CNN.com readers sound off on Gore, Nobel Peace Prize

With a plethora of dissenting view points, this really calls into question the sanity of Americans.The objective of this award might be in question, but there's no questioning the outstanding work Gore has performed.

CNN) -- Former Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for their work to raise awareness about global warming.

CNN.com asked readers to share their thoughts on the Nobel Prize, global warming and Gore's selection. The response was overwhelming.

Many readers offered congratulations to the former vice president, while others expressed disdain for him. Some readers said it was a poor choice, while others flat out dismissed global warming as pseudoscience.

Below is a selection of those responses, some of which have been edited for length and clarity:

Roy Woodcock of Rochester, Washington
What a disgraceful choice. Al Gore has promoted bad science and dishonesty, but done nothing to promote peace. I must conclude that his selection is based on pure politics.

George Burns of Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
I can only imagine how upset Bill "looking for my legacy" Clinton is that he didn't win it. Mr. Clinton really thought he had a chance at it when he tried to broker piece between [Yasser] Arafat and [Ehud] Barak. Arafat, another Nobel Peace Prize winner, rejected Barak's offer of everything Arafat wanted. ... Jimmy Carter, another Nobel Peace Prize winner, got North Korea to "promise" to terminate their nuclear weapons program. How'd that work out?

Mr. Gore is in great company.
Subhojit Roy of Marietta, Georgia
This is as deserving an award as one can be. Al Gore is the undisputed champion of raising awareness about global warming and other environmental hazards. Visionary Al is always on the right side of issues from global warming to his opposition of the devastating Iraq war.

Rob Edwards of Woodbridge, Connecticut
It is a sad world in which we live when bad science (and even a lack of any data at all on many points) leads to so much hype or accolades, especially the award of the Nobel Peace Prize. The IPCC is a farce. View the CBC documentary from 2005, which is backed up by clear and reproducible science, to understand how wrong the IPCC and Al Gore actually are.

Wanting things to be so does not make them so. And with so many other deserving nominees once again it seems that politics is playing a role on too many fronts. When more science is actually researched on the [global warming] issue and it shows that Al was a buffoon, one would hope to see his gold medal stripped from him in a Marion Jones fashion. This is a disgrace.

Chris Smith of Bexley, Ohio
Al Gore? Nobel Peace Prize? Wow, that really degrades my image of that prize. Why not give it to Michael Moore while we're at it? How sad.

Robert Singleton of Wakefield, Massachusetts
I think it's a good thing Al Gore won the peace prize. People like my English teacher try to downplay the significance of global warming. Maybe this will help give him the respect he needs to push this issue.

John Gruber of Bremerton, Washington
There is going to be a lot of controversy over whether Al Gore should win the Nobel Peace Prize. Regardless of what the critics might say, or the political pundits trying to gauge whether he is going to run for president or not, he is still an extraordinary man.

He took the defeat of the 2000 election and rechanneled that energy into a cause that he feels passionately for. He has raised the awareness of a growing global issue, and regardless of whether those changes affect us in 50 years or 100 years, he has shown courage for pointing out things that others don't want to acknowledge.

Finally, I think that we as Americans should be proud of Al Gore. There is a certain national pride that should occur when someone wins the Nobel Peace Prize, and rather than condensing this award into a 30-second sound bite, and analyzing it, we should take a moment to reflect on ourselves and our nation.

Seung Kim of Fort Wayne, Indiana
What Mr. Gore achieved is noble and good for us, but I have to wonder if he is the right person for Nobel Peace Prize. Several past Nobel Peace Prize winners, such as ... Arafat from PLO, may not have been the best choices either.

Marla Adams of New Salisbury, Indiana
I am very pleased for Al Gore. I have been an admirer of his ever since I saw him speak at Lanesville, Indiana, during the Clinton/Gore bus tour before Clinton's first presidential victory. He has worked tirelessly to inform, not just the citizens of the U.S., but the citizens of the world of the environmental crisis. It is simply inexcusable for world leaders to not pay attention to the evidence of this crisis. Score one for Al Gore that Florida cannot take away.

Phillip Bernard of La Grange, Illinois
The peace prize should be reserved for furthering peace in our world. The work Mr. Gore has done is conjectured quasi-science. His research does not employ a scientific method, otherwise it would have been considered for the prize for science.

Robert Ellis of Columbus, Ohio
Well-deserved award. If Al Gore had been president, the world would be a far more peaceful place, and America would be admired. Instead we have oil wars and worldwide hatred of America. For more than 30 years, Gore has been one of the planet's truly enlightened thinkers. I hope he gives this country another chance by running for president again.

Matthew Joyce of New York
Regarding Al Gore's recent Nobel Peace Prize acquisition, I find this to be absolutely deplorable. First off, choosing an opportunistic politician who has damaged the good name of global climate research, and a man that is responsible in no small part for having further diminished the powers of the EPA during his term in office is downright absurd.

The Nobel Peace Prize used to mean something. As of today they are all now worthless. And I mourn the passing of this once great humanitarian honor. Watch as the Nobel committee chairman explains why Gore, U.N. panel won »

Reynolds Jones of Schenectady, New York
Political and religious ideology has never caused or stopped a natural disaster or plague. It won't do so now. There are serious problems with climate change going on, right now. The most dangerous possibility is that of run-away global warming -- while I don't think that will happen, I don't (nor does anyone else) know that it won't happen.

Al Gore is correct about climate change. We can only hope that conservative ideologues, both religious and political will stop obstructing reasonable efforts to save the planet, and thus to save the race that we belong to.

Sam Gibbs of Muncie, Indiana
Al Gore may use far more energy than the average U.S. citizen, but his impact, as one person, on raising awareness about, and fighting for legislation against, global warming far exceeds anything that most of the United States' 300 million citizens combined have ever done or will ever do.

Matthew Whitley of Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Over the last decades, the Nobel Peace Prize has increasingly become a laughingstock. That Al Gore of all people should be honored this year is another nail in the Nobel Peace Prize's coffin of legitimacy and relevance. Much like the prize for literature, the peace prize is becoming nothing more than a political bauble awarded to some political insider advocating the cause of the week.

Al Gore has been "working" for climate change for an enormous period of four whole years, coincidentally discovering this new passion right when his political career was slouching to its end. The Nobel Committee actually expects us to believe that, out of all human organizations working for peace and the improvement of the human condition, Al Gore's paltry four-year media circus of climate change advocacy is the most significant achievement we have to show for ourselves?

How ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for the legacy of the Nobel Prizes, I'm embarrassed for my country, and, if I were Al Gore, I'd be embarrassed to stand in front of the world claiming to be a worthy, legitimate recipient of the peace prize.

Emily McGue of Columbus, Ohio
I think it is absurd that Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize for raising awareness about something that is not even true. Global warming may be happening, but is not because of us. There are many scientists out there who would love to agree with me. If you are going to give recognition to someone for promoting the awareness of something that isn't even true, you might as well just hand out a half-million dollars to some random person walking down the street, they would be more deserving.

Mark McCord of New Richmond, Wisconsin
This just means the Nobel Peace Prize no longer stands for peace, it stands for propaganda, fear and political agendas.

Linda Witt of Bemidji, Minnesota
It is wonderful Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize. I can only wonder how different our country would be now if he had been our president. I'm proud of him and his work and intelligence. He alone has done more for raising awareness of global warming than our current president has with all the power he has at his disposal. As Americans we should take his lead in fighting the global warming crisis.

Ryan Kiblinger of Temple, Texas
My heart just broke today. The Nobel Prize went to an individual who consumes many times more than the average person in the world, and more than the average person in the first world. Yet he wins an award for his propaganda with regards to global warming. Al Gore has no scientific expertise for his film and congressional testimony. He is a mere puppet and speculator. The Nobel Peace Prize has lost all credibility today, and for that my heart breaks.

Mark Green of High Point, North Carolina
How exactly does this pertain to world peace? From the very beginning of his "campaign" this has reeked of politics. The reasons for global warming are widely disputed as are Gore's data. His carbon credits program is a sham.

If his efforts had resulted in a sweeping policy change across the globe, then maybe -- maybe -- I could see it. Even then, isn't it more scientifically, or more precisely, environmentally oriented? Gore's role has been more of a spokesperson. Maybe the award should be the Nobel Prize for Most Prominent Politician as a
Spokesperson.

Al Gore Should Endorse Barack Obama If He's Not Going To Run For President

As you know unless you've crawled under a rock, Al Gore was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize , and the media's immediately speculating on what his plans will be -- in other words, will he run for President?

Gore has stated several times that he will not run and that at some point in the future, he will endorse a candidate running for President.

Gore should endorse Barack Obama, and not just because Barack's the best candidate, but because Senator Obama -- of all the candidates -- is the only one who signed the Live Earth pledge, encourages his supporters to do so , and takes Gore's efforts so seriously he consistently refers to them and to the Global Climate problem on the campaign trail.

Moreover, Senator Obama's energy plan is specifically designed “to combat global warming and achieve energy security." In fact, the campaign website states...

"Global warming is real, is happening now and is the result of human activities. The number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled in the last 30 years. Glaciers are melting faster; the polar ice caps are shrinking; trees are blooming earlier; oceans are becoming more acidic, threatening marine life; people are dying in heat waves; species are migrating, and eventually many will become extinct. Scientists predict that absent major emission reductions, climate change will worsen famine and drought in some of the poorest places in the world and wreak havoc across the globe. In the U.S., sea-level rise threatens to cause massive economic and ecological damage to our populated coastal areas.:

By contrast, Senator Hillary Clinton did not have her supporters back the Live Earth pledge or give it attention on her website. And while she mentions her admiration for Gore, she does so with a caveat that she does not agree with all of his ideas -- like what?

She said ....

"You know, I have a great deal of respect for Vice President Gore. He has been beating the drums and sounding the alarm of global warming for many, many years. He has never given up on his mission to try and raise awareness and to get the country to take action. I may not agree with everything he proposes -- I don't agree 100 percent with anything that any one person proposes -- but I am certainly grateful to him for being such a public spokesman."

Well, now that spokesman is a Nobel Prize-winner. Gore should back Barack Obama.

Barack Obama On CNN's Situation Room Attacks Hillary Clinton - Video

Barack Obama comes out swinging in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

Steeler RB Charged for Domestic Incident in Cleveland

Article retrieved from www.myfoxcleveland.com

Last Edited: Thursday, 11 Oct 2007, 8:09 PM EDT
Created: Thursday, 11 Oct 2007, 8:09 PM EDT


After investigating an early October domestic incident involving 29-year-old Najeh Davenport, the Cleveland Police department announced today that charges have been brought against the Pittsburgh Steeler's running back.

According to Cleveland Police Lt. Thomas Stacho, Davenport has been charged with domestic violence, endangering children and unlawful restraint.

Davenport is not currently in custody and will be given a chance to surrender to police on the charges.

On Thursday, October 4th, at 8:52 p.m., Cleveland Police investigated a report of a domestic dispute at 1374 E.115 Street.

According to Stacho, the incident involved Davenport and the mother of his 5-year old child, Anita Person, 27, of Cleveland.

The dispute resulted from a custody matter involving Davenport's and Person's child.

Cleveland Police received three 9-1-1 calls between 8:45 p.m. and 9:02 p.m. from individuals at the house where the incident took place.

No arrests were initially made as officers were unable to determine the primary physical aggressor in the dispute.

If convicted Davenport could face more than 1 year in jail, 6 months for domestic violence, 6 months for endangering children and 60 days for unlawful restraint.

Coulter: We Want Jews To Be "Perfected"

Disgusting, simply disgusting. How dare a woman who is supportive of the right wing strategy that has failed the American people miserably echo this sentiment. If not for the first amendment, I'd love to have her silenced and at the very least she should take an extended leave of abscene in order to revise her thoughts.

To say that Jews should ''be perfected'' is laughable and completely racist. Unquestionably, Jews have made stupendous advances in the American culture and have set the standard that the rest of the world follows. It's not a coincidence that Jews are people of class, professionalism, wealth, hospitality and respect.

People associate Jews to be doctors, lawyers, accountants and overall extremely successful individuals who do not get into much trouble. It would be a major story if a rabbi was found on the first, second or third page of the newspaper for committing an offense, but it has become second nature to expect Christan's to be getting into a whirlwind of trouble on a consistent basis.

The standard of excellence that the Jewish religion has established is outstanding and to state that we need to be ''perfected'' is completely reprehensible.

Shame on Ann Coulter.

(CBS News) Ann Coulter is stirring up controversy again.

The conservative commentator said this week that the nation would be better off if all Americans were Christian and that she wants "Jews to be perfected, as they say."

Appearing on the CNBC show The Big Idea, Coulter was asked to give her version of a better America. She told the show's host, Donny Deutsch, that it would look like New York City during the 2004 Republican National Convention.

Pressed for details, Coulter said, "People were happy. They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America ..."

"Christian ... so we should be Christian?" Deutsch interrupted. "It would be better if we were all Christian?"

Coulter answered "Yes" once, and after being asked the same question again by an obviously surprised Deutsch, answered "Yes" a second time.

When Coulter tried to shift the conversation to the diverse congregations in Christian megachurches, the show's host brought the topic back to Coulter's statements about Jews.

Media Matters, the liberal media watchdog group which is publicizing the encounter, provided this transcript:

DEUTSCH: ... we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or ...

COULTER: Yeah.

DEUTSCH: Really?

COULTER: Well, it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track.

DEUTSCH: Really?

COULTER: Yeah. You have to obey.

DEUTSCH: You can't possibly believe that.

COULTER: Yes.

"We just want Jews to be perfected, as they say," Coulter said later in the show. "That is what Christianity is. We believe the Old Testament, but ours is more like Federal Express."

"Candidly, I had her on not to talk about politics but to talk about her brand strategy," Deutsch later told AdWeek . "Whether you like her or not, her strategy is to be extreme and that's a way to make money. But because it's her, it drifted into politics."

"I simply asked her a question, something like, 'If the world was her way, what would it look like?' And she said something to the effect that everybody would be Christians," Deutsch told AdWeek. "I was somewhat baffled and asked if that meant there would be no Buddhists or Jews and I think her words were, 'perfected' Jews [would be OK]."
(© MMVII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize - BREAKING NEWS

Gore, U.N. Body Win Nobel Peace Prize
By Howard Schneider and Debbi Wilgoren

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 12, 2007; 5:52 AM

Former Vice President Al Gore Jr. was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize today along with a United Nations panel that monitors climate change for their work educating the world about global warming and advocating for political action to stop it.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee characterized Gore as "the single individual" responsible for convincing world governments that climate change was real, caused by human activity, and posed a threat to society.

Gore has focused on the issue through books, promotional events and his Academy Award-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, incorporating the work of some 2,000 scientists, has been monitoring evidence of climate change and possible solutions since 1988. The panel is a joint project between the United Nations Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization.

Between the science showcased by the panel and Gore's advocacy, the two helped "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," the committee said.

"Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced clear scientific support."

As with last year's award to Bangladeshi banker Mohammad Yunus, whose pioneering use of small loans to the very poor helped contribute to the stability of developing nations, this year's prize focused on an issue not directly related to war and peace, but which was seen as critical to maintaining social stability.

The panel said that global warming "may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states."

Highlighting those risks, and the role of man in both creating and mitigating them, has defined public life for Gore, 59, since he lost the closely fought presidential election in 2000 to President Bush.

From that difficult race, in which he won the popular vote but lost the electoral college in a case ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, he emerged as a controversial figure -- ridiculed by opponents as an environmental extremist, and hailed by supporters as "the Gore-acle" for his foresight on issues like the Internet and climate change.

The Nobel is a vindication that could impact the upcoming presidential race: Gore's supporters have repeatedly urged him to enter the race, and the luster of the peace prize may add to that push.

But the former vice president, whose background includes a Harvard education and deep roots in Tennessee politics, has seemed disinclined to enter the fray. He has focused more on undertakings like last summer's "Live Earth" concerts, which promoted environmentalism in a series of star-studded rock and roll shows around the world.

John Edwards Affair? | Enquirer, Part-Owned By Clinton Backer Says John Edwards In An Affair In 2006?

UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS CAUGHT VISITING RIELLE HUNTER AND CHILD JULY 21, 2008.

FLASH: Clinton Campaign head sticks foot in mouth in Iowa.

FLASH: Barack Obama and African American fear of success.

Video UPDATE:



This is one of those stories you aren't sure what to do with but figure you should cover to some extent. Apparently the National Enquirer is reporting that John Edwards had been cheating on his wife. It's all the more hurtful because his wife's battling breast cancer and doesn't need any more stress, even from the mere existence of the story itself.

Yikes.

The person who some are pointing fingers at is named Rielle Hunter. She's a video producer who was hired to cover Edwards for a period of time during the campaign and made a special set of videos. Here's one of them..




Hunter released the following statement through a spokesperson:

"The innuendoes and lies that have appeared on the internet and in the National Enquirer concerning John Edwards are not true, completely unfounded and ridiculous.
My video production company was hired by the Edwards camp on a 6 month contract, which we completed December 31, 2006.

When working for the Edwards camp, my conduct as well as the conduct of my entire team was completely professional.

This concocted story is just dirty politics and I want no part of it."

But how in hell did this get started and generate 1,363 blog posts, according to Technorati? We'll get to that, but it appears the National Enquirer is part owned by Clinton backer and former staffer Roger Altman , according to Pat Dollard.

But A spokesman for American Media, Richard Valvo, said in an email that Altman has “no involvement in editorial, ever.” He said that Evercore owns 20% of the company through an investment fund. Altman didn’t respond to an email seeking comment or to a message left with his secretary.

American Media has also published terrible and negative stories about the Clintons since its acquisition, so that may just be coincidence.

But how did this get started?

According to Sam Stein over at the Huffington Post , the two met at a New York Bar (!) and the idea for a set of videos was hatched there. What Sam doesn't report, but does come from Rielle's own website, is that in 2004 she was flat broke. In 2006, just two years later, she scored a six-figure deal with Edwards. But how?

What appears possible is that Edwards got involved with helping a woman in her early 40s remake her life. Indeed, the production company that made the film, Midline Groove Productions, was brand new in 2006, according to its website.

"Midline Groove is a full-service production company committed to projects that reveal truth -- the authentic aspects of humanity that are right here and most often overlooked. Creating short and feature length documentaries for the web, broadcast, and big screen, the company was established in 2006 by producing partners Rielle Hunter and Mimi Hockman."

So it seems that the Edward project was Midline Groove Productions' first work, period. Thus it seems as if Edwards created a job for the new production company. It came at the right time for Hunter. Hunter's other website sends the constant message that Hunter was searching for a new self at the time. Check this out..

Back in bed the thought arises: Funny, I would ask Ramana for help and not Gangaji who is here in a body. Yes, that would be too intimate. Intimate intimate intimate. And because I have learned to move towards my fear, I have learned that under the fear is where all the great juice is hidden, it naturally occurs to me to ask her: Gangaji, PLEASE help me wake up from this dream.

There's a lot of text like that.

NYMag has a great timeline which I've reproduced here:



January 2007. John Edwards's One America campaign debuts a series of Web videos about him, made by relatively unknown documentarian Rielle Hunter. The pair met at a bar, where she sold the future candidate on the idea. Hunter subsequently followed Edwards around the country, filming. Newsweek reporter Jonathan Darman, upon watching the final cuts, notes that "in the midst of a short theme sequence that begins each Webisode, the camera lingers over the former senator's behind as he tucks a starched white shirt into his pants."

August 27, 2007. The Post's "Page Six" runs the following blind item: "WHICH political candidate enjoys visiting New York because he has a girlfriend who lives downtown? The pol tells her he'll marry her when his current wife is out of the picture." This is later reprinted by commenters on the Huffington Post blog.

September 26, 2007. Young Huffington Post blogger Sam Stein writes about his efforts to track down the Web videos, which have disappeared from Edwards's Website. Stein writes an oddly detailed account of his chase of the videos and points out that both the Edwards campaign and Hunter's production company blame one another for their vanishing act. Stein even checks with the Screen Actor's Guild to get more information and tracks down production assistants on the project, none of whom will say much. Finally, Edwards's people let him see the videos while accompanied by a campaign minder and Stein sees nothing sinister in them.

September 27, 2007. Daily Kos contributor Ben Bang links to Stein's post and viciously berates the reporter. "Are we supposed to infer something from this non-ending, douchebag?" Ben Bang asks, going on to call him a him a "no-article-finishing, character-assassinating hack fuck."

October 10, 2007. The National Enquirer reports that Edwards is having an affair with a mystery woman who had traveled with the campaign and met the candidate at a bar. An Edwards rep calls the allegations "false, absolute nonsense."

October 10, 2007. That same day, Stein posts a follow-up to his original Huffington Post piece. He questions why the filmmaker, Rielle Hunter, was paid upwards of $100,000 for her work and points out that she used to be a party girl who dated writer Jay McInerney in the eighties and inspired the main character in his book Story of My Life.

October 10, 2007. Ann Coulter, late in the day, mentions the Enquirer story on Tucker Carlson's MSNBC talk show. Daily Kos once again picks up on it and lists the reasons why Stein and the Huffington Post are irresponsible journalists for digging into it.

October 11, 2007. Mickey Kaus on Slate writes a post headlined "Emerging Edwards Scandal?" in which he notes the previous coverage, mulls what would happen to Edwards's campaign if the story were true, especially since he's been "tacitly and effectively used Elizabeth and her struggle" with cancer (the struggle with cancer no doubt being a large part of why the "mainstream media seems to be strenuously trying to not report it"), and wonders who might benefit. Obama?

October 11, 2007. Jezebel.com doesn't mince words, with a headline that screams, "Is John Edwards Cheating on His Cancer-Stricken Wife?" "Who the fuck sleeps with a married man whose wife has terminal cancer and THE ENTIRE WORLD FUCKING KNOWS ABOUT IT?"

October 11, 2007. Washington, D.C., gossip blog Wonkette.com picks up on the Enquirer story, too. After Ann Coulter (who once called John Edwards a gay slur) mentions it, they query: "But, um, Ann? Why would Edwards have a lady-affair when he's a 'faggot'?"

October 11, 2007. New York Magazine's Daily Intelligencer dutifully compiles all of the coverage of the rumor, without adding any information or making conclusions of any kind.

The AP Picks Up The Story

The Associated Press just picked up the story as did the LA Times. In total, 70 news outlets are running with the yarn. Let's see where this takes us as it's not going away.