Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"
Al Gore and his movie clarifying the reality and scope of the threat of global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth" is getting a lot of buzz lately.
The list of theatres and opening dates shows that if you want to see it, you'll have to make a road trip.
The nearest theatres to the Quad Cities showing the film are Des Moines, Ames, Chicago, and Champaign.
The site says that theatres are still being added, so maybe a local theatre might find a screen for it.
posted by The Inside Dope @ 5/24/2006
6 comments
6 Comments:
The only "inconvenient truth" I see here is that the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated in '97, giving Gore and the Clinton Administration 3 years to present it to the Senate for ratification.
Given Gore's position in the Senate at that time, and his passion for environmental issues, the real "inconvenient truth" is that Gore didn't seize this opportunity of a lifetime and push Kyoto through the Senate, when he actually had the power to DO something about global warming, and not just make movies about it.
You conveniently omit that the Democrats lost any and all control of the Senate after 1996. During the three year period you speak of Trent Lott and the rest of the Senate was more worried about cigars and interns than the environment.
Regarding the actual movie, I bet the Bijou in Iowa City will end up carrying it.
If I remember correctly, a sense of the Senate vote in '98 sent Kyoto down in flames, 98-0, which is about as bipartisan as you can get. Which means tiz, that the "inconvenient truth" for you is that you can't play the Blame The Republicans Game on this one. 'Tiz a pity. har har
But still, I'd love to hear from Gore why in his 8 years in power, he didn't use his political capital to do more to promote Kyoto, or at least devise some homegrown hybrid of it, considering his passion for the subject. I guess it's just easier to stand on the sidelines and indulge in hand-wringing and scaremongering.
Sorry hi, but 98-0 isn't
"Republican controlled" Senate, it's "bipartisan" Senate.
Don't you guys ever get bored playing the "Blame The Republicans Game"? I guess not, otherwise, you'd be thinking about how you lost Congress after 40 years, and what you could do to get it back. But it's so much easier telling pleasing stories about your heroes, clinton-Gore, and blaming Republicans, rather than doing the hard work of regaining the public's confidence.
But even so, why didn't the passionate environmentalist Vice-President Gore, devise something homegrown to address global warming? Did he just Blame Republicans (tm) too? Looks like your hero Gore took the easy way out, and is now just scoring cheap partisan points. Way to go, Al! But no matter---your fans will adore you even if you're a hypocrite (do what I say, not what I do).
Why doesn't Bush get out of Iraq? He is the worst President this country has ever seen. Paladine and the rest of the "Republican right" are about to get a rude awakening. We are sick and tired of Bush's "oil for soldiers" policy.
Paladin, you, Zinga, Beals and the rest are nothing but captives of corporations. Next you will be joining up with the D/A to stamp out progress!
hi, let me repeat: a vote of 98-0, in the Senate, even in '98, is bipartisan, and has nothing to do with which party had the majority at that time. There were not 98 Republicans in the Senate in 1998.
And thanks for agreeing (at least, I think you agree!) that as passionate as Gore was about environmental issues, he could have done more when he was VP. That was my main point---Gore didn't do enough during the 8 years he actually had the power to affect change in our debate and policies about global warming.
Post a Comment
<< Home