Today's Nobel News

Friday, October 12, 2007
The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded yesterday and it was shared by former US Vice President Al Gore and United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Now, I'm all for saving the planet, going green, and trying to reverse global warming (note to self: put more effort into recycling...) but should Gore and the IPCC have been awarded the Nobel PEACE Prize? Wouldn't their efforts fall under something like the prize for science instead? Oh wait, there isn't one for "science"? They've seperated out Chemistry, Physics, Medicine, Literature, Peace and Economics... Hmmm, I guess Peace is probably the only category Gore's work (and that of the IPCC) would fall under. My bad. Perhaps the Nobel Foundation should consider expanding their categories.

I like to think that this Captain is pretty green - the Swiftsure, afterall, is powered by wind power. No fossil fuels aboard whatsoever. And we're considering solar panels but that's proving a bit of a logistical nightmare. Back to Gore though. His work, and that of the IPCC and other similar organizations, is extremely important but I don't see the connection necessarily with "peace". I would think that there are other people or organizations out there who perhaps are more deserving. What about Mia Farrow who was one of the first to bring the plight of the people in Darfur to the attention of the general public? Or the work of Medecins sans Frontieres/Doctors without Borders? It might just be me, but I don't immediately get the connection between Peace and Climate Change. Can someone more knowledgable than myself explain this?

Without a doubt, the news of Gore being awarded this prestigious honor will fuel the speculation regarding the possibility of him running for office once again. Even before the announcement, there was a renewed push to encourage him to throw his hat back into the political ring. Gore has stated a number of times that he has "no plans" to run for president. Ever since he started using that phrase, I've had my doubts about what his plans are. Sure he may not have plans at this moment, but who knows how those plans will change prior to the deadline for submitting nominations. I'd love to get a Democrat back in the White House (even though I'm not American), but given the current crop of candidates I don't know if any of them are necessarily a good choice. I have issues with all of them.

If Gore doesn't run, I think there's a great chance Hillary will get the nomination and win the election. My concern though is the fact that she'd be the first female US president and this might overshadow more important issues. A similar problem with Obama - he'd be the first African American US president which would likely overshadow everything else just as Hillary's gender would. There's the whole issue of whether Barack Obama is "black enough" which I will not bother commenting on as I think it's ridiculous. However, if Gore DOES run (which I think is highly unlikely), he could become the Ross Perot of this election if he runs as an independent. I'm guessing a large portion of his support comes from those with a tendency to vote Democrat and he'd end up pulling votes away from whomever the Democratic nominee is and quite possibily resulting in a Republican win (god forbid).

There is some controversy over Gore's work/film which is not surprising. The global warming/climate change debate has been raging for years and will not be settled anytime soon.

10 comments:

Sheamus the... said...

that is crazy about star trek...but somehow it makes since. In a JJ sorta way.

Candy Minx said...

I think the democrats need someone else entirely. I doubt people will vote for either Obama or Hillary...but more likely her than him...

I wish they'd find some boring non-dramatic choice with a great team like Obama and Hillary standing behind them...and Kuchinch and Gore...a sort of figurehead like Bush is...plain and not all melodramatic or "extreme"

Probably won't happen and republicans will get reelected...I worry...

Where are you I haven't seen you in ages...

sp said...

I do see a relationship between peace and this years choice for the Nobel Peace prize. The catastrophic results that occur due to global warming leads to stressful conditions for those affected by a hurricane, a flood, etc. Maybe it's a stretch but if we work towards slowing global warming then isn't that a gesture towards peace, a gesture to make the world a better place a more peaceful environment.

Barbara Bruederlin said...

I had heard about the flawed science in Gore's documentary, but don't know quite enough about the sticking points to make a decision. It's not a bad thing to start thinking about our actions, either way.

SME said...

Sp's got a point, but I truly don't understand the criteria for the Nobel Peace Prize either. They seem pretty loose.

I think Ron Paul is the Ross Perot of this campaign, 'cause 5 years from now all the people who thought he was God will be snickering about him and saying "What were we THINKING?"

Jocelyn said...

I don't see Gore entering the race. I also don't quite see how his work is peace-related. It's sort of "consciousness-raising"-related, really.

Whenever I visit your site, I never get to read dumb. You is always smart.

Gardenia said...

You are right about the dynamics should Gore run independent. However, I don't think he will. It is far too late to start. I don't think any of the candidates are what we need, but like you I think Hillary will be it for the dems. I think the popularity Julliani gained during 911 will score him for the Reps, although I think that is his only qualification.

Gore is a brilliant man. He was voted in by the people's vote. I watched our election spectacle that year closely as I live in Florida.
What can I say - it was bad news.

Nobel Peace - well, I think when the oil is gone or dwindling, peace will be a HUGE issue as nations war over the remaining "black gold" - maybe this is the start of recognizing that - the Nobel has been awarded for contributions to humanity's betterment sometimes I think - - ???

I do think a Dem will get in - we are more in debt than ever, foreclosures on homes are at an all time high, a jar of peanut butter costs $10.00 American, a vast amount of Americans are without medical care, including children. Our high school graduates are "dumbed down" despite the current President's "initiatives," most countries are mad at us, current administration wants to continue to take from the poor to enrich the rich, i.e., cut or take away social security, cut children's programs, and mental health programs, instead of pass a fair tax law.

The Dems at least are more socially aware.

Global Warming - there's a lot of very convincing programs on Discovery Channel, scientists at the Antartica taking measurements, counting how many glaciers have melted off or away - don't know if you guys get on TV or not.

Yes, if we all do what we can, it will help some.

Avid Andy said...

Jar of peanut butter costs $10.00 American? Where are you shopping? In NC peanut butter is affordable and plentiful. We are in more debt than ever but it is because of Congress and Bush overspending not because of tax cuts. Govt. revenue is at an all time high. If one of the Socialists (Clinton or Obama) get in office the debt will only increase. Raising taxes on the rich will decreas tax revenue and the social programs (govt health care) will only add to the problem. The top 10% of wage earners pay 65% of the taxes and the top 50% pay 96% of the taxes. That means that the bottom 50% only pay 4% of all income taxes. What is fair to you?? To me it would be a flat tax. Get rid of the bloated IRS and let everyone pay the same percentage with no loopholes.

Gardenia said...

I dunno I wouldn't consider myself a rich taxpaper - perhaps a bottom one, but my taxes come in at 27%, not 4% when I get my paycheck - that is in the U.S. I can NEVER in all my working career (even when I couldn't afford a piece of gum) remember paying just 4% Federal Income Tax, not to mention the tax I paid, pay on: gas tax, sales tax, state tax, the penny tax, special taxes for special districts, and on and on and on.

Shopping? How about Walmart - just a general grocery store.....

Again, I dunno - but the male Clinton had the budget balanced when he left office -

More taxes - I wouldn't complain if it were less war and more social programs!

Wandering Coyote said...

I wouldn't put too much stock in the 'peace' part of the Nobel Peace Prize. It's a very old award.

Read about it here.

Powered by Blogger.
Back to Top