This would be a great step forward for our country! Finally someone who is willing to make a change working with someone who has made a change!

Al Gore as Obama's Vice President I think would be a marriage made in heaven. Take note though, Obama has not ruled out expanding nuclear - don't know what treehugger's view on this is?

http://www.counterpunch.org/nukes.html

The fact that both Al Gore's and Obama's answers on the issue leave a lot of maneuvering room suggests that they are both pragmatic about solutions. There is even talk of nuclear tankers:

http://www.trade2save.com/blog/2008/03/26/are-nuclear-powered-tankers-on-the-horizon/

Al Gore as Obama's Vice President I think would be a marriage made in heaven. Take note though, Obama has not ruled out buildng more nuclear power plants - don't know what treehugger's view on this is?

http://www.counterpunch.org/nukes.html

The fact that both Al Gore's and Obama's answers on the issue leave a lot of maneuvering room suggests that they are both pragmatic about solutions. There is even talk of nuclear tankers:

http://www.trade2save.com/blog/2008/03/26/are-nuclear-powered-tankers-on-the-horizon/

Al Gore as Obama's Vice President I think would be a marriage made in heaven. Take note though, Obama has not ruled out buildng more nuclear power plants - don't know what treehugger's view on this is?

http://www.counterpunch.org/nukes.html

The fact that both Al Gore's and Obama's answers on the issue leave a lot of maneuvering room suggests that they are both pragmatic about solutions. There is even talk of nuclear tankers:

http://www.trade2save.com/blog/2008/03/26/are-nuclear-powered-tankers-on-the-horizon/

It will be interesting to is if people are ready for drastic measures and actually vote for him. Not too many people with hummers will.

I doubt Gore would accept the job... He's already said no to the possibility of fulfilling other cabinet positions.

And isn't Gore in favor of a carbon tax? Cap and trade gives too much leeway to be effective. Taxing carbon seems to be the only way to provide an overall limit to greenhouse gases.

This may have pushed me over the edge toward Clinton. I think I'm tired of arrogance.

Obama, says that he will use Gore as a source to "tap into". That he .. "will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem." as though Mr. Gore is at his beck and call.

Since both candidates are so very, very similar, to make my decision, I'm finding that one has a tinge of arrogance to each commitment and within each speech he gives.

I doubt that Gore would accept the VP position. However, Secretary of Energy wouldn't be a bad place to be, considering his positions on the environment and global warming.

Mikey, you realize that if he wins, he'll be the president of the united states, right?

Mikey, Al Gore should be at any President's beck and call, if he is committed to a political solution to AGW. He certainly should at least be willing to discuss the issue with any President.
It's not arrogance, it's a reasonable expectation.

Obama is anything but the candidate of Treehugger. He is a huge supporter of coal and nuclear and ethanol, and supports nothing more than the status quo on environmental issues.

How is he on other issues? Not much better. He wants 100,000 more troops in Iraq, has no position on military contractors, voted for the Patriot Act, and wasn't even there to vote for half of his Senate career.

So why am I railing against Obama? I do see what people like in him, and I'm not a Hillary supporter. Nor am I a McCain guy. I'm not here for a presidential candidate.

My favorite is Mike Gravel (www.gravel2008.us), who recently dropped out of the Democratic race to become a Libertarian. But I'm not asking you to vote for him. I'm asking you to support his idea: The National Initiative for Democracy.

This proposed law would add a new branch to the government, allowing citizens to propose and vote on laws, much like they do in 24 states, in many local areas, and in Switzerland. To read more about it (and read the text of the law) and vote for the idea, go to www.ni4d.us and www.vote.org.

Yes, I fear that Mikey doesn't get it. People who have a big commitment to change the world would love to be at the President's beck and call if that means they get to influence how the future unfolds.

Mikey has it quite backwards, in my view.

I find this to be a hopeful prospect. I am from Canada and I will not get to cast any ballots, but I watch closely. I would be very supportive of someone in the American leadership who can take some real steps to deal with the problems that the entire planet will have to address together, and right eff'n now.

Sure, there you can always pick things apart to the Nth degree - but don't take the possibility for genuine progress for granted, especially in this context. Reflecting on the last 8 years, I think its indisputable that the world needs this superpower to immenently take on the most pressing challenges that we face as a species and a biosphere.

I find this to be a hopeful prospect. I am from Canada and I will not get to cast any ballots, but I watch closely. I would be very supportive of someone in the American leadership who can take some real steps to deal with the problems that the entire planet will have to address together, and right eff'n now.

Sure, there you can always pick things apart to the Nth degree - but don't take the possibility for genuine progress for granted, especially in this context. Reflecting on the last 8 years, I think its indisputable that the world needs this superpower to immenently take on the most pressing challenges that we face as a species and a biosphere.

It's nice to see a candidate at least address the issue of climate change. I'm glad it was Obama. I doubt Gore would take a position within the cabinet (definitely not VP) since I've heard him say he's tired of playing the politics game. I'm sure he would be a top advisor, but not on the presidential payroll.

I just got my voter registration for PA. Fingers crossed for the Pennsylvania primaries.

@Mikey

How is Obama assuming anything? Arrogance? More like ignorance on your part for failing to read the whole article.

Obama said, "He's somebody I talk to on a regular basis. I'm already consulting with him in terms of these issues..."

Sounds to me like Gore is already working with Obama. If Gore is adamant about change, I think working closely with the President is a good direction.

And if we suddenly start having another mini- or average ice age? Then what?

I am all for doing more with less. Talk to people (of average means) who lived through the Great Depression or WW II. It was all about conservation and holding on to what you have.

Nowadays, we can embrace new technologies as they emerge. The president will end up being a figurehead or a puppet to lobbies.
Real changes will truly be at the grass roots level and driven by greed/money etc. We ourselves are the ones in charge of our own destinies.

For better disclosure, I will be voting for the old man. Sorry, there's just too much chicanery and controversy going on with the others.

Whomever becomes president, it will not keep me from riding my bike to work or change when I can get an (hopefully American Made) electric car. It will not change when I can go off the grid or keep me from choosing not to consume just to keep up with Mr. Jones.

Good Luck,

vsk

I think the presidential candidates are all too gentle and reserved in their approach to environmental remediation, for fear of losing too many votes from those who don't care a whit for the future of the earth, or who have other things on their minds. You know who I would vote for? A candidate with a tough-love approach to environmental policy, someone with enough backbone to make great strides toward eliminating highway subsidies and shift that to freight and transit rail. Someone with enough political savvy to outmaneuver the automobile lobbyists and the "clean coal" charlatans. There are plenty of checks on the president's power, so a strong-willed president doesn't necessarily equate a dictator. Sooner or later, the worse things get, I hope that person will appear.

Gore seems to be on the save the earth bandwagon but how serious is he?

Houston, TX. Senior staffers at the democratic campaign offices of Senator Hillary Clinton continue to deny the existence of a leaked report outlining plans to outlaw all forms of professional auto racing in the United States. Citing environmental concerns and the high cost of fuels used in the sport at a time when consumers are paying over $3.00 per gallon at the gas pumps, the report which was widely distributed Tuesday, purports to reveal a detailed strategy effectively signaling the death of NASCAR to be put in motion upon a democratic presidential win in November.

The Environmental Protection Agency has long presented the argument that auto racing represents a huge pollution problem. For example, every weekend during Busch/NASCAR racing season typically 43 cars drive 300 to 500 miles each day. That's 12,900 to 21,500 miles on race day, excluding practicing and qualifying. These cars until this year were still running on leaded gas, which has been banned from passenger vehicles since the mid-1970s. They also do not
use catalytic converters on their exhaust systems.

Although the EPA phased leaded gas out of the consumer market more than 30 years ago, its use in stock cars has gone on with the agency's blessing--an exemption was written into the Clean Air Act. All that will change if the democratic NASCAR doomsday plan goes into effect. Lead lubricates engines, helping them run smoothly, but it's also a neurotoxin that can lower IQ, particularly among young children.

In December 2005, a draft EPA document titled Air Quality Criteria for Lead stated that leaded fuel may pose a serious risk to residents living in the vicinity of racetracks, fuel attendants, racing crew and staff, and spectators.

In a pilot study published in the February 2006 issue of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, by the Indiana University School of Medicine found elevated blood lead levels
among some mechanics and crew members of a NASCAR race team. Specifically, the median blood lead level in 47 tested individuals was 9.4 micrograms per deciliter, which approaches the EPA's own risk threshold of 10 micrograms per deciliter, over which toxiceffects can be expected. Nineteen of those individuals had blood levels at the EPA threshold.

The leaked report gives a startling insight to the democratic party’s preparations for assuming the presidency, describing cost-benefit analyses of fuel consumption, friendly voices in Congress
> who would support the measure and a rough timetable for introducing legislation aimed at dismantling what has been described as the
fastest growing sport in America. In 2004, a total of 3.5 million fans watched races sponsored by NASCAR. Once concentrated mainly in the
Deep South, NASCAR now lays claim to audiences throughout the United States and even in Mexico.

Despite repeated denials by party officials the story will not die. Senator Clinton herself, when told of media inquiries on the subject, feigned ignorance of such a plan. The exact source of the original report has not been named but investigators in the media have narrowed it down to someone in the democratic campaign offices in either Atlanta or Houston.

The great thing about Obama is he brings a serious demeanor to the table. He means business. I believe he could be one of our greatest presidents. I would hope Al Gore would be the VP. That would be a dream team!

The great thing about Obama is he brings a serious demeanor to the table. He means business. I believe he could be one of our greatest presidents. I would hope Al Gore would be the VP. That would be a dream team!

The great thing about Obama is he brings a serious demeanor to the table. He means business. I believe he could be one of our greatest presidents. I would hope Al Gore would be the VP. That would be a dream team!

After reading many of the posts, I find several things.

One, we should, as citizens be at our President's beckon call. I don't like politics personally, but our society does not change if we abdicate our responsibility to serve in the interests of the 7th generation from now.

Two, none of the major candidates will change the world any more than Kennedy got the U.S. to the moon. The question is who can motivate and facilitate the changes that we want?

Three, there are a range of voices posted here. I respect them all equally. That said, if we only articulate suspicion and blame without cooperation, nothing will change. WE, as a unit must use the leverage of our resources and make sustainability a market force so that corporations will obey.

Four, may I suggest a paradigm shift? Instead of "Supply and Demand" I prefer "I Demand and you Supply".

I am a small business man who is converting to sustainable practices in PVC Free. I seek each day to lessen my impact and teach my children respect for the Earth and it's creatures, including humans. I look forward to moderation and genuine respect converting our behavior or even raw capitalism. However, polarization did not make the nation take notice of MLK Jr. or Ghandi. It was the uniting power of a dream.

After reading many of the posts, I find several things.

One, we should, as citizens be at our President's beckon call. I don't like politics personally, but our society does not change if we abdicate our responsibility to serve in the interests of the 7th generation from now.

Two, none of the major candidates will change the world any more than Kennedy got the U.S. to the moon. The question is who can motivate and facilitate the changes that we want?

Three, there are a range of voices posted here. I respect them all equally. That said, if we only articulate suspicion and blame without cooperation, nothing will change. WE, as a unit must use the leverage of our resources and make sustainability a market force so that corporations will obey.

Four, may I suggest a paradigm shift? Instead of "Supply and Demand" I prefer "I Demand and you Supply".

I am a small business man who is converting to sustainable practices in PVC Free. I seek each day to lessen my impact and teach my children respect for the Earth and it's creatures, including humans. I look forward to moderation and genuine respect converting our behavior or even raw capitalism. However, polarization did not make the nation take notice of MLK Jr. or Ghandi. It was the uniting power of a dream.

The EnviroCzar with powers and big budget. That would be apropos. Bring America into the 21st century at last.

I am all for the push for alternative energy. I myself have been researching and using alternative and renewable energy for awhile now. Not because it is popular or because I’m trying to save the earth, children, future, etc. I do it because it is cheaper and anything to prevent relying on the government is a plus in my book.

I appreciate that Al Gore is one of the only Politians that is trying to address the issue, but jumping on the "inconvenient truth" bandwagon is something I cannot support. I have no idea where this guy gets his info. This global warming scare tactic is a load of crap.

Do some research before you believe anything that come out of a politician’s mouth.

Global warming test: How much do you know?
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There's been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away -- all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years. Earth has survived everything in its time. It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in Arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears the earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It's powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out. Do you think this is the first time that's happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive glass, like fluorine. When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago we didn't have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can't imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven't got the humility to try. We've been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we're gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us.

If humans are causing "climate change", and you want to "save" the planet, simple solution, get rid of the humans.

To drastic for you? Then just get rid of some of the the humans.

No can do ? Then just deny some of them a high standard of living.

Not fair? Then make Gore your god and let him decide what you can and cannot do to make your life better.

Sound familiar?

"Y'know Barak this used to be my office once, for all of ten minutes."

All joking aside, I think Al has already done great job in bringing attention to global warming. He converted me, for one. Now that he's raised awareness so dramaticallly he can return to Washington and exert more leverage there.
If he had a sympathetic and supporting president behind him I think they could finally start to get things done. And, much as we Europeans hate to admit it, the fact remains that, when the US leads on issues, the rest of the world follows.

Barak Obama is my life, my love, and my soul mate baby oh yeah peace out homie you gunna win this primary then win this election hit it hard and you will be rewarded!!!!!!! %$#%^&$^$%^ OHHHHHH

- BILLL U BONG