ever run for public office again? His eventual answer to that will tell you whether he’s really in it for public service or for ego.
Forget personal prejudices about Gore’s ability (or lack thereof) to often walk the walk he talks, or what his real purpose was about agreeing to make “An Inconvenient Truth.” He has still been an important part of raising the consciousness in this country about climate change, and has caused the debate to intensify. If he is truly interested in serving the public and effecting a change, then he needs to continue to make his case as Al Gore, Private Concerned Citizen. But if this is just a ploy to re-make himself politically, then he’s not interested in public service at all, but power.
I don’t know the answer here. Gore has always championed environmental protection as his #1 cause, and that makes you want to believe that he’s really in it to educate the country and make a difference. But if you watch his movie with a critical eye, you don’t just gloss over all the references to the 2000 election. Instead, you wonder why it’s included. After all, if this is about raising consciousness on what we’re doing to the planet, who cares about how you lost the election?
That is the dichotomy with Al Gore, and why a lot of people struggle with or discount what he stands for, or what he purports to stand for. If you’re really in this for environmental change, why do you try to show how “unfair” the 2000 election was to you? And if the environment is that fragile, why do you live your extremely environmentally abusive lifestyle and think that by buying “carbon credits” you can excuse your behavior?
See, this is the problem with career politicians. They think they’re above the fray, and they think they’re entitled to positions of privilege. Hey…I’m an agoraphobic person who has partially been rewarded by a lifetime of being on stage instead of down with “the rabble.” So on some level I understand. The difference is that I’m not in a position to make policy. I’m just saying that whatever you see Al Gore do in the future with respect to seeking public office should tell you a great deal about his true motivations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
How can you say that Al Gore lives an "extremely environmentally abusive lifestyle"? His home is equipped with solar panels and he and his family all drive hybrid vehicles. Yes, he still does use fossil fuels, but he is doing what he can, what do you want from him? We need to invest in technology that will change how we get the bulk of our energy from fossil fuels to alternative energy sources. Unfortunately, that system is not yet available to Mr. Gore and the vast majority of Americans. This is what he is trying to change.
It has been well-documented how much energy the Gore household consumes, using more energy in 1 month than the average household in America consumes in 1 year. You can easily research this with any online search engine if you are interested in learning more details. Here is one such link from the nonpartisan Tennesse Center for Policy Research:
http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=548
I applaud Mr. Gore's efforts at dissiminating information, but driving a hybrid car and buying carbon credits doesn't make up for such energy-gulping luxuries as keeping his swimming pool heated year-round. And that's my point: part of the dichotomy of the man (and many politicians) is that he gives the impression, fairly or not, that he is not practicing what he preaches. As someone who believes very strongly that we need to make wholesale changes in the ways we consume energy, that bothers me.
Post a Comment