Gore's Awesome Politics

by: Matt Stoller

Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 11:36


Gore gives an important speech on making all our electricity clean and then goes off and says this.

The Nobel Prize-winning former vice president said fellow Democrat Barack Obama and Republican rival John McCain are "way ahead" of most politicians in the fight against global climate change.

Yes, McCain, who has flip-flopped on climate change and did not support the very tepid Lieberman-Warner bill, is way ahead of most politicians.

Matt Stoller :: Gore's Awesome Politics

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

He meant ahead of most GOP politicians (4.00 / 1)
But probably it would detract  from his mesdsage if he said that.  GOPers like James Inhofe of OK, who is still a global warming denier, or even George Bush, who is such an immature imbecile that even if he has "intellectually" accepted that there is global warming, still thinks he can joke about the US being the "world's biggest polluter."  Or Cheney, who evidently expects to be dead when it all hits the fan and figures he's left enough for his grandchildren to survive it.

Schwarzenegger gets it, but not many other GOPers do.  McCain is ahead of most of them.  And I'd argue Obama is ahead of many, maybe most, Dems.  But it is clearly a double standard, because the average Dem is way ahead of the average GOPer.  But he couldn't say that without that becoming the story, provoking a media storm, and obscuring his overall message, I guess.  This is what is meant by "excessive partisanship that prevents us from solving our problems."

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.


I guess it's a question of where the incentives are for Gore (4.00 / 3)
It's understandable that he doesn't want to be pinned down as a partisan bomb-thrower, but surely everyone knows he's a Democrat.  And he's already openly endorsed Obama.  So would it really hurt Gore that much to say something along the lines of, "McCain is good for a Republican on this important issue, but Obama and the Democrats are better"?  

[ Parent ]
My point was about the noise/drama machine (0.00 / 0)
It is very easy to say something that pokes the GOP noise machine and then the media drama squad and then no one hears anything else for 24-48 hours.  It's not so much incentives as wanting to stay out of that to keep from having his overall message not be heard.  I expect that's one reason he doesn't want to get back heavily into electoral politics.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
Gore didn't need to say that. This was easy. (0.00 / 0)
"McCain is one of the enviromental leaders of his party.  Barack Obama is way ahead of most politicians. "  See how simple.

[ Parent ]
byline (4.00 / 2)
the article is by RON FOURNIER, so we KNOW it is an accurate quote!

This is what Gore is very bad at (4.00 / 2)
Even though he eloquently critiques media business consolidation and the existence of false narratives, he is not good at playing the game.  

Mimi above is right; if that's what Gore meant, he should have been specific.  Instead, He's handed McCain something McCain can use.  

You'd think he'd know this stuff by now.   I'm very happy Gore is out of politics and sticking to policy.


Lieberman was his vp, dude... nuff said... (4.00 / 1)


We won the Battle. Now the Real Fight for Change Begins. Join MoveOn.org and fight for progressive change.  

missing details (0.00 / 0)
cap and trade?  or carbon tax?

wants to give $$ back to consumers by payroll tax reductions

but also wants huge investments in Detroit to build electric cars, transition for coal workers, and a new electric grid

where is that money coming from?


same place we get $300B to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (4.00 / 1)
congress' butt

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Same place as the money for everything else (0.00 / 0)

where is that money coming from?

The printing press.

[ Parent ]
In an election (4.00 / 1)
that will be decided on the ability of Obama to tie Bush to McCain, the Gore quote is increadibly unhelpful.

And it ironically comes after McCain has sided with the oil companies on drilling.


what was the context of the quote? (0.00 / 0)
Was it, perchance, during a major energy policy address laying out an ambitious and unquestionably progressive agenda?  Because I would think that fact might be worth a mention.  

Are we really limiting our vision so much as to only look for (damn near insignificant) errors and miss the unprecedented context in which they occur?

Yeah I blog.


[ Parent ]
Which Gore criticised (0.00 / 0)
Talk about mixed messages!

Gore's well ahead of the game, but seems to be lamentably unwilling to actually haul people up when they aren't doing what they need to.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
small political error but big progressive narrative (4.00 / 1)
Yes, criticism deserved but let's not lose sight of the bigger picture which is a very forward thinking progressive narrative.
Yet when we look at all three of these seemingly intractable challenges at the same time, we can see the common thread running through them, deeply ironic in its simplicity: our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels is at the core of all three of these challenges - the economic, environmental and national security crises.
 

seriously! (0.00 / 0)
Matt's one of the best when it comes to seeing trees, but in this instance he's kind of missing the forest.

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
BIG political error (0.00 / 0)
It doesn't matter how progressive the strategy is, few will read the exact proposal. What matters is that Gore praised McCain's policies, and hence implicitly justified his atrocity of an energy plan.

If McCain's energy policies are made progressive by getting Gore's imprimatur, then all the hard working on moving the Overton window he has done is completely undermined.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
super gore (0.00 / 0)
Why are all the liberal boobs talking as if wind, biofuels, solar, etc are some magic cure? We are getting close to powering small passenger vehicles with batteries, but that is of miniscule importance to the economy. We are nowhere near possessing the techology to power semis, trains, airplanes, and cargo ships with any alternative fuels. These are the workhorses of the economy, not joe sixpack's prius. We are going to need fossil fuels for the next few decades at least.

Why do all the environmentalists seem to believe that technology in every area of society has improved except for in the area of oil drilling? More oil enters the ocean from natural fissures that is accidentally spilled in the ocean. The only proven way to bring price down on anything is to increase supply. If you want to shake up the futures market, repeal Congress' ban on offshore drilling.

Last two points, where is the harm in allowing the individual states to decide on whether to drill? I believe Jim Webb feels that way. Secondly, why no discussion of Jim Gray's public denunciation of global warming. Usually his pronouncements of hurricanes gets big play on the big (but shrinking) media. Has he suddenly lost credibility?


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox