Obama Would Find Cabinet Post for Gore

There's a big difference between experts and "trusted advisors," Calvin.

There's a big difference between experts and "trusted advisors," Calvin.

Exactly - The reason I said:

One of the things that I really like about Obama, is that he actually consults experts when he makes decisions

is because of things like this article

.

Especially in politics it seems we don't always need an expert, even common sense will help a lot

I think "trusted advisers" should be trusted by the public as well as the President. Bush's aren't/weren't.

Calvin:

From the article I linked to previously.

One major reason for these differences is the candidate himself. Cutler told me Obama is adamant about consulting bona fide experts. "The staff kept saying, 'What he wants to know is that he's really talking to experts in the field. When you go see him, you know, make it clear that you're an expert.'" When it comes to economics, it's very difficult to achieve expertise without an academic background. It's a field that prizes rigorous results, supported by reams of painstakingly sifted data. (Though Reich was labor secretary, he was trained as a lawyer, not an economist.) Cutler, for example, has made his name with a series of detailed econometric studies suggesting that, contrary to the conventional wisdom on the left, Americans actually have quite a bit to show for the trillions they spend on health care.

This is what I like about Obama - he recognizes the need to consult with people who are considered "experts" by the industry/sector/etc... they represent.

It's possible for "experts" to disagree - but if you'll read the whole article I linked to, you'll also see that Obama doesn't mind surrounding himself with a diversity of opinions.

This is what sets him apart from the current administration.

Winning the Nobel Prize for one's work in a particular field makes one an expert, in my opinion.

It was Peace. I find that a logical leap. I do see the connection, but surely there was a peace activist who deserved it.

Ending global climate change will generate far more peace than some simple protest.

I think that, while Gore's intentions are good (unless he's in green energy's pocket) he needs to step back and realize that one day people will zoom out on those graphs and charts and see how badly the numbers have been spun on his agenda display. I'm not against him, or his motives, but I question everything, dug into the numbers, and found out that he pulled a true statistical illusion to make the problem of global warning seem out of proportion to what it really is. . .

Winning the Nobel Prize for one's work in a particular field makes one an expert, in my opinion.

He didn't win the Nobel peace prize for his research into global warming. He did not do any research. All he did was tell of the findings of some climate scientists.

being an unelected position, he would not be a politician

That is true, but probably semantics. Taking a government position, period, will make him look to many like a politician.

Calvin Tang, you seem to have an active conversation going on in this current chat. You also work for Newsvine, so let me ask you in open forum. It says I have 15 dollars I could donate. I would like to send it to McCain, can you make that an option please?

I'll save Calvin the trouble of saying no, repeating the number of requests the staff has had to add to or alter the list of potential donations and why it is not possible to even begin to tackle the many changes requested, however wonderful the assorted causes are. You can withdraw your earnings via paypal and send it along to the campaign or any other place on your own though.

Well maybe I will give it to fuzzy animals anyway.

I dunno...Gore seems to have a polarizing effect on a lot of people.

(no pun intended)

We could certainly do much worse than Gore for Administrator of the EPA...

Better yet, Gore should be Secretary of the Interior.

LOL, thats what I thought, too!

Yeah, I'd have a lot more faith if I heard Gore say "I'll work within the Obama administration."

Why would a former Vice President with a half of a Nobel Peace Prize and a Grammy take a cabinet position anyways? I just cannot see it happening.

I think Gore just wants to do what he is doing. He wants to tackle the affect of greenhouse emissions and get them reduced.

See this: Nobel prize winner and former Vice President Al Gore launched a three-year, $300 million advocacy campaign calling for the United States to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.

Gore has an Oscar, too.

At a town-hall meeting, Obama was asked if he would tap the former vice president for his Cabinet to handle global warming.

"I would," Obama said. "Not only will I, but I 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. He's somebody I talk to on a regular basis. I'm already consulting with him in terms of these issues, but climate change is real. It is something we have to deal with now, not 10 years from now, not 20 years from now."

First, a hypothetical question "would you tap (ask) Gore? Obama was asked about Gore, he did not "throw it out."
Second, I seems they have been talking.....

yeah, Roy, it "seems" they have been talking. "Seems" is the operable word here. I'd just like to hear it from Gore. Is that unreasonable.

This does not seem much different than Sen Clinton saying she would "hire" Sen Obama to be her Vice President does it?

Well except for one minor detail.

Clinton was offering to "hire" Obama as her Vice President when he was leading her in a primary race for the Democratic nomination. Takes a lot of chutzpa to do something like that.

As far as Obama and Gore?

1. Obama is the leading contender for the Democratic nomination.
2. A voter straight out asked Obama if he would tap Gore for his knowledge of environmental issues.
3. Obama has already searched out Gore's advice and council in this area.

So - I'm confused - how is the situation with Obama and Gore anything like Hillary "offering" the VP slot to Obama?

I compared them only to the "extant" that it was a "public" offer which was an attempt to influence voters into their favor.

Your characterization of their differences are "right on the mark"

I did not attempt to infer differently my response was more guided to the previous comments and does not work standing alone.

Your characterization of their differences are "right on the mark"

I did not attempt to infer differently my response was more guided to the previous comments and does not work standing alone.

Thanks for the clarification Disappointed in GA. :)

Literacy a problem?

At a town-hall meeting, Obama was asked if he would tap the former vice president for his Cabinet to handle global warming.

To break it down further, Obama didn't bring it up, someone else did. How would you answer? I know I'd say I'd consider it.

Steve 21.1- you are not so naive to think that the obama camp and the clinton camp are not out there wooing big Al for an endorsement???? Please.

Oh, so that's what you meant? Somehow it didn't come off like that... apologies for the slam.

taking sides with the guy who wasn't too keen on all votes being counted in FLA and MI

That's an untruth. Obama and Clinton both signed a statement that they would not campaign in either state. The votes were counted, as in numbered. But they didn't count, and that's the states' fault.

Damian 21.4- completely agree that the problem sprouted at the state level ---but there is NO doubt that only Hillary pushed for the revote because she assumed it would help HER with the popular vote.....not because she is all more democratic than obama.

there is NO doubt that only Hillary pushed for the revote because she assumed it would help HER with the popular vote.....not because she is all more democratic than obama.

Absolutely agree on that one, lisaed. #21 sounded like a repeat of the Clinton line o' desperation.

Aaron 23.0- I agree that Al Gore is ultimately interested in Al Gore and his big Global Warming Farce.....I see his crusade as nothing short of an attempt to reorganize society as we know it.

More of the Dem's nanny gov't plans unraveling. . . More controlling the popular imagination through fear and distorted statistics. . .

lisaed, no offense, but when you say things like that, no one is going to take you seriously at all.

You sound exactly like a 9/11 truther. Enough with the conspiracy theories!

Henry VII 23.3 - it's not a conspiracy theory ---there is a massive socio-economic structural change attached to Al Gore's Global Warming Crusade ---you disagree?

Of course there would be change. But that doesn't mean that global climate change is a hoax that liberals conjured up with the help of scientists to get at your pocketbook. Frankly, thinking like that is a sure sign that one is a moron.

Henry VII - the science is not clear enough to warrant the sea change envisioned by the likes of Al Gore et al in the name of global warming.....

It's clear enough to thousands of scientists. It may not be clear enough to incompetent theists who see global warming as just another sign that Jesus is on his way back to smite the heathens and take his sheep to heaven, but those kinds of people believe in witchcraft.

Every educated person knows that global climate change is occurring, and whether or not the oceans will rise an inch or a few yards - the effects of global warming are already being felt in many parts of the world. Drought is a big issue in places where there is not enough water. In places such as Africa, this leads to genocide as a means of survival.

I'm sure it must be nice for the days to be a little warmer for you, but those of us that care about more than ourselves are wise enough to ignore the politicians and listen to the scientists.

Also, it's lying considered a bad thing in your holy book?

You mean how the oil companies do today?

i don't disagree with you Henry. However the oil companies cannot use goverment aide to increase their wealth, you pay for their overpriced gas, thats your fault. What Gore would do would be like the goverment saying "you have to buy 10 gallons of gas a week or you lose your car." now that really only benefits the oil companies and not the american people.

Instead, we say "You have to buy overpriced gas or good luck getting.... anywhere." (Unless you happen to live near non-gas public transit, in which case, need not apply.)

However the oil companies cannot use goverment aide to increase their wealth,

You mean the way oil companies were invited into closed door meetings with VP Cheney to design energy policy and figure out how to get access to Iraqi oil fields?

We are now in a war that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 and EVERYTHING to do with getting access to some of the richest oil fields in the world. Our tax dollars are paying for that war, it is being run by our government, our men and women are dying for those oil fields. And worse than all that - we've ripped another country apart and we've no idea how many Iraqi citizens have died because of our actions.

And if you question WHY we're in Iraq - you may want to check out Oil Companies in Iraq:
A Century of Rivalry and War

This document is from the Global Policy Forum - this organization monitors policy making at the United Nations. Following is JUST ONE PARAGRAPH from the whole document - a document well worth the read:

The administration of President George W. Bush represents an especially close set of personal ties between the oil companies and the government � at the very highest level. The president and his father were both longtime industry insiders from Texas and chief executives of their own oil companies. Other oil figures at the top of the administration include Vice President Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton, the nation�s largest oil-services company, and National Security Advisor Condolezza Rice, a former director of Chevron Texaco, after whom the company named one of its supertankers. These very visible figures give the administration its peculiarly strong oil flavor. In the earliest days of the administration, they promoted a number of striking industry-favorable policy decisions, such as the rejection of the Kyoto Treaty on global warming, the ouster of the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the elaboration of a strongly pro-oil national energy plan.

But, oil companies haven't used "government aide to increase their wealth"????

Sorry - I'm not buying that one.

Does it really matter?
Personally, I don't care if this makes Gore richer. The greater issue is global warming, and by entering into the Kyoto Protocol, we are actually doing something about it. There are worse ways to become rich than saving the environment.

And yes, you can see I do believe global warming is real.

Kyoto would be a disaster for this country. Carbon Credits?? It would be funny if so many people werent falling for it...