Gore to be the VP on a Hillary ticket.

I know the odds are zero for that. When I dream, I think of the thing that has the capability to cause the most conservative heart attacks and ulcers. And I am for that thing.

March 20, 2007: Joan Walsh writes, Hillary Clinton's latest hawkish stance on keeping permanent bases [in Iraq] deserves more attention than it's gotten in a week dominated by the U.S. attorney-firing scandal.

March 21, 2007: Joan Walsh publishes an interview with Anne Lamott and an opinion piece on Al Gore.

Am I overlooking that important, critical piece on Hillary's wholesale support of the Bush doctrine? Surely a competent news editor would not neglect to publish something which "deserves more attention" than the attorney-firing scandal? No less than 3 piece appear in today's Salon about the attorney-firing scandal; since news of the scandal broke, Salon have published dozens of articles, opinion pieces, and AP wire stories about the scandal. There must be some hidden subdirectory at Salon where dozens of articles take a critical view of Hillary Clinton's support of Bush administration policies, as it "deserves more attention" than the attorney-firing scandal. Surely I am simply overlooking the proper place to click.

... to want to see him savaged by another presidential campaign. While I have no doubt the world would be a much better place if he'd been inaugurated in 2000, that is past. In 2007 and 2008 he's doing important work and doing it well. Let him do it, and leave the churlish and childish campaign trail to his lessers.

Al Gore did not win an Oscar. The documentary he was in (and was instrumental in creating) won the Oscar, an possibly the documentary's director won one as well (don't re-call). Unlike movies, I don't believe the subjects of/in the documentary are even eligible for an Oscar.

Bukk364; that's kind of how I already feel about Obama, and even moreso in terms of the 2008 presidential term--I like his energy and idealism and his attempts to instill hope in the nation, all of which are things I can see being bled out of him by the end of a campaign. And even if he survived and won the presidency, he's going to be stuck with four years of unraveling the Gordian knot that his predecessor spent eight years creating.

It's a conundrum, to me...because while it's true that only our best and brightest candidates have a shot at undoing the damage of King George the Ignorant, I don't feel ready to sacrifice them to the soul-killing business of undoing that damage. I'd almost-- almost--rather have a moderate Republican win in 2008 to force the GOP to handle their own mess, and hand it back to the progressives in 2012 so they can try to make some progress afterwards.

I ran the idea that Al Gore would make a great candidate and a good president past my irrational-rightie-yet-smart old pal Bill.

He hooted, and called his wife and children to witness poor old Uncle Tom's delusion. And he went back to explaining why that TV character on "24" who tortures people every week is a hero for him and for his daughters, and why torture is so important for America.

They hate Gore as much as they hate Hillary, as much as they hate Bill Clinton. Barack may be our only chance, because they have not had as much time to build up as much organized hatred.

Put me in the group saying, "twenty years of Bush and Clinton is enough!" Hilary is the same product as Lieberman and the time has come for vision and leadership, not evasion and attack. I voted for Obama when he ran for Senator, the guy has a magnetic quality that was evident in his Senate run and has to be experienced to belive. I wish he would come home to Illinois and season a bit because he may not be ready. Edwards seems to have the stuff but will never have the traction necessary to catch the front runners.

That leaves Gore and I did contribute at DraftGore.com. He is my choice and he would be a great candidate and president. Having said that, what he is doing now is far more important than the Oval Office and I quietly hope he decides to keep on with that.

I can no longer stomach Hilary and Bubba and she CAN'T WIN, lets move on! So, I made another contribution today, this time to the Obama camp; he may be shy on experience and some issues need explaining, like the contributions from Excelon and CTF funding, but he has a rare inspirational quality that we need.

JAC

Personally, I will never trust a man who takes a one million dollar study commissioned by the White House to "finally settle" a controversial issue "with science," and then lies about the conclusions of the final report on the campaign trail.

Is that what it means to "settle an issue with science"? When the science doesn't validate the message demanded by your supporters, then you just spin the report around until the conclusions point in the opposite direction?

That's the kind of trick we'd expect from Bush. If it's wrong when Bush does it, isn't it wrong when Gore does it too?

Actually, from a republican POV, Clinton-Gore weren't all that bad. In a Nixon-goes-to-China kind of way, they were able to do things Repubs only dreamed about such as NAFTA & welfare reform. The stock market boomed, unemployment was low, taxes pretty much stayed in place (with the usual bit of trivial reform & soak the rich bloviating). Plus there was someone in the Whitehouse to blame for everything we didn't like (OK City, USS Cole, WTC I, etc). All-in-all, not a bad time to be a republican. Kyoto went down in flames in the senate, so his green leanings didn't really matter.

I say let him have it. Frankly, after 4 years of listening to Bush being clubbed daily on NPR, I'm worn out and would welcome the break if I got four years of a Dixiecrat like WJC or Algore.