Clinton-Gore-Liberman sprang from the same source but diverged. Personally, I find Gore's present path the most palatable. Liberman is out of the question and Clinton needs to get out of the picture--she and Bill once and for all--get out of the picture--15 minutes were up ages ago. Just bow out with some dignity and class and get off the stage and out of the spotlight, so we can MOVE ON from the Bush-Clinton dynasty.
The Progressive Left is important to inform the debate, keep the heat on and drive the agenda. Which road will serve those ends?

Grase Slick

I am not a nuclear physicist, but here is why I disagree with a nuclear solution:

1- there is a finite amount of easily recoverable uranium.

2- the current process produces a lot of nasty waste products that could create future environmental disasters while it solves current ones.

3- there are other alternatives besides oil & nuclear.

Humanity's greatest accomplishments were mostly copied from nature. That is to say nature did it first and by studying the natural world, we feebly try to copy the wonders of the world with our inventions.

If we could perfect solar energy and fuel cells, more or less what plants do, then we would have our environmentally friendly energy. My guess is that the central powers that be will fight us every step of the way because such systems would literally liberate human dwellings from dependency upon giant energy corporations. The thought of it must outrage Bushevites!

And to address the above, above comments that blasted the blasting of "bad conservatives". Truly two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left. (ha ha)

Still, even if the corporate robber barons believe in what they are doing doesn't make it unasailable. Hitler probably believed he was justified too. Most rich Americans feel justified in their actions because they have been convinced (and by no accident) that capitalism is God's pet political system (how far-fetched is that?)

A sucker is born every minute. PT Barnum

It's democracy, and Gore is one among many. He EXPECTS to get trashed. His interest in global waming appears to sincere...and credible. Move on! His skin is pretty thick!

Now what about the SOLUTIONS, which Gore would probably prefer this democracy debate.
Please see my question above regarding nuclear energy as a viable alternative.

Frankly, I don't understand what planet some of the comments here are coming from.

Gore was trashed by the "liberal" media in his bid for the president. And now he is trying to promote awareness of a danger which matches if not excedes that of WMDs and we are supposed to be irked that he isn't doing it in the right way?

Jeeze, the problems we face today and which our children will have to cope with are about our survival as a species.

All this luxurious time-wasting and sophmoric babbling has to stop. Let's derail the arguing about how miserable corporate power is(blah blah blah) with a question bringing it back to global warming:
What do you'll think of James Lovelock's advocacy (in REVENGE OF GAIA) of nuclear energy as the only real energy solution for America's oil addiction? Lovelock says the latest generation of nuke tech, regardless of the waste product, is far less riskier for the planet than our continuation down the oil "pipeline". He says the other alternative sources will remain only a small, but growing, slice of our overall energy pie.
Let's hear some educated responses, none of the standard knee jerk-off stuff from the mouth's of bored kiddies.

Maggie,
You are so right. If people could just look for some of the good and helpful things that are being done and accept them. There are times to complain about the things where people are "wrong," meaning that they different than what I would do, but there are also times to think, "Will that make things better?"
Hell, I wish we lived in a perfect society, but until we do, I will settle for just a better society. We have to get to be better before we can get to be perfect. lol

It is very dishearting to realize the left can be every bit as narrow minded and unforgiving as the right. "If you don't think like me about everything, your a toll of such and such." Ever since I started reading "comment" on Common Dreams articles, I've been dismayed by people's prejudice.

Did it ever occur to any one with strong political beliefs that a person can actually be doing something because they believe in it. Why must everything be all or nothing? You are rich so everything you do is wrong? You are a businessman so everything you do is suspect. You are a Democrat (and not a Green) so you are automatically corrupt.

Do you ever listen to yourselves talk. Where is your capacity to reason?

And before you call me a "right wing nut", I am probably one of the most liberal person you'd ever meet in your life time. Stop judging people on such flemsy evidence. Leave that for the people on the right. "judge not, lest you should be judged".

Even though I'm an atheist, I do relaize the bible has some good quotes.

PEACE

The Corporate-right has nothing left in it's arsenal of distraction and denial so they are focusing on attacking the messenger. Even many conservatives are coming to realize the reality of the ecological crisis we face. Gore and others try to say that its not a partisan issue, but of course that a system run by corporations cannot address the issue since it would not be profitable in the short run.

The reality is that "personality politics" (good phrase) is the result of very directed public relations, not accidental journalism. Gore is in the news because he or his "people" want him to be, to maintain his high profile if nothing else, let alone his possible ambition to run again for president. The same is true for any of the well known out-of-office political celebrities we can't get away from, including Bill Clinton. Hillary may get her publicity free much of the time, but she nevertheless has her own PR machine to fill in the gaps, as do all the candidates. It's the singular mission of PR flacks to keep the client's name in front of the public, on TV, in the papers, on radio, whatever. It simply doesn't happen by accident, any more than "reality" TV, which is as far from reality as a tightly controlled, scripted TV show can get. When it comes to public communication of any kind---press conferences, interviews, rallies, whatever---politics, both electoral and issue-centered, is one of the most tightly controlled endeavors in our society, with every aspect of what you see and hear prepared in advance as a form of pablum for us dummies out here. If we were to be allowed to see what actually goes on behind the scenes, it'd be like the proverbial trip through a hot dog factory...you'd never look at a hot dog again without becoming ill, let alone eating one. It all fits well within the mythology most hapless Americans embrace regarding the conduct and motivations of our government. Me, I'm an unreconstructed cynic of the highest order, having witnessed too much venality, greed, bullshit and brazen hypocrisy for my own good (a smallish example just yesterday in watching our esteemed Attorney General of the U.S., who'd have a hard time supervising clerks at the DMV, illogically lying through his teeth on "60 Minutes" about his "reasons" for firing those U.S. Attorneys...this guy couldn't shine Elliot Richardson's shoes). If you want radical or progressive, don't look for it in the Times or Washington Post...if you do, you're a blind idealist or a fool. This country is in the deep pockets of the corporations, and it will take some horrendous event or series of events to even begin the process of pulling it out. The question is whether the American People have not had the thirst for real democracy leached out of them since Nam and Watergate, the kind of democracy that ignited the Boston Tea Party and our last revolution a few hundred years ago. Now, it seems our primary interests are "American Idol" and "Dancing with the Stars". God help us all.

@Chuck:

What I meant by 'liberal' media, was this very corporatist, centrist-Democratic party politics that dominates big media in the US, as exemplified by the Washington Post, and the NYTimes . This is as opposed to a really progressive or radical newspaper.

I find this whole personality politics very irksome, Al Gore is hardly the first to speak about global warming, he lives in a mansion that consumes many times as much energy as the average US household (a number that Al Gore admits is too high). Indeed the Clinton adminstration's record is hardly anything to crow about. There's more on Counter Punch, which at least is a somewhat radical news source: http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly03222007.html

@lod

"Irksome?" Well, no, not really.

"Liberal-media propaganda"? That old tar brush must be a bit worn out by now!

Looking at the liveearth.org website, venues have yet to be found in Brazil, Japan, US and Antarctica. And it ain't going to happen in the Antarctica for a zillion reasons, mostly legal.

I think jon's comment was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, at least I hope it was! anyone else find all this Al Gore liberal-media propaganda irksome?

If Mitch McConnell ever took the stick he's got stuck up his ass he'd find that life would go a lot more swimmingly. I saw former SecNav John Lehman interviewed yesterday and he was pointing out the mediocrity of today's elected "officials." McConnell is the epitome of that mediocrity.

Dress warmly. That's the heart of winter in the Antarctic.

Brrrr.....

wouldn't that be kind of ironic, jon? jumping on a jet to catch a concert about climate change?

i mean, do as you like. i'm just saying it might strike some (like me) as funny.

I'd like to jet in to the Antarctic for the celebration there--wouldn't that be cool. Anyone know of a group organizing a tour?

jon
Connecting the dots: From human behaviors to Ecosystem decline
http://StudentsForTheEarth.org