I was thinking it would be a bad idea for Democrats to nominate Al Gore. The right-wing hate machine would go into hyperdrive, much as it will if Hillary Clinton is nominated.

Gore also failed to carry his own home state in 2000, otherwise the theft of the Florida election wouldn't have mattered and we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.

The winds are shifting, though. The most recent MTSU poll showed a slight shift to a bluer shade of Tennessee purple. In the 2006 elections, The People sent Washington a message that was loud and clear: we are mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more.

(And even though Corker won in Tennessee, his unimpressive 3 point margin over a black man from Memphis named Ford despite the fact that national Democrats abandoned their hand-picked candidate down the stretch could be chalked up as a symbolic victory for Democrats and further evidence of a shift in Tennessee politics, not to mention that the GOP had to shift resources here which probably helped Webb defeat Allen in Virgina among others.)

But what's really got me thinking about Al Gore for President is this editorial in today's Knoxville News Sentinel.

Judging by their pathetic record on presidential endorsements, their admonition for Gore to stick to the global warming crusade and leave the presidency to someone else amounts to a ringing endorsement for a Gore candidacy as far as I'm concerned.

If the KNS is against a presidential candidate, it's a pretty safe bet that's the candidate you ought to support. Besides, when are Democrats going to stop taking advice from right-wing conservatives about who they should run for president? In 2004 they wanted Dean, and when he self-destructed they wanted Kerry. Look what happened. Now they want to run against Hillary and/or Obama, and hope Gore stays out of it. That should tell you everything you need to know right there.

The KNS says the "the presidency offers a gigantic bully pulpit, it might not be the one that is most effective for the environmental challenge posed by global warming." They are essentially saying that the President of the United States can't effectively promote or enforce environmental policy.

History in their world begins in January of 2001, so they come to this conclusion based on the Bush administration's incredibly harmful neglect of the environment. Which, if you think about it, negates their point. This president has had a huge negative impact on environmental policy.

They also insult the intelligence of not only Al Gore but all Americans. Do they really think Gore is so narrow-minded that he would focus all his attention on climate change and ignore every other issue if he were elected president? Do they really expect people to believe that?

The editorial has another interesting remark regarding global warming, saying "there remain many skeptics, and that is altogether not a bad thing, given the diversity of opinion about most everything in the nation." Memo to the KNS: Skepticism based on blind loyalty to a failed ideology is not an altogether good thing, and opinion is not science.

Anyway, the fact is, for good or ill, Al Gore is the most experienced and most qualified person being talked about as a candidate for president in 2008. He has vision and proven leadership abilities on everything from inventing the internet to raising worldwide awareness of climate change. He is an accomplished policy wonk on par with Bill Clinton in his ability to speak intelligently on any issue.

America could do a lot worse. We already have for the past six years.

101
like
JaHu's picture

Randy, I agree 100%. I think

Randy, I agree 100%. I think if Gore should decide to run, he would not only win this state but it would be a landslide victory. His choice of running mates didn't help him in the 2000 election. Obama might be a nice choice for the role in this next election, but then again, it might be testing the waters too soon, and the democrats really need a victory in this election. Gore needs a running mate who could help pull the swing voters, and not push them away as he had in his previous campaign.

Adrift in the Sea of Humility

WhitesCreek's picture

Me Three

It's snowing out here.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Coulter's remark

Wow--Coulter's remark about Edwards on that clip was outrageously hateful. Frankly, I didn't even understand the basis for it. Did I miss some kind of action on Edwards's part that opened him up to criticism from the Hate Machine???

Nelle's picture

Does existing count as an action?

Did I miss some kind of action on Edwards's part that opened him up to criticism from the Hate Machine???

He continues to breathe in and out.

ATSF616's picture

Gore-Edwards ?

"Gore-Edwards" has a nice ring to it, I think. Both are reasonably progressive Southerners, which might mitigate the perceived need to "balance" the ticket with a Republican-lite VP candidate.

Darrell Sherrod
Kokomo IN

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Geography?

Darrell: "...which might mitigate the perceived need to "balance" the ticket with a Republican-lite VP candidate."

I thought we got Lieberman on the ticket previously due to some perceived need to "balance" the ticket geographically?

metulj's picture

Problem with the premise is

Problem with the premise is that Liebermann isn't Republican-lite. He's Cheney's little puddin'.

True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler

marat's picture

He's in an excellent position

Gore is in an excellent position, particularly since he's been getting a ton of free publicity, all of which serves to burnish his already-impressive credentials: The Oscar for Best Documentary, his performance at the Oscars (understated and he showed himself to be a good sport), a nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize (even if he loses, you can't buy the prestige that goes with that), a best-selling author, and a brand-new target for the right wing (is anyone still listening to them, outside of their own echo chamber, that is?). He's not a candidate now, and he can get a pretty good ride without declaring for the next few months. Therefore, he'll neither be attacked (except by Republicans), nor attack anyone (except for Republicans).

As far as the KNS goes, you've hit it on the nose. Their recent positions have raised the scent of partisanship very distinctly. This, coupled with their record on both local and national issues, may have served to reduce any influence they may have once exercised.

Gore's record over the last six years, raising his stature, talking seriously about serious issues, showing himself through hard work and evidence to have been right about global warming, at the same time that Bush has isolated himself and us in the world, got us involved in a two-front war, and shown himself and his White House to be impervious to questions and alternative views, has set up a contrast that only the most partisan would miss.

JaHu's picture

Rearing over the little bump

Pearing over the little bump of a post between us, I'd have to agree with you Marat. Gore has moved himself into the position of having a very successful campaign. Although if he does have plans of running, he doesn't need to throw his hat into ring to quickly. He needs to catch the wingnuts off guard, not allowing them enough time to spin a strategy against him.
Adrift in the Sea of Humility

jhow66's picture

mr. hug a tree

algore for prez.--he he haw haw lol rotflmao etc.

Number9's picture

Other polling says no...

Gallup has the following:

A new Gallup poll released today finds that, actually, relatively few Democrats think he could win the White House next year.

The survey found that 74% thought Sen. Hillary Clinton would have a good or excellent chance to win, with 71% feeling the same way about Sen. Barack Obama. A still healthy 52% gave former Sen. John Edwards this kind of chance. But only 31% gave good or excellent odds on Gore.

Sixty-eight percent give Gore a "slim" or "no" chance to beat a Republican next year.

Even among Democrats only, Gore was seen by only 44% as having a good or excellent shot. This contrasts with 90% feeling that way about Clinton.

The poll of 1,018 adults was taken Feb. 22-25.

JaHu's picture

Just to let you know digit.

Just to let you know digit. I wasn't reffering to you.

Adrift in the Sea of Humility

JaHu's picture

A new Gallup poll released

A new Gallup poll released today finds that, actually, relatively few Democrats think he(Gore) could win the White House next year.

'Gallup poll' Sorry not falling for it. With the right strategy, those numbers could flip overnight if Gore did decide to run.

Adrift in the Sea of Humility

Number9's picture

You are correct

Two big things on the horizon. If Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and he stands a solid chance, the polls will flip.

The other looming issue is Hillary Clinton's hidden thesis from her Senior year at Wellesley College. In fact it is very well hidden.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Reachin' back 40 years???

I'll admit, I didn't read your entire post, 9. I stopped because it reminded me so much of something in the DVD our family rented Friday night, Robin Williams in "Man of the Year."

If you haven't caught it yet, Williams plays comedian Tom Dobbs, who launchs a campaign for the presidency (and wins) on a "Cut-the-S**t" sort of platform.

Anyway, the scene I was reminded of was one in which Dobbs, hounded by a mob of reporters is asked numerous and largely irrelevant questions about his adolescence, including some about his prior marijuana usage (Dobbs's quote: "It was lit and it was in my hand...") and his teen sexual experiences (Dobbs recounts his adolescent dates with himself--use your imagination, he did).

Honest to Pete, I could care less about what opinions a candidate held 40 years ago, I can extend the same courtesy to candidates whose *current* opinions I don't like, and I really believe most people feel the same way. We wanna know where candidates stand *now* on the issues that are important *now.*

Number9's picture

I want to see why

Honest to Pete, I could care less about what opinions a candidate held 40 years ago, I can extend the same courtesy to candidates whose *current* opinions I don't like, and I really believe most people feel the same way. We wanna know where candidates stand *now* on the issues that are important *now.*

it is so important to hide the thesis. Is this a clever way to get people to want to read it?

LadyVols's picture

Al would be a great one but

he lost (OK he was robbed but he didn't win) his movie is about to be outed (swift-boated) in the next two weeks, and Hillary will spend mountains of money just to make sure he does NOT run!

Colter so stepped in it when she fired one off at Edwards and then today her response was even more on the ugly side! Naturally the right wingers are trying to cloud it by saying HBO should can Bill because he said we would be better off if the VP had been killed. Ann can't hid behind this one!

ivester's picture

Gore is for single-payer

A year or so ago Gore said in an interview that he had "reluctantly" come to the conclusion that single-payer health insurance was the best option for US health care. He's absolutely right about this, of course, as he is on most issues, but this means the insurance rackets and the AMA will do anything to keep him out of office.

His willingness to tell the truth--in this case as on the issue of climate change--makes me think he's not going to run. To be a successful politician, you need to be a very well-practiced liar, and Gore, having now broken the habit, might not want to force himself to relearn it.

WhitesCreek's picture

Troll-like post

his movie is about to be outed (swift-boated)

"Outed" and "swift boated" are not the same thngs. Essentially every single claim made by the swift boaters has been debunked. Kerry was a hero, no if's and's or but's. Bush was a deserter. Get over it, help us fix this mess, or shut up and go away.

LadyVols's picture

"Outed" and "swift boated"

"Outed" and "swift boated" are not the same thngs."

Outed exposes the person..swift boated exposes the act.

As for Al, the two week from now benchmark was wrong it has already started. Kerry was not a great candidate and he proved it when he tried to run again. In 08 it will take the very best to win and Al does NOT want to get into the game. His own words.

redmondkr's picture

LV, you have the most

LV, you have the most amazing dictionary.

_____________

Come See Us at

The Hill Online

LadyVols's picture

Well, some of us are just

Well, some of us are just farm rased or is it raised folks who never got into a good liberal arts school. I sure wish I was smarter and could both hitch a thought to a string of words, but I have to do the best I can on passion and love for my fellow woman.

As for the new movie out on warming, it is a real mess..filled with science pulled out of a think tank in Texas. Still it is another reason Al needs to stay on the street fighting the good fight and not get into this mess in 08.

Did you see the coverage of Hillary today from Alabama? It was such a slanted work of fiction I thought FOX produced it..but no it was on ABC! Al needs to be Al and hang right in
there with what he is doing.

I like your skyline by the way and if you met me I bet you would like me also!

gttim's picture

Did I miss some kind of

Did I miss some kind of action on Edwards's part that opened him up to criticism from the Hate Machine???

He's a Democrat?

WhitesCreek's picture

LV just wants to lie for his side

Outed exposes the person..swift boated exposes the act.

"swift-boated" is a term for a smear. What do The Swift boaters think about all the fines they pay for campaign law violations? Just the cost of doing business.

Their own statements contradicted their ads and they got condemned even by John McCain.

They are simply Liars!

You too, LV.

But LV, answer me this...Does your conscience ever bother you when you sit in church or are you just comfortable with being a sociopath?

Mark Siegel's picture

Indecent Exposure

Outed exposes the person..swift boated exposes the act.

Outed exposes something a person wants kept private.

Swift boating exposes something the exposer makes up.

Indecent exposure exposes something that the public in general demands be kept private.

LadyVols's picture

Indecent exposure exposes

Indecent exposure exposes something that the public in general demands be kept private."

Unless you are on a certain beach in MEXICO!

R. Neal's picture

LadyVols, you referred to

LadyVols, you referred to your X as a "he" in an earlier comment. But you don't write like a girl. Were you in a gay marriage? What state was it sanctioned in?

Knoxquerious's picture

That’s weird. You usually

That’s weird. You usually don't hear the words "gay" and "Lady Vols" in the same reference together. Zing!

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Huh?

Randy: "...you don't write like a girl."

Uh, Randy? You wanna 'splain this one to me slowly???

R. Neal's picture

Dunno. I've got a sixth

Dunno. I've got a sixth sense about it that's usually correct. Sorry if that's sexist or whatever, but it's true! (Don't ask me to prove it or quantify it though. It's a mystery, and not always accurate. It also develops over time after reading lots of prose. I can't usually spot it right away.)

Here's an interesting webtoy that tries to determine a writer's gender:

(link...)

It almost seems random at times, but it's fun.

It said this post about Gore was written by a male, which is correct. It says your earlier comment about "going back 40 years" was written by a female, which is correct.

On the other hand, it says my post about the Shrimp Dock was written by a female (by a very small margin), and my post about daylight savings time and PCs was written by a female (by a large margin). Go figure.

The more text you put in, the better its "accuracy" is supposed to be.

(P.S. In this PARTICULAR case, I have other CLUES.)

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Randy: "On the other hand,

Randy: "On the other hand, it says my post about the Shrimp Dock was written by a female (by a very small margin), and my post about daylight savings time and PCs was written by a female (by a large margin)."

You're off the hook, darlin'. Sounds like you're plenty in touch with your feminine side. ;-)

LadyVols's picture

But LV, answer me

But LV, answer me this...Does your conscience ever bother you when you sit in church or are you just comfortable with being a sociopath?"

There are lots of good churches and more than a few sociopaths both in them and in D.C. the trick is to find one that works for you.

Right now I am still visiting others although the people that make up the one I moved my letter into are the real heart of the church. Granted most are not democrats and those that are sure are not liberal, but in general they have good hearts and do so many wonderful things that are never reported. Lots of outreach in that church and their motive is not proselytizing either.

Still the mega church idea is not working for me, although it sure does bring people in. I am more into the older idea of bible teaching and open exchanges of thought found in smaller churches. Guess that is why I am still visiting?

LadyVols's picture

That’s weird. You usually

That’s weird. You usually don't hear the words "gay" and "Lady Vols" in the same reference together. Zing!"

LOL!!!!!!!!!

WhitesCreek's picture

Well, Duh!

You usually don't hear the words "gay" and "Lady Vols" in the same reference together. Zing!

It's pretty simple. We're predominately progressive and we don't care about any of that.

Particularly if they can play ball.

R. Neal's picture

Ditto. Heh.

Ditto. Heh.

WhitesCreek's picture

"you don't write like a girl."

It's really simple, T. Except for the ones with large adam's apples like Ann Coulter, most women are way to smart to write such obvious bullshit, even a DC based one like LV claims to be. I'm guessing paid operative, but we'll see.

redmondkr's picture

Most women don't get off on

Most women don't get off on braggin' 'bout Diesel dualies either.

_____________

Come See Us at

The Hill Online

Factchecker's picture

As Monte Burns said...

The fish is in the pan. ;>)

LadyVols's picture

On the other hand, it says

On the other hand, it says my post about the Shrimp Dock was written by a female (by a very small margin),"

Check that margin again! As for shrimp, unless they are bigger than Colter's nose take a pass.

OH and being paid to write on blogs sounds like a dream job for Ms Bean, but I can't spell well...uh good enough..or well..or is it goo...I'll get back to you on that.

Ms Bean did you

R. Neal's picture

And the multiple layers of

And the multiple layers of facade continue to peel away....

LadyVols's picture

And the multiple layers of

And the multiple layers of facade continue to peel away"

Like sands through the hour glass so are the days of our lies...lives.

I still like it when post those pictures of birds, kinda like the old blog. You do very good camera work.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is used to make sure you are a human visitor and to prevent spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Upcoming events:

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Local Media Blogs

Local News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Site Statistics

Last 7 days:
  • Posts: 21
  • Comments: 403
  • Visits: 11,555
  • Pageviews: 31,442
Last 30 days:
  • Posts: 124
  • Comments: 1855
  • Visits: 47,390
  • Pageviews: 135,853

TN Progressive

Nearby:

Beyond:

At large: