How is it "disobedience? We are the sovereigns of this nation and what we want is in no way disobedient.

Jian
I agree but to get the average sheep American out of his basement to do some type of action does not exist on this web site. Myself I work for the Green Party in Canada ( new home was an American at one time) now I know they will not win but if the word gets out more that is doing something. I have posted I don't know how many times for action in a none violent way and nothing. At times I feel some of these people are not old enough to know hard times or call the shots in their home OR have reduced their expectations to a point that food on the table and driving a car is doing a good job. I even said phone from a phone booth your elected people and tell them what you think. Not one reply just posting after posting saying how bad it is. I would like to see the names removed from the postings and just a number in numerical order of the number posted. I wonder if that would start something.

Madcow,

Does it matter to you that "clean coal" plants do not exist?

The name calling is the blubber here and in over 50% of America so what else is new? What about redirecting this blame energy into positive action for shared well being?

Truthteller(ironic name),

Obviously Progressives don't support the US backed violence in Bolivia. Do you support using violence to avoid helping the poor?

Civil disobedience in Santa Cruz, Bolivia is going VERY strong. I wonder how many progressives support it...

Al Gore has done more to raise awareness of climate change than all the posters on this site combined. And all these posts insulting him. Amazing. Even a post insulting Michael Moore for being wealthy.

Gore certainly didn't do enough as Vice President, but it is simply idiotic to insult this ally of the environmental movement. Radical purists who cannot play well with others are the reason the Left has no power in this country.

I only expect Bloody Gore to be a Bloody Bore for us. I can't think of one Democratic Party politician that has shown up at any protest, and that includes Dennis the Menace. These people are brakers of Mass Movements, not builders of them.

There was a really interesting post the other day and I can't remember which article it was, but a guy answered my question on "clean coal" and explained in detail why it wasn't clean. I wish he would repost. I believe it would help here.

I also hoppe none of you are waiting for Gore to show up to lead the civil disobedience he is advocating. Not going to happen.

Algore can donate his BIG FAT BLUBBER towards energy production !

My My! Mr. Gore sure is getting fat! Pigs do get fat. Maybe some lipstick would help.

Al Gore, the finest example of a Democrat bullshitter.

He's against coal plants but supports Obama, who's for it.

He urges young people to engage in civil disobedience to stop coal plants, but isn't man enough to do it himself, or have challenged his own election theft in 2000.

Incidentally, this picture gives the term 'fat big' a new meaning. He looks like he put on another 40 pounds, probably from eating genetically modified chicken. Hypocrite.

28 new plants? That's just insane!

I wonder how different the world would look today if Al Gore was just finishing his second term. No difference between the parties? I don't think so. Not enough? Yes. But none? Simplistic pabulum!

OK Al, Just name the place, date, and show up with the rest of us!

it's all fine and dandy for him to say this....but why contradict himself as he's supporting the very candidate who is for what he is supposedly against? yes, more "clean" burning coal. let's get those plants more incentive to pollute why don't we? let's be consistent at least! civil disobedience is alright, but shouldn't he be leading the charge? he should say something like..."i will be at (such and such a place)...at (time) and i urge....etc..etc. be specific and lead the way. get serious and more people will take you seriously but not if you support those who contradict your important message. i recall that he didn't run on any kind of environmental platform before and now that he is finally coming out into his own with his pet projects on the environment, he stumps for obama who is for the coal industry. in fact, it's confusing, because i don't have a clue what obama stands for. he's all over the place changing with the wind. i have a headache just trying to figure him out. it's not worth it.

HERB:
OK please tell us what are YOU are going to do?

He didn't do it while in office. So why now? Politics ?

and once again the nit pickers emerge...

discussion turns to hairsplitting grammar, punctuation , or vulgarity.
the usual epithets, slurs, and grand sweeping generalizations accompanied by left and right political extremist's glazed eyed chanting of their respective mantras.

so the message gets lost , the idea fades.. no wonder to me why the world is screwed.

simplify now
there is still time.

Webwalk,
Do you not notice a disconnect between what Gore is suggesting and his support for Obama?

Specifically because of this:

"Obama Declares Support For 'Clean' Coal
Barack Obama has proclaimed his support for the US coal industry after running mate Joe Biden declared 'no coal plants here in America'"

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/24-6

The best thing about a carbon tax is that it would reduce Exxon/Mobil's ability to pay its ad agency to hire or otherwise reward global warming denial trolls, who chill debates with robotic invective over and over and over again, and otherwise pollute the public discourse on commondreams topics such as this one.

Hell yes civil disobedience! But not to protest coal plants. Better to protest the TAKEOVER of our GOVERNMENT by FASCISTS!

This is way to funny AMERICANS GET OFF THEIR BUTTS AND PROTEST, HA HA HA HA. You are way to afraid of getting arrested, COWARDS you deserve what you get.

This is way to funny AMERICANS GET OFF THEIR BUTTS AND PROTEST, HA HA HA HA. You are way to afraid of getting arrested, COWARDS you deserve what you get.

I urge civil disobedience to insist that Al Gore cut his household/s carbon footprint in half in the next six months.

Just what i figured when i opened the comments section of this article - reams of time and energy spent attacking Al Gore. Thanks for all your constructive criticism.

Now, whaddaya gonna do about it? About coal, and the disrupted climate system?

Seems like we could be a lot more useful if we spent our time here sharing ideas about what we can do, instead of "sharing" our "ideas" about who is an idiot or a hypocrite or a shill.

Frankly, it is LONG PAST time for civil disobedience, on this and many other subjects. And not just civil disobedience, but a wide range of other resistance tactics, including voting and running for office on the more mainstream side, and other creative disruptive tactics on the less mainstream side.

i'm also a big advocate of major lifestyle behavioral commitments, starting with not buying ANYTHING that you do not actually need. Live where you work and work where you live to eliminate the need for energy-hog commuting. Live in a small space or share your larger space with others to reduce total energy use.

And on the policy side, doing urban design to facilitate these lifestyle options, as well as incentives and investment in renewable energy, and ultimately the abolition of corporate personhood and the elimination of corporate participation in funding politics, with verifiable paper-trail voting, instant-runoff elections, and proportional representation.

As to hypocrisy or futility, what good is all the loud-mouthed self-righteous blogging going to do? Boy, i spent my time making fun of someone today! And if Al Gore DID participate in a blockade at a new coal plant or a mountain-top removal "mine", he would be attacked and vilified and made fun of by many of the same persons who are attacking him and vilifying him and making fun of him today for NOT participating in civil disobedience.

Big props to everyone who offers serious contributions to a productive dialog.

BTW, this does means Gore will now get arrested at a protest, right? He's not just some hypocritical politician, right? After all, no one cares if you or I get arrested, but if Gore did, it would matter. And I'm sure, unless he's grossly insincere, he would also advocate civil disobedience against the wars, and the government which has dissolved our Constitution.

Ever hear of "clean coal"? You know, the stuff that doesn't actually exist? Obama now supports it.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/24-6

So Gore's first act of civil disobedience will be not endorsing Obama, right?

END MOUNTAIN TOP REMOVAL ! http://www.wisecountyissues.com

Al Gore, just go away.

"Radical" though you now think yourself to be, you're still not capable of saying nine little words, those nine words being -- "I'm sorry, I should have challenged the 2000 election."

Or, more to the point -- "I'm sorry, had I spoken to the needs of millions of Americans, had I moved to the left -- and MEANT it -- I would have won the 2000 election in a landslide."

Instead, you presided over the Senate during the 2000 Electoral College vote, while the Congressional Black Caucus frantically tried to get one senator -- just *one* senator -- to bring to the floor a motion to investigate the disenfranchisement of over 1 million black voters.

Voters who, if properly counted, would have given you the presidency with votes to spare.

And so there you were, Al Gore, on the floor of the Senate during the 2000 Electoral College vote, featured, pathetically, in the first scene of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911."

But, then again, your philosophy, evidently, is, "Why dwell on unpleasantness, why dwell on the past?"

Your Nobel Prize doesn't impress me, Little Boy Blue. Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize, and all he and his Secretary of State, Zbignew Brezinski, did was create the mujahadeen, which later morphed into Al Qaeda. (Jimmy got *lots* of people to forget about that one!)

Ah, yes, then there was the year, I think it was 1977, when Jerry Lewis was nominated for a Nobel Prize. ... No, not the Congressman, the comedian. ... Though, it is rather funny that you and Jimmy Carter have such short memories. I guess the joke is on us.

You now come to us pretending you're a radical. So radical that you urge civil disobedience but, at the same time, you support Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. Do you perhaps recall, dear boy, how the Democratic Party treated protestors at the Democratic National Convention in Denver? .. Slip your mind, did it? ... Then again, your memory is a sort of "iffy-thing," isn't it?

Al Gore, take the silver spoon that's in your mouth, shove it where the moon don't shine ... and just go away.

"Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon."

I think they'll quickly find out this isn't the UK...how much are the Berkeley tree sitters beiing fined?

"Berkeley's infamous tree-sitters have been hit with a rude surprise since they came down to earth: Judges are socking them with thousands of dollars in fines and legal fees.

"Ironically, much of the money -- which could total more than $10,000 per sitter -- is going straight to the University of California, the very institution the tree-sitters were protesting as they tried to save a grove of trees outside Memorial Stadium."

and don't bother flaming me because I really don't have an opinion on whether clean coal is good or bad...I just wonder if Al is going to pay their legal fees since he's obviously endorsing this

(When I was a Lad they taught us that part of Civil Disobedience was willingness to accept your punishment)

Gore for civil disobiedience? Fine Al - go down to the Dominion Site in Wise County, Virginia and we will all follow through. But to call for CD actions form "young people" and not be engaging in it yourself is bit cowardly, don't you think.

The CD owners can't answer your question, wsws. Now answer mine? What has wsws ever done of note other than run your occasionally interesting website?

Acting on behalf of the economic elite, the Democratic Party's historic role has been to make sure that potentially radical, revolutionary movements don't get out of hand -- don't go any further than the confines of the Democratic/Republican duopoly’s oligarchic agenda.

The Democratic Party:

-- sold out the working class in the 1870s (re. Tammany Hall);

-- sold out the Populist movement in the 1890s;

-- sold out the labor movement in the 1930s;

-- sold out the civil rights movement;

-- sold out the environmentalist movement;

-- and sold out the antiwar movement -- many, many times.

The Democratic Party has betrayed the antiwar movement *four* times in the past six years!

1.) In 2002, the Democratic Party told the voting public that that year's Congressional elections would *not* be about whether the US should invade Iraq. … Invading Iraq was a done-deal, a bipartisan decision. … Instead, we were told, and in no uncertain terms, that the 2002 Congressional elections would be about “other issues.” … In other words, peace was, officially, “off the table.”

2.) In 2004, what could have been a national referendum on Iraq -- a war candidate, George Bush, versus a (sort of) peace candidate, Howard Dean -- soon became a choice between two war candidates, Bush and Kerry.

3.) In 2006, the Democrats captured both houses of Congress chiefly because millions of people were voting Democratic to end the War. However, in the days that followed, the Democratic leadership wasted no time making it clear that ending the War wasn’t going to happen.

4.) Which brings us to 2008 and Barack Obama. ... “Obama the Peace Candidate” has now become “Obama the Warmonger.” ... Whereas during the primaries, Obama’s position was that he would start withdrawing “some” troops within 16 months of his presidency, *after* the primaries Obama “clarified” his position on Iraq -- his position now being that if the commanders in the field say we should stay in Iraq, we stay.

In short, Obama wants to be a war president just as bad as George Bush and John McCain want to be war presidents.

Obama supports two wars now in progress -- Iraq and Afghanistan -- and has indicated his willingness to engage in two more wars --Iran and Pakistan -- with the use of nuclear weapons "not off the table."

Indeed, Pakistan has already been invaded; with barely a peep from “peace candidate” Obama.

The Democratic-Republican duopoly will never allow a national election to become a referendum on war or peace. … Why? … Because they know damn well that the American public will vote for peace every time.

-- We know Obama won’t stand up to Wall Street.

-- We know Obama won’t stand up to the banks.

-- We know Obama won't stand up to the oil companies.

-- We know Obama won't stand up to the drug companies.

-- We know Obama won’t stand up to Wall Street.

-- We know Obama won’t stand up to the banks.

-- We know Obama won't stand up to the military-industrial complex. … Like McCain, he wants to *increase* the Pentagon budget.

-- We know Obama won't stand up to the insurance lobby; in particular, the healthcare insurers. … Like McCain and Hillary, Obama is against single-payer healthcare; albeit every advanced industrial country has it.

-- We know Obama won't stand up to the Christian fundamentalists -- the Christian fundamentalist who want to turn the United States into a theocracy.

-- In short, we know Obama and the Democratic Party won’t stand up to the economic elite – and why should they? – they *represent* the economic elite!

So what is the “change” Obama is talking about?!

Real change will occur only when a third party movement becomes a genuine oppositional party vis-a-vis "The Business Party" -- the Democratic-Republican duopoly.

In any given presidential election, 45-50% of eligible voters don’t vote. Therefore, let’s say 50% of all eligible voters vote this November. If that were the case, with support for a progressive third party from “the soft left” (e.g., CommonDreams.org MoveOn.org, the Huffington Post, The nation magazine, et al), Election Day results might look something like this:

Obama (or McCain) -- 21%

McCain (or Obama) -- 19%

Nader, McKinney, et al -- 10%

Not Voting -- 50%

Now what do you imagine the vote-totals would look like if the above-named politicians (Boxer, Sanders, Gore, Kucinich, Kennedy, Waters, Lee, et al) practiced what they preached and joined Nader and McKinney in a third party movement? … There’s a very good chance they would win.

Instead, they remain within the oligarchic confines of the Democratic/Republican duopoly. A duopoly that vigilantly guards the interests of those at the top.
And so this is the Democratic Party -- specifically, the left-wing of the Democratic Party.

The left-wing of the Democratic Party is of critical importance to the economic elite, especially in times of political turmoil and economic stress, such as millions of Americans are now experiencing. Whatever tensions, whatever radical sentiments begin to crop up, there's the Democratic Party to see to it that such rumblings don't get out of hand.

Crucial to this con game are the people who go along with it, re. the Democrats mentioned above.

So, Al Gore, you’re not fooling anybody. You’re so wedded to the Democratic/Republican duopoly that you allowed the 2000 election to be blatantly stolen from you. And all without a peep. (See the first scene of “Fahrenheit 911,” where Gore pathetically – and obediently -- oversees the 2000 Electoral College vote in the Senate.)

For some, the choice is “the lesser of the two evils.” Whereas, for others, the choice is economic survival (if not *species* survival), versus “more of the same.”

And “more of the same” is what can be expected as long as the Democratic/Republican duopoly dominates the political process.

Ralph Nader's father was once asked what he thought of a third party. Mr. Nader replied: "I'd settle for two!"

Interestingly enough, the owners of CommonDreams.org run articles that are SIGNIFICANTLY TO THE LEFT of their presidential preferences.

CommonDreams' ownership is supporting Barack Obama. ... In 2000, they supported Al Gore, and in 2004 they supported John Kerry. ... But if CD ownership truly believed in the philosophy of the articles they publish, they would reject both Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.

CommonDreams would, instead, urge support for a third party movement. A progressive third party movement would be in near-perfect agreement with the philosophy of the articles CD publishes.

Yet CD supports Barack Obama -- who is nowhere *near* the philosophy of the articles you see here at this site!

The same can be said of those who occupy the left-wing of the Democratic Party --Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, Mario Cuomo, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, et al. They are all significantly to the left of Obama and the Democratic mainstream, yet:

a.) they support Barack Obama and,

b.) they refuse to break with the Democratic Party.

Why do they remain with a party that has enabled the Bush Administration, time and time again, to do whatever it damn well pleases?

The answer is ... PROPERTY.

The aforementioned Democrats value their elected office -- their political property -- over their purported political principles.

For example, above is an article CommonDreams has published, indicating that Al Gore is encouraging civil disobedience on behalf of an environmental issue. Gore's encouraging people to commit civil disobedience would, logically, put him considerably to the left of the party he supports, the Democratic Party, and considerably to the left of the candidate he endorses, Barack Obama.

So Al ("Oh-It's-OK-I-Don't-Mind-Being-Cheated-Out-of-the-Presidency-It-Might- Upset-the-Apple-Cart") Gore ... wants it both ways. ... Like CommonDreams.org, and like MoveOn.org and like the Huffington Post, and like The Nation magazine, and like similar "soft left" strongholds, Al Gore wants to *espouse* progressive, even radical ideas, but he winds up supporting a corporatist candidate like Barack Obama -- who has shown that he has absolutely no desire to take a stand on a wide variety of progressive issues. Rhetoric aside, his voting record proves that.

What would happen if Democrats such as Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy (when he was well), Mario Cuomo, Al Gore, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Bernie Sanders, et al, put *PRINCIPLES OVER PROPERTY,* broke with the Democratic Party, and joined forces with Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney?

For starters, their collective “name recognition” would be something that mainstream media could not ignore.

Beyond that, they would garner millions of votes for their third party. And they might very possibly win.

Such a party would be a true oppositional party to the Democratic/Republic duopoly.

So why don’t they do that, other than because they want to protect their political “property,” i.e., their incumbency in their elected office? ... Put another way -- why are they in the Democratic Party in the first place, given that the Democratic Party:

a.) has moved so radically to the right in recent years;

b.) has been complicit in the mass-murder, also known as the Iraq War;

c.) has been complicit in the financial crisis we now face, and

d,) has been complicit in class warfare, i.e., has allowed the Republicans to further exploit the poor and further shrink the middle class?

In short: why are the above Democrats, and those like them, still in a party that goes against their purported political principles?

The Democratic Party and the Republican Party are two sides of the same coin.
They are a duopoly that represents not the “democratic-many” but rather the “oligarchic-few. “

The Democratic Party serves a crucial function for the ruling class, the economic elite. ... Should things start "heating up" on the left, should economic turmoil, social unrest and the class tensions that inevitably occur given the inequalities inherent in a capitalist economy -- should such status quo-endangering rumblings develop into broad-based, progressive movements, the Democratic Party is there to co-opt, dilute and eventually betray those progressive, broad-based movements.

The first thing the Democratic Party says to the people committed to these broad-based, democratic movements is "T.I.N.A." -- "There Is No Alternative" -- there is no alternative to the two-party choice; so you need to let us, the Democratic Party, speak on your behalf.

The Democratic Party, and especially the left-wing of the Democratic Party, thus becomes a political "safety valve" for any status quo-endangering movement that may pose a threat to the economic elite.

(Continued)

Well Al Gore, like Jimmy Peanut Carter before him, are recycling politicians at least. How green can you get?

The Democratic Party is certainly part of the Responsible Enviromentalist Corporatist Movement, too, PLUS the average donkey lets off a lot less methane into the environment that the average elephant does. Al Gore is a positive carbon credit! Look what he did for computers!

mikep,

That was awesome!

what about drastically reducing electricity use?

If Gore thinks civil disobedience is a good idea then why doesn't he do it, and show us all how it's done? But of course, he won't, since he really doesn't give a damn, all he cares about is promoting his own image as some sort of savior, and of course, raking in HUGE bucks from his corporate buddies. (Well over $100 million since he sold out his country in 2000, and rising rapidly.)

What an embarrassment this hypocrite, right-winger and corporate polluter is to our nation. He's never once stood up for anything in his entire life, never once risked anything, never once took a firm stand on anything. He likes to make speeches, but he never actually does anything. This is so ridiculous. Civil disobedience for the environment, but not, of course, to oppose illegal wars and to save lives, or to oppose the racial cleansing disguised as a War on Drugs?

Question for Mr. Gore. Since you advocate civil disobedience, are you willing to cough up a chunk of your misbegotten hundred million to help those who protest pay their legal bills? Thanks to greedy, corrupt lawyers like you and your buddies Clinton, Kerry, Biden, Obama, Edwards, etc., ad nauseum, the legal fees would be outrageous, enough to bankrupt most young people. Or is this just a way for you lawyers to make a few more bucks?

"Kill pragmatism, long live idealism and PROGRESSIVISM."
-progressiveparty

What's wrong with pragmatism?

That finger wagger in the picture sure is getting bloated from over consumption! Poor guy. Just what did he do when he was in office, I forget?

How about protesting Gore's "carbon budget" at his multi-bathroomed" residence in Tennessee? Gore's one month energy bill for electric power is bigger than my family's for 2 years! Another charlatan making huge sums of money off the the "green" issues of the day. Sheesh.

If you decide to protest or even organize a protest here in America outside of a pre-determined "Free Speech Zone" the police will knock you to the street...spray you down with chemicals... then arrest you and keep you for a short period of time with or without a charge, then, after a few hours or days will drop what ever reason for your detention and send you home with a personal directed strong warning to never protest again without their permission or they will treat you even worse the next time!
They have your name and pic now...they know who you are and are sharing that info with police around the world!

It's past time for civil disobedience.

Pick any one of the many urgent social causes and...Fight back!
After 8 years of Bush you really have nothing to loose.

Gore for once do the right thing ...lead all of the people..not just the right, white people.

Gore, are you listening to the people.... why don’t you condone civil disobedience for the bail out?

I admire Gore so much more now than I did when he was mired in the muck of the DLC and choosing Lieberman as his running mate.

I have to say: this is one more reason why I will not and cannot support Barack Obama - his support for so-called "clean coal". WAKE UP and vote for alternative parties and vote AGAINST our corrupt two-party system. Kill pragmatism, long live idealism and PROGRESSIVISM.

I agree. Where is he anyway, flying around in one of his jets, polluting the skies? Or maybe at his mansion that must require an obscene amount of energy?

There is nothing wrong with civil disobedience. If we pay taxes, we should have the right to publically oppose issues with which we disagree.

Form a 3rd party Al.

So Gore is advocating civil disobedience? Maybe he is the leader we need to rally behind. Where is he leading protests? Of all of us, he surely is one who can unite the Green Movement. Why is he stopping at just advocating, and not actually gathering support and directing these civil disobedience protests?

“If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it.”
--Julius Caesar