Gore Refuses to Answer Question

The director of “Not Evil, Just Wrong,” a documentary challenging Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth,” dares to ask a question at the Society of Environmental Journalists annual conference. Apparently Mr. Gore only allows the ‘right kind’ of questions to be asked of him.

14 Responses to Gore Refuses to Answer Question

  1. Paul Wenum October 11, 2009 at 8:29 pm #

    What’s new? He hasn’t debated the issue he pushes since the beginning. Why change when the dollars continue to roll in. Gore isn’t that stupid. He’s dumb as a fox. Oh, that’s right, it would be “Inconvenient” to have a discussion with opposite parties. Maybe he would lose???

    • Rick Shorrock October 20, 2009 at 5:00 am #

      This whole thing reminds me of when Gore was VP and he went up against Big Tobacco, all while his family was growing tobacco in Tennessee. I guess he thought America was not going to figure that out! He railed against the Joe Camel ads that were, as he said, targeting children, even though you never saw cigarette ads in magazines marketed to children. So the billboards were taken down, and the Joe Camel ads went bye-bye. In NASCAR, Winston Cup was changed to Nextel Cup. Cigarette advertisements were virtually wiped from existence. Then, a few years later, a report from the National Institutes of Health came out, declaring that teen smoking had not ever declined…in fact, it was higher than ever! And no one stopped to ask two-faced Al Gore, “So, Al, I guess Joe Camel wasn’t the problem after all!”

  2. Neil F. AGWD October 11, 2009 at 9:14 pm #

    Gore: “Do you think the polar bears are in danger?”
    McAleer: “The polar bear population has increased.”
    Gore: “Do you think the polar bears are in danger?”
    McAleer: “The polar bear population has increased.”
    Gore: “Do you think the polar bears are in danger?”
    McAleer: “The polar bear population has increased, that means that they’re not in danger.”

  3. paul wenum October 11, 2009 at 11:38 pm #

    Never changes does it. Ask a Profiteer a question that they cannot answer, simply stifle the question. It has never changed. Let’s hope that there is Hope!! Truth will prevail. I hope. If not, we have a serious problem.

  4. Rob N. Hood October 13, 2009 at 8:15 am #

    I thought you guys were “pro-profiteer.” This is American capitalism in process. Just because you don’t like his politics shouldn’t preclude him from participating in capitalism, right? Or do you believe in some kind of double standard perhaps?

    In the introduction to his magnificent The Age of Betrayal: The Triumph of Money in America, 1865-1900, Jack Beatty notes a CBS News/New York Times poll, from 2004, in which 64 percent of the respondents answered in the affirmative to the first of these choices: “Would you say the government is pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves or that it is run for the benefit of all the people?”

    Not very surprising, you say? Hardly even noteworthy? By itself, that would be true; even from an anecdotal approach one can quickly — and accurately — surmise that most Americans have little faith in their government’s virtuous independence.

    But Beatty’s purpose wasn’t solely to point out that 21st-century America is off to a rocky start, confidencewise. His purpose was, rather, to note the remarkable acceleration of civic America’s discontent: when the same question was asked in the 1960s, only about half of the later number were willing to agree that “the government is pretty much run by a few big interests.”
    Within the same 40-year period — and need I remind you that this was the era of Reaganism Rising, that prolonged epoch of propagandistic reassurances that a government much closer to the people was finally at hand — the number of Americans who agreed that “public officials don’t care about what people think” also nearly doubled, from 36 to 66 percent.

    Moreover, two scholars of Congress, Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, were in the early 2000s offering academic evidence to confirm the popular opinion that when it comes to kowtowing to big business, the House of Representatives — the people’s house — “more closely resembles the House of the 19th century than that of the 20th, of the Gilded Age more than the Cold War era.”

    What’s more, as though more was needed, in 2004 the American Political Science Association issued a report, “American Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality,” which bluntly concluded that “Our government is becoming less democratic, responsive mainly to the privileged and not a powerful instrument to correct disadvantages or to look out for the majority.”

    • Jerry Citti October 19, 2009 at 9:51 pm #

      Dear Mr. Hood,

      You seem to misunderstand a few things. Perhaps I can be of some small assistance. Please note that it is not Mr. Gore’s Politics at issue; it is his ethics. To wit there are several apparently obvious errors which he declines to discuss in his recent effort entitled “An Inconvenient Truth”. It has been reported that the equivalent of an injunction has been judicially granted to those opposing plans to use “An Inconvenient Truth” in British schools’ science classes because of its innaccuracies. It is also reported that Mr. Gore has failed to acknowledge a challenge to debate these inaccuarcies. It is difficult to blame Mr. Gore for these failings however. After all he has made and continues to make scads of money off the effort.

      The other significant issue you raise which ought to be addressed is that of American Democracy. Please note that America was not intended to be a democracy from the get-go. This country was meant to be a constitutional republic governed by law not by whoever has the biggest gang. It was not intended as a “powerful instrument to correct disadvantages, nor to look out for the majority. The intention was to protect the rights of all, even the minority, and to ensure that everyone even the minority enjoyed the right to the pursuit of happiness.

  5. Paul Wenum October 13, 2009 at 8:46 pm #

    Our “Government” is us!!! Look in the mirror and blame yourself.
    I can hardly wait for 2010!!

    • C October 17, 2009 at 2:35 am #

      I hope you’re not waiting for 2010 ELECTIONS, because there won’t BE any. 2010 will bring Martial Law, United Nations control of America, and nuclear attack on this country, along with Jihadist terrorism and beheadings of Christians and Jews.

  6. Neil F. AGWD October 14, 2009 at 11:50 pm #

    What the heck are you blabbering on about? What does Al Gore not answering a question have to do with anything you’re talking about? Nothing, that’s what.
    You know, this website isn’t about you, and what you think. OK?
    You remind me of the Black Knight in Monty Python’s Holy Grail. Wev’e whacked off an arm, and you say “It’s just a flesh wound!” You are armless and legless but you just keep running your mouth!

  7. paul wenum October 15, 2009 at 11:13 pm #

    Couldn’t have said it better! Kudo’s to you Neil.

  8. shannon hill October 19, 2009 at 1:26 pm #

    Yeah, Al Gore can go straight to you know where!!! No more money for this crook. Kiss my ass. I am one pissed off American. I say clean out Washington before America goes down.

  9. Paul Wenum October 19, 2009 at 9:45 pm #

    Please let’s get back on point. I know I’m extremely upset with what is happening and I have a hell of a Scot’s temper. That said, stay on point and let’s let our neighbors and neighbors neighbor hear it from all of you. Typing is fine. Voices are LOUDER!!!

  10. Rob N. Hood November 1, 2009 at 1:06 pm #

    Jerry- I know all that. That is standard procedure for powerful groups (in this case Big Oil) to discredit person or persons they don’t want the public to be influenced by. Nothing new at all. That said, sure Al Gore and the majority of the planet’s scientists could be wrong about this issue- but the question is why are you and other deniers willing to take that risk, a BIG risk at that?! That to me is the ultimate arrogance.

    And Neil, you are so narrow-minded it’s mind blowing.

  11. Rob N. Hood November 1, 2009 at 1:10 pm #

    Oh and Jerry- I don’t know hwhy you want to lecture me about what you think this country was “founded upon.” Because ultimately it all comes down to democracy. That’s prety much all Bush II talked about for 8 years so don’t give me it’s just a Republic crap. That’s not true nor reality. We are supposedly fighting two wars for Democracy, but that’s another joke of course. Does anyone, even a Republican say our soldiers are fighting for our Republic, or our Democracy? Case closed.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.