David Roberts argues well that Al Gore has better things to do than run for president. Brent Budowsky argues well that America and the world need Gore to run for president. I argue that which one of them is right depends on whether Al Gore has burning in him the prophetic fire to tell America the moral truth about these dark times.
::::::::
Here are two articles, both of them well-argued. David Roberts on Huffington Post argues that Gore has better things to do than run for president. Brent Budowsky on thehill.com says America needs Gore for the Oval Office. Then, after these, is my own take on what would determine whether Roberts or Budowsky is right.
*****************************************
What Should Gore Do Now?
by David Roberts,
on Huffington Post
Posted October 12, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change." Here's the press release.
Over the past week, all the U.S. media could talk about was how winning might affect Gore's chances in the U.S. presidential race. To me this demonstrates just how badly our media is misjudging the race, Gore's significance, and our current historical moment.
There's no reason to think that winning the prize would have any positive effect on Gore's chances if he did run. Does the American public care about the Nobel, a prize awarded by a bunch of ... foreigners? Wouldn't winning a "peace" prize brand Gore as weak on national security? Doesn't it show that he thinks he's better than us? Who would want to get a beer with a Nobel Peace Prize winner? Wait, did he just sigh?
If he entered the race, Gore would run headlong into the same dim-bulb, theatrics-obsessed political press that did him so much harm in the 2000 race. He'd also run into Hillary Clinton's political machine. He would own the climate change issue, so other candidates would have to start attacking him on it and distancing themselves from it. He'd be forced to spend his time discussing one piece of frenzied ephemera after another, instead of focusing on his animating passion. He'd end up in a bruising, demeaning battle, and winning some peace prize wouldn't shield him. The process of electing a president, like so many things in the U.S. today, has become small and petty. It shrinks, cheapens, simplifies, and plasticizes those who take part in it, and Gore has already learned.
No, it would be a disaster for Gore to enter the race at this point -- not because he might lose, but because he has transcended U.S. partisan politics. He has become a figure of global stature, one of a tiny fraternity of private individuals in the world capable of driving historical change from outside the confines of any institution. What many Americans don't realize is that the rest of the world is not distracted by the serial, lurid distractions that compose our political dialogue. Our national conversation is dominated by the resentful bile of core of nationalist, reactionary, authoritarian ding-dongs, but it's not like that when Gore goes overseas. In other countries, they don't care about his electrical bills or his waist size or his clothing choices or his lack of that most important qualification for leader of the free world, the ability to act like a regular guy.
Gore can't act like a regular guy. He's smart, and he talks like a smart person. He's earnest and committed. He cares. He wants to help save the world. Inside the glorified high school of U.S. politics, those qualities make him a square, an easy subject of mockery. But outside the U.S. they are assets. Gore can help bring governments together; he can get powerful financiers, corporate titans, rock stars, and energy scholars in the same room. He can help shape policy and public opinion across globe, not just in the U.S.
We are at an inflection point in history. These are times of immense consequence. The world will either unite around the problem of climate change and start pulling as one in the direction of survival and sustainable development, or grim years lay ahead for all of us. We must learn, as a species, how to share our collective resources more equitably and how to become happier without using more stuff and creating more waste. We must decouple our health and fulfillment from our ecological impact.
That's the project Gore's involved in now. He is called to higher things than running for president.
*************************************************
Al Gore for President
by Brent Budowsky
October 11, 2007
As these words are written the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize has been chosen but not yet announced and for purposes of the future of America the great and inconvenient truth is that this does not matter.
America does not need another prize, we need another president.
Americans deserve a president who aspires not merely to wield power but to use the office of the presidency as the center of action to lift our land to the greatness that was bestowed to us by Americans who came before us.
My hope is that Al Gore is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He deserves it, and it would be a great moment for America and a great statement about the future of the earth.
But America does not need another prize, we need another president. “An Inconvenient Truth” was a brilliant, noble and historic undertaking, but if saving the planet from the ravages that threaten it is our purpose, in a journey of a hundred steps, the film took us one step, not 99.
The Assault on Reason will be viewed by historians as possibly the most sweeping and profound analysis of the troubles of our times, and the most brilliant manifesto of where an American president in the tradition of Roosevelt and Kennedy would lead this land we love.
But America does not need another brilliant book with a compelling program; America needs another president to make it happen.
The concert for the earth was a wonderful and important moment that brought to the attention of the planet the latent idealism and dreams of young people who want to inherit the wind of a better world, not merely the winds for another war, and a statement of generosity and conviction of stars who joined with kids on every continent of the earth.
But now, America does not need another concert, we need a new courage, a new conviction, and a new president to bring out the best of all of us, and make America a force that brings light to the world.
Is it unfair to ask: If the earth God gave us, that past generations endowed to us, that we hold in trust for future generations not yet born, is truly in danger and depends on decisions taken during the term of the next American president, are we not all obligated to bear any burden, share any sacrifice, endure any hardship, so our great-grandchildren will inherit a safe earth?
Is it unfair to ask: In a world where the last of the great generation that saved freedom from fascism are leaving us by the hour, in a nation where our best young are making all the sacrifice and giving all in a war far away from us, should not every political leader, at all levels, put aside personal and political convenience and ask what they can do for our country — and do it?
John Fitzgerald Kennedy was right: the presidency is the center of action, and God’s work on earth must truly be our own.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was right: We have nothing to fear but fear itself, and for the great matters of life and death for our country, we are all in this together.
The Democratic Party has the opportunity not to win an election to wield power, but to win a landslide that would bring a president and a Congress who stand for a politics of courage and idealism, who call again for
our country to dare to dream, and dare again to reach for greatness.
Is it unfair to ask, as previous generations of Americans have asked, and future generations of Americans depend on us to ask today, for a leader worthy of the office once held by Washington and Jefferson, by Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, by FDR and JFK?
Imagine a president who leads the world in the battle of ideas, who knew from the start that we are a nation of idealism and hope, not a nation of torture memos and spying on each other in secret.
Imagine a president who was wise enough to know from the start that an unwise war was wrong, and who spoke with clarity and conviction when it mattered the most, and when others fell short.
Imagine a president who has believed from childhood that our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights comprise the sacred trust of the world’s greatest nation, and has stood for this truth in good times and bad, in hard times and moments of triumph, from the House of Representatives, from the Senate, and from the vice presidency of the United States.
Imagine an America that is once again seen throughout the world as a beacon of hope and light, as an inspiration for human rights and freedom, and as a liberator of the world from poisoned energy that imprisons men and women everywhere, and ultimately endangers the very existence of the world itself.
Imagine an American democracy that is greater than an exercise in poll-taking, fundraising and the character assassination of fellow Americans and becomes again a democracy in which politics is viewed as a noble profession and Americanism is viewed as a call to share both the sacrifice and the triumph, and young people are inspired to reach for the stars in every endeavor in their personal and civic lives.
Imagine an America without the scandals of wounded troops and the mistreatment of disabled veterans and rising numbers of homeless heroes because our president will avoid war when we can, win war when we must, and fight for our troops and our veterans every hour, every day, in war and peace, in deed as well as word, no
matter how hard it may be, because in our country it is right, and in our country, right makes might.
I know it is fanciful, unrealistic and probably naive to believe in the greatest aspiration that America should choose its best possible president. But America has always had the Frank Capra quality of daring to dream, of looking at the stars and viewing the better angels of our nation.
Our nation began with the impossible dream of a world ruled by kings, that could be forever transformed by a brave and generous people who put their hearts, their souls, their spirit, their lives, behind what they called their sacred honor and believed was their sacred trust.
Many tears have fallen, much blood has been shed, many dreams have been crushed on the road from there to here, but for every Valley Forge there has been a Yorktown, for every Gettysburg there has been an Appomattox, for every Pearl Harbor there has been that moment in Times Square where the sailor kissed the lady, and the lady in that harbor lifted that torch higher than ever before.
Personally I will support any of the Democrats over any of the Republicans, but does anybody believe that the campaign of 2008 has given any hint of a renewal of American greatness?
In my view, never before in memory have the man, the moment and the magic come together as they come together for Al Gore in 2008.
My hope is that he is awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace, but whether or not that comes to pass does not ultimately matter.
There is a far higher stake than another honor, another prize and another award, and that is the future of a great country that deserves a remembrance of our past, a renewal of our better angels, a reform of our shortcomings, a revival of our national spirit and unity, and a restoration of our role as the true leader of the free world.
**********************************
Here's What I Say
by Andrew Bard Schmookler
It all depends on whether Al Gore has the prophetic fire in his belly.
If he has that fire, then he will be able to transcend the petty slings and arrows and elevate the discourse to deal with the battle of good against evil that is now ongoing in America. And Budowsky's right: there is no more important role to be played in the world right now than to lead America against the dark forces that have taken it over through the Bushite regime.
If he lacks the fire, he'll succumb to the right-wing smears and belittlements. And besides, who needs yet another candidate who lacks that fire. If Gore's no more courageous and aflame than the current crop, then Roberts is right that Gore should keep doing his current, less combative form of leadership.
There was a while --and I wrote about it earlier this year-- when it appeared to me that Al Gore might have the moral passion to speak the truth to America about this amoral regime. (He already had the stature and the standing to be effective, and now that is only more true.)
But then he has seemed to back away. The fire is one that makes one strong for the battle against evil, but Gore showed --in the ASSAULT ON REASON interviews-- a disappointing eagerness to avoid any fight.
Until I see a strong indication to the contrary, my belief for now is that Gore does not have the stomach or the heart to lead the charge --as a Democratic standard-bearer-- against these dark forces that continue to dominate both America's present course and the likely future uses of Republican power.
But here is what I will look for as an indication that the fire is there: that he speaks out boldly, and with righteous wrath, against the ongoing lies and crimes of this regime. He does not need to declare his candidacy to get attention for such remarks. And whether he runs or not, this would be an important service to the nation.
Submitter: Andrew Schmookler
Submitters Bio:Andy Schmookler, an award-winning author, political commentator, radio talk-show host, and teacher, was the Democratic nominee for Congress from Virginia's 6th District. His new book -- written to have an impact on the central political battle of our time -- is WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST. His previous books include The Parable of the Tribes: The Problem of Power in Social Evolution, for which he was awarded the Erik H. Erikson prize by the International Society for Political Psychology.