Rolling Stone Mag.: "Al Gore 3.0"

[Pirate Smile]

Al Gore 3.0
The man who won the presidency in 2000 is looser and more outspoken than ever. Is his global-warming movie a warm-up for a third run at the White House? (From the July 13-27, 2006 issue of ROLLING STONE)

BY WILL DANA



It is probably not fair to say that global warming excites Al Gore, but get him going on the subject and he becomes possessed by the spirit of a Holy Rolling preacher, swelling and quaking in his chair, hitting high notes, speaking in tongues. We are meeting in a cramped waiting room outside two TV studios in midtown Manhattan. Gore is spending the afternoon here, knocking off a dozen or so interviews with broadcast outlets across the country, one after the other, intimations of the apocalypse sandwiched between the local-anchor happy talk and car-dealership ads in markets like Houston and Kansas City.
Gore is in the middle of an exhaustive campaign to promote An Inconvenient Truth, a surprise hit that transposes to film a lecture about global warming that he has given more than a thousand times in the past six years. (An accompanying book of the same title is climbing the best-seller lists.) But while Gore's message may be grim -- in a nutshell, a warming climate threatens civilization, and if the human race wants to survive, we've got about ten years to start turning things around -- Gore himself seems funnier, warmer and more relaxed than he ever did during his political years. You used to think: I wouldn't mind taking a class from this guy. Nowadays, you wouldn't mind having a beer with him. His recent appearance on Saturday Night Live, when he addressed the nation as president and boasted that gas prices were so low that the government had to bail out the big oil companies, was the single funniest moment on the show all season.

-snip-
How is that possible, given the current administration?
This is not a partisan issue. I talked to a CEO of one of the ten largest companies in the United States, who supported Bush and Cheney. He told me, "Al, let's be honest. Fifteen minutes after George Bush leaves the presidency, America is going to have a new global-warming policy, and it doesn't matter who's elected." And I think that the smartest CEOs, even in places like Exxon-Mobil, now understand that the clock is ticking, and the world is changing, and the United States is not going to be able to continue living in this little bubble of unreality.

Do you think these people are taking that message to Bush and Cheney?
Some of them are. But Bush is insulated -- his staff smiles a lot and only gives him the news that he wants to hear. Unfortunately, they still have this delusion that they create their own reality. As George Orwell wrote, we human beings are capable of convincing ourselves of something that's not true long after the accumulated evidence would convince any reasonable person that it's wrong. And when leaders persist in that error, sooner or later they have a collision with reality, often on a battlefield. That, in essence, is exactly what happened in Iraq. But we have to keep that from happening with the climate crisis. Because by the time the worst consequences begin to unfold, it would be too late.

-snip-
What did you think during the 2000 campaign on the day that Bush announced he would limit CO2 emissions if he were elected? Did you think, "That's bullshit"?
I thought it was fraudulent. I actually did not anticipate that he would directly and brazenly break that pledge, and go 180 degrees in the opposite direction at full speed, but I thought that he would slow-walk it and make it meaningless. They were trying to drain the moral energy out of an issue that they felt could hurt them if the public perceived a clear contrast on the issue.

Did it seem like a smart move, strategically, at that point?
Well, if you define the word "smart" in an antiseptic and clinical way that excludes any ethical dimension, then, yeah, I guess it was smart. Smart, if you're willing to say things that you know are not true. But that's what Karl Rove is known for. Bush's whole pose as a compassionate conservative was fraudulent. His budget was fraudulent. Even the idea that he would be staunchly opposed to nation building was fraudulent. I don't mean that he actually knew at the time of the campaign that he was going to invade Iraq -- because I don't think Cheney had told him yet . But the statement on global warming, and the specific pledge to reduce CO2 emissions with the force of law, was part of a larger pattern. He was completely fraudulent from head to toe.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10688399/al_gore_30/1

[durrrty libby]

1. I so enjoy listening to Al Gore say anything!!!

I have hope when I hear him speak.

[Pirate Smile]

2. Here's more from Al - a different look at Peak Oil.

"Do you believe, as some predict, that we are going to run out of oil within fifty years?
It's a sophisticated debate between the geologists on one side and the economists on the other. But the debate over oil reserves misses the point. We have more than enough oil, not to mention coal, to completely destroy the habitability of the planet. The real constraint on oil and coal is not supply, but global warming. There's a saying: "The Stone Age didn't end because we ran out of stones. And the Age of Fossil Fuels won't end because we run out of fossil fuels."

The fact that oil is beginning to get more expensive more quickly will contribute to the realization of how dysfunctional our current pattern is. Take the tar sands of western Canada. For every barrel of oil they extract there, they have to use enough natural gas to heat a family's home for four days. And they have to tear up four tons of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts. But you know, junkies find veins in their toes. It seems reasonable, to them, because they've lost sight of the rest of their lives.

As Lincoln said in the darkest days of America's darkest passage: "We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." Our biggest challenge, our biggest foe, is thrall. The word sounds ancient, but it means anything that imprisons our thinking and prevents us from seeing the reality of our situation. We're in thrall to oil. We've got to break out of it. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we will save our planet."

[calmblueocean]

18. "Junkies find veins in their toes." Powerful analogy.

This is what really gets to me sometimes. If -- and it's a big if -- the events of 9/11 still occurred during a Gore presidency, is there any doubt he would've initiated a War ON Oil instead of a War FOR Oil?

[Uncle Joe]

24. That struck me as a most powerful analogy too calmblueocean,

overall an excellent column.

Kicked and recommended for President Gore!:patriot:

:kick:

[NastyDiaper]

23. "because I don't think Cheney had told him yet "

I don't mean that he actually knew at the time of the campaign that he was going to invade Iraq -- because I don't think Cheney had told him yet.

:rofl: ... :cry:

[SeaNap05]

3. Voted for him in 1988.......

in the primaries. I expected a lot from him, maybe there will be more to hear and see.

[Pirate Smile]

4. Al on Iraq

Let's look at Iraq right now. Is there some way we can pull out?
We're going to have to pull out of there. But the hard truth is that even those of us who tried like hell to prevent this catastrophic mistake are now bound to share in the moral consequences of whatever choices we as a nation make in the manner of our leaving. We have to pursue two objectives simultaneously, and that's always hard. The first objective is to get the hell out of there as quickly as we can. The second objective is to avoid the moral mistake of doing even more harm to those people in the manner of our leaving than we did in the manner of our invasion. And, tragically, it is possible to do even more harm if we are not alert to the ethical choices that we have to make as we prepare to leave. Unfortunately there are no "good options," because Bush and Cheney have driven us into an ethical cul-de-sac. General Odom, who used to run defense intelligence, said last year that the invasion of Iraq "will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history."

So do you support the "strategic redeployment" advocated by Rep. Jack Murtha?
I think Jack's awfully good on these questions, and yet I would like to know more about what that really means. It may be different in different parts of the country. Look at the looming conflict with Iran over its nuclear program and the bizarre statements by its president. We have in effect given him 135,000 hostages on his doorstep. And the government that has just emerged in Baghdad is on much more friendly terms with Tehran than Washington is.

We're all, in some ways, lashed to the mast of our ship of state here. Because the little group at the helm should resign. You know, Rumsfeld and that whole gang have made horrible mistake after horrible mistake, and yet Bush continues to keep them in charge. How do the rest of us play a responsible role in advising the group in the White House that doesn't want to hear what any of us say in any case? If you had written this in a novel before it all played out, you'd get the proverbial rejection slip -- nobody would believe it. That any group of leaders could be this incompetent, and catastrophically blind to reality. But here's my point: What they've done with Iraq, what they did with Katrina, is exactly the approach they're taking to global warming. They're ignoring reality, they're twisting and cherry-picking the evidence to create false impressions that serve the interests of a small, powerful group that has a financial interest in the outcome.
Now, Iraq was more complicated than that -- there were other factors that created that perfect storm. But their willingness to deny reality and twist the truth is the same as with global warming. And the stakes are too high for us to let them proceed without pulling out all the stops and trying to alert the American people and engineer a very broad and strong consensus that crosses party lines, that causes people to rise up and say, "No, not with our future!"

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Gore very keenly using the term "fraudulent" over and over

The more he says it, the more you associate Dubya with general fraud. It's a great rhetorical strategy, straight out of Cicero.

[Greybnk48]

12. I've seen two interviews lately where he used the word "outlier"

or "the outliers" for people who deny global warming. He repeated It several times in both interviews and the word that jumped out was "liar." Very clever (and true).

[Pirate Smile]

6. kick

[glitch]

7. well that's an awful picture, but Ihis words are awesome, especially

"Did it seem like a smart move, strategically, at that point?
Well, if you define the word "smart" in an antiseptic and clinical way that excludes any ethical dimension, then, yeah, I guess it was smart. Smart, if you're willing to say things that you know are not true. But that's what Karl Rove is known for. Bush's whole pose as a compassionate conservative was fraudulent. His budget was fraudulent. Even the idea that he would be staunchly opposed to nation building was fraudulent. I don't mean that he actually knew at the time of the campaign that he was going to invade Iraq -- because I don't think Cheney had told him yet ."

thanks for posting

edit: and this

"Do you believe, as some predict, that we are going to run out of oil within fifty years?
It's a sophisticated debate between the geologists on one side and the economists on the other. But the debate over oil reserves misses the point. We have more than enough oil, not to mention coal, to completely destroy the habitability of the planet. The real constraint on oil and coal is not supply, but global warming. There's a saying: "The Stone Age didn't end because we ran out of stones. And the Age of Fossil Fuels won't end because we run out of fossil fuels."

The fact that oil is beginning to get more expensive more quickly will contribute to the realization of how dysfunctional our current pattern is. Take the tar sands of western Canada. For every barrel of oil they extract there, they have to use enough natural gas to heat a family's home for four days. And they have to tear up four tons of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts. But you know, junkies find veins in their toes. It seems reasonable, to them, because they've lost sight of the rest of their lives.

As Lincoln said in the darkest days of America's darkest passage: "We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." Our biggest challenge, our biggest foe, is thrall. The word sounds ancient, but it means anything that imprisons our thinking and prevents us from seeing the reality of our situation. We're in thrall to oil. We've got to break out of it. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we will save our planet. "

[Pirate Smile]

8. I can't believe I didn't notice this in the header when I first read it:

"Al Gore 3.0
The man who won the presidency in 2000 is looser and more outspoken than ever. Is his global-warming movie a warm-up for a third run at the White House? (From the July 13-27, 2006 issue of ROLLING STONE) "

[glitch]

9. geez neither did I! :) first rfkjr, now this, I may have to subscribe! nt

[MelissaB]

10. ROFLMAO!

I don't mean that he actually knew at the time of the campaign that he was going to invade Iraq -- because I don't think Cheney had told him yet .

:rofl:

[gasperc]

16. that was really choice

and I saw his daily show interview, Gore " I think I carried Florida"

[bunkerbuster1]

19. Caught my eye as well

That's worth quoting.

Classic Gore, the kind of guy who can cut you down without even breathing hard.

[BrklynLiberal]

11. kicked and recommended. ..happily

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

13. Rolling stone is on a roll lately

covers of pearl jam, bush worst pres ever, rfk's piece

the mag hasn't been this good in years. whatever they're putting in wenner's coffee, it's working

[EVDebs]

14. All they've got to do is a remake of the Carl Bernstein article Oct '77

The CIA and The Media
http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/cia_press.html

and they'll be the vanguard of the new media !

[xxqqqzme]

21. I let my subscription go during

the b spears - j jackson cover era - I may have 2 go back 2 subscribing.

[EVDebs]

26. DUers, also read Lester Brown's Plan B 2.0 in a similar vein

it gives the world until 2031 before the * hits the fan.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB2/Contents.htm

Gore says ten or so...

BTW, Amory Lovin's www.oilendgame.com book and website are good too.

Sadly, Republicans can only support the current oligopolies and malignant corporatisms who are sponsors of the 'continue as you are' mode.

[ms liberty]

15. Great interview - thanks for posting! Gore/Feingold 08! n/t

[SCDem]

17. I LOVE the man!

I've always been a democrat and in 2000 of course I voted for Al but wasn't as involved in politics then. But after watching An Inconvenient Truth I said to my friend... I want him to run in 2008.

[cain_7777]

20. Gore 08, PLEASE!!!

I met Gore in Houston at his very first presentation of AnInconvenient Truth in the US, and he has evolved into a very personable well-spoken saviour. We need someone to not only save America but the entire planet, and Gore is the person to do it. In the meantime, Bush needs his head removed from his ass because he has been huffing his own green house gases for too long. It's time to come out Georgie, and smell the reality we're all forced to deal with, you F'in prick!:spank:

[Rosco T.]

22. Spread the word...

www.cafepress.com/democatic







www.cafepress.com/democatic

[emmadoggy]

25. Absolutely Delicious!

Geez, I was happy to vote for Al in 2000, but he is really kickin' ass right now!! We need our authentic President so badly!! Waiting for that point of no return to see if he will run is going to be agonizing and I, for one, will be very disappointed if he doesn't. Gore/Feingold '08!:woohoo:

[WA98296]

27. I hope he runs.