GORE-May have only 10 yrs to save earth from turning to a total frying pan

[Karenca]

Al Gore, Sundance's Leading Man
'An Inconvenient Truth' Documents His Efforts To Raise Alarm on Effects of Global Warming
By William Booth
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 26, 2006; Page A01

PARK CITY, Utah -- Has ever a little indie film faced a greater hurdle? Imagine this sales pitch: Babe, it's a movie about global warming. Starring Al Gore. Doing a slide show.

With charts.

About "soil evaporation."

Improbable? Perhaps. So it's all the more amazing that "An Inconvenient Truth" had its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival on Tuesday night before an enthusiastic audience that gave the former vice president and his movie a big standing O.

Among the film's lessons: Earth's glaciers are melting, the polar bears are screwed, each year sets new heat records. Al Gore sometimes flies coach. He also schleps his own bags.

The morning after his debut as leading man, Gore pronounces this whole Sundance thing "a most excellent time." He is wearing earth tones again. He seems jolly . He brought Tipper and the kids. He is attending parties and posing for pictures with his fans and enjoying macaroni and cheese at the Discovery Channel soiree. He's palling around with Larry David of "Curb Your Enthusiasm," who says, "Al is a funny guy." But he is also a very serious guy who believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan.

Full Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502230.html

[BattyDem]

1. Well, let's see ....

the election is 2 years from now and then he'll have 8 years - or two terms - to save us from the frying pan! :)

[Dead_Parrot]

2. Some days, I look at Gore

then I look at bush, and I can't help thinking that something went wrong. Not just stolen-election wrong, but really wrong. How did it get close enough to steal? Serously, what the fuck were you thinking? (Bush voters, that is).

Hey ho. I hope Gore does decide to run again: Out of the current crop of Dems, He's the one most likely to get us out of the shit.

[Karenca]

3. "He's the one most likely to get us out of the shit."

Absolutely!!

[Erika]

4. Yep. Gore has vision to save us and the earth

W sees corporate profits and the hell with anything else.

[darkmaestro019]

8. I think I know EXACTLY what you mean.....

The FIRST time Bush was selected I was disoriented for days. The second, let's not even go there.

Wrong, as in--that Twilight Zone episode where the guy wakes up in a close-to-home but parallel universe, where all the English has switched what each word means, and the last scene is him with a kid's book and a picture of a dog labelled Wednesday.

Or another one where the guy wound up in a police station in the same situation, and didn't believe it till the cop showed him "real money" and the cash he'd had on him side by side. (The new universe's cash looked just like ours, but blue and not the green we USED to use....uh...let me just get away from that one, cos our peach money wigged me plenty BEFORE I thought of that)

Or for a different show, lol, the many many Treks where they landed somewhere that the Nazis or the Borg won the war already in the past....that one is closer, maybe....

Explained badly and in ramble-ese, but I'm trying to convey the big-eye, little-eye, horrified sense of "What the unmitigated FUCK has just happened and how did I miss it? Where is the wormhole back to the real world?"

[Dead_Parrot]

9. "A dog labelled Wednesday"

Yeah, that's the feeling all right. I haven't seen that episode, but that sums it up nicely. :(

[NNadir]

16. I am not optimistic that anyone can get us out of this shit.

It's probably way too late.

But if anyone would have a shot, it would be Gore.

[Dead_Parrot]

17. Well, "least unlikely" might be more accurate. nt

[NNadir]

22. He is the best shot we have.

I'll never forget when I first heard of him - he was a long shot running against Dukakis for the nomination in 1988.

I thought Gore was a nothing then.

Man have I changed my opinion! I do hope the President-elected will ultimately be seated in the office he has already won. I do not know that it will be enough but much of what little hope we have involves him seeking and taking the office.

[IndyOp]

21. Yes! A round of applause for Dead_Parrot's question:

"I can't help thinking that something went wrong. Not just stolen-election wrong, but really wrong. How did it get close enough to steal?"

What have we been doing (and allowing to be done in our names) that led us to a place where they *could* steal the elections and anyone would believe they were legit.

My list:

Materialism, greed, capitalism as a moral virtue.

Racism.

Militarism.

Failure to be citizens who believe ALL government personnel will lie and it is our job to find out what they are lying about right now and expose them.

Neglect of the 'commons.'

Allowing corporations to be treated as if they have human rights, and allowing humans to be treated as if they have none.

Any to add?



BUSH did not come from out of nowhere - he is just another point along a trajectory that began long ago, and that we have all been complicit in allowing.

I am with Dr. King and Garrett Hardin (Tragedy of the Commons) on this one: What we need now is a true revolution of values!

A new figurehead is not enough --

On edit: Though Gore would *obviously* be a tremendous welcome change - we cannot 'go to sleep' like we did during Clinton. The revolution must come from us.

[rfkrfk]

5. Kyoto , does Gore still oppose submitting the treaty to the Senate?

has Gore changed his position?

http://clinton5.nara.gov/CEQ/19981112-7790.html

>President Clinton has made clear that theUnited States regards the Kyoto Protocol as a work in progress, and that itwill not be submitted for ratification without the meaningful participationof key developing countries<

what would Gore, have us do?


I'm getting kinda tired of...

glaciers are melting, but I won't suggest
to lawmakers as to what to do, all the numbers are secret...

as an enviornmental stance

edit, typo

[Dead_Parrot]

7. Opposed my arse.

Have you read S.Res.98?
----
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--

(1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would--

(A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or

(B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States; and

(2) any such protocol or other agreement which would require the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification should be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement the protocol or other agreement and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement.
----
Kyoto's failure can hardly be blames on Clinton/Gore, with that attitude (Take a bow, Mr Kerry). How long do you think it would take to fill out the "detailed" Sec. 2 requirements?

[sandnsea]

10. 95 Senators voted for that

Clinton nor Gore, neither one, would ever have signed Kyoto. Why are you blaming this sense of the senate on Kerry? They were all in agreement that more work needed to be done on Kyoto. Environmentalists were all over Gore's ass on Kyoto. I don't get this obsession to blame all the world's woes on John Kerry. Just weird.

[Dead_Parrot]

11. No, the point was...

that the requirements that S.Res.98 put on Kyoto effectively shoved it onto the back burner for a good few years before it would get anywhere near the Senate again. At the time it probably seemed like a good idea, although with hindsight it screwed us all royally.

Blaming Kyoto's failure on Gore is therefore going a couple of steps in the wrong direction: The only one who actually buried it is the gimp in the whitehouse now.

Incidentally, "Clinton nor Gore, neither one, would ever have signed Kyoto" is slightly inaccurate, since Gore did sign it - although without ratification by the Senate, it's just a piece of paper.
I only mentioned Kerry to be annoying. :evilgrin:

[rfkrfk]

12. does Gore have preferences for 'Kyoto-follow-on' ?

if so, I don;t know about them.

what number is Gore suggesting?
what number is Gore suggesting fo the US?

the Kyoto treaty ends, in 2012.

I assume something is planned for after 2012.

Gore wants ?????
.........
why do you write that Kyoto is a failure?
OK, so the treaty has only 75% of its intended effect.
The treaty is in full force, and has been
ratufied by a hundred-plus countries.

[sandnsea]

14. After revision

Which kind of makes the whole Clinton/Gore Kyoto discussion moot. You can't say Kyoto has been ratified by a hundred plus countries when many of those countries wouldn't ratify the treaty Clinton and the Senate rejected either.

[Dead_Parrot]

15. No idea...

...he hasn't even said he's going for nomination yet. It's a bit early to be after campaign details, isn't it?

As for what comes comes after Kyoto, that's what the Montreal conference was about - except shrub wiped his arse on that, too.

And yes, without the US, India and China taking part (as sched. I signatories, for the latter) Kyoto is a bit of lame duck. It's basically just Europe and Japan, and that's not nearly enough.

[sandnsea]

13. Weird obsession

Like I said. Gore did not sign for the treaty to be ratified, he didn't have the authority. Lots of countries signed the protocol. Some ratified later, some didn't. Some did after it was revised. Gore's signature and the senate vote did not serve the same purpose.

[Silver Gaia]

6. Theatrical Trailer

of “An Inconvenient Truth” (seems to be exclusive at moviefone.com — works best with IE):

http://movies.aol.com/movie_exclusive_an_inconvenient_truth?ncid=AOLMOV00150000000001

[Pirate Smile]

23. NYCGirl posted a link that will let Mac people watch.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=867775&mesg_id=871217

[NNadir]

18. One more vote will get this thread on the greatest page.

The film could use the buzz.

[blindpig]

19. Well and good.

But I don't see how Gore reconciles his environmentalism with his belief with maintaining a growth economy? I don't believe we can "save the earth" and have an eternally growing economy. To believe thus is science fiction and I'm still waiting for my flying car.

[calmblueocean]

20. Enough with the 'earth tones' cracks.

I hate the media.

[Karenca]

24. We all do!

:grouphug:

The media has played a tremendous part in the ruination of our country!

[NNadir]

25. Hey Karenca!

I don't think I know you, but thanks for the thread.

It was nice to learn of this film.

[Karenca]

26. Thanks....

Jimmy Carter was right and everyone laughed at him.

I just don't get how we let this happen...this idiot in our house
who is not only murdering thousands of innocent people
but destroying our planet, as Gore says "frying it'

He couldn't care less---as he says: "We'll all be dead then".

It's all unbelievable to me....surrealistic.

[ramapo]

27. Can you imagine...

...the current president of the US standing in front of a real audience, presenting a slide show on anything that requires thought, logic, and oral skills?

What contribution will Bush make to the world as an ex-president?

If only Gore had acted like the person that he is during the 2000 campaign. He may have actually lost but perhaps he would've struck a cord with people.

[NNadir]

28. Answers to your 2 questions.

#1. No.

#2. Hopefully his contribution will be take up space in a prison cell, ideally Milosevic's old cell.