Conservatives can't get over Gore's win
Or at least the two at Friendly Fire.
Chris is so annoyed (or perhaps jealous of Gore's corpulent good looks?) that he's come up with a weak, and somewhat incoherent argument about why Gore doesn't deserve the Nobel Peace prize. It goes something like this:Gore isn't a peacemaker because getting the world to supposedly accept some crackpot theory about global warming which may or may not harm us, might or might not save lives. Peace, apparently has to be only about stopping a war right now.
Well, if that narrow definition of who deserves the peace prize, then perhaps Medicine Sans Frontiers (which won in 1999) doesn't either. The humanitarian group ministers to the medical needs of people all around the world regardless of politics, but that's not directly working toward peace. In fact, they probably help war continue by fixing up injured soldiers I don't remember conservatives griping about that.
How about CalTech scholar Linus Pauling, the scientists whose work lead to the The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, outlawing all but underground nuclear testing. How is he peacemaker under Chris narrow rules?
Peace is about more than the cessation of war, and the Nobel committee, that collection of liberals that conservatives like to sneer at for celebrating other liberals with their silly peace prize, like Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, the Dalai Lama, understands this.
As for the complaint about the prize being political, well duh. When was it not? It's only when the recipient they don't like, such as he man who almost (or did, in the minds of many) win the presidential election in 2000 for the Dems. You guys won the election, but lost on global warming. Get over it and move on.
Well, Gore is pretty hunky.
Hmmmm... well, I actually voted for Al Gore - believe it or not (and I wasn't thrill with the idea).
I just think he's gone way batty with the way he goes to extremes with global warming. As I said in another post, his silliness (carbon credits, future sunken cities, energy wasting concerts) only polarize sides and piss people off.
I would be right with him if he was anywhere near rational.
Could you please stop assuming everyone against Gore is some waste-loving, hawkish, right-wing conservative.
I was raised by environmentalist San Francisco hippies. I voted for Clinton and Gore. I have no dog in any politcal race. I just wade through the issues to figure out who is the less pathetic of the fools.
I'm a little afraid you too easily ignore Gore's sort of silliness out of some kind of political loyalty.
I think that's a huge problem across the world - people being blinded by their politics. Why else would Sean Penn, Kevin Spacey, etc. buddy up to Chavez?
I refuse to ignore idiocy - no matter what political side it comes from.
P.S. I also have a whole slew of idiots on the right - too many to mention. But Bush is at the top of my list.
Signed,
No Right-wing Hawk, just not a Gore lover
Mariel:
Kindly explain the relationship between world peace and backing (with intellectually vacuous statements) an unproven theory based on a fraction of evidence that, if followed, will bankrupt America while India and China ignore it and flourish?
Here's a short list of folks who have done far more for world peace and justice than Al Gore has pondered of in his fume spewing, gas chugging private jet:
- Every shop keeper and fruit stand operator in Baghdad.
- Every farmer in Afghanistan.
- The monks in Burma (Suu Ahn Kyii already earned the NBPP, why not them)?
- Prime Minister Olmert for finishing the Israeli wall and eliminating terrorist attacks that killed hundreds.
- The Commander of Gunatanmo Bay for keeping 500 killers off the street and still providing them Korans and Halal meals