Al Gore Takes a Beating from a Scientist

Washington, DC (TLS). Conventional wisdom has maintained that Hillary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democratic Party to run in the 2008 Presidential election. Conventional wisdom has also maintained that Al Gore's stranglehold on the environmental issue is fast and secure.

So who still believes in conventional wisdom, anyway?

Certainly the Clintons believe that the Democratic nomination is rightfully hers and that the 2008 Democratic convention is nothing more than a coronation. Party loyalists and the elite old guard also believe that she will be the nominee.

And I don't really doubt them that much. In fact, this is the most likely scenario.

Yet, her securing the nomination is not yet in the bag. Hillary faces some landmines that have surfaced at a very inopportune moment in her rise to fulfill a lifelong dream. First, her negatives are actually growing in the polls, not abating. She is not perceived positively by a majority of the electorate, and a new poll suggests that at least 50% of likely voters state that they will NOT vote for her.

Such bad news is sure to create some nervousness on the part of Party operatives. They may well turn to someone else if Hillary's negatives continue to dog her campaign.

Second, Hillary faces a potential bombshell of a scandal involving illegal activity on the part of both Clintons. The centerpiece of the scandal is a videotape that shows the Clintons committing felonies with regard to receiving illegal contributions and making underhanded deals.

If she is indicted and goes to trial, she can kiss her political aspirations good-bye.

Enter Al Gore.

Gore has been waiting in the wings for an opportunity to take center stage and supposedly recapture what he has always considered his since 2000--the Presidency.

Should Hillary falter, it is a near-certainty that the Democrats will NOT turn to Barack Obama, since his polls numbers have plummeted faster than the speed of sound. Edwards has fared even worse. And none of the other Democratic candidates appear to be catching on.

Thus, Al Gore would be the Party's tenured star waiting in the wings to save the day...except the problem is that Gore is facing his own set of problems.

By making global warming the centerpiece of his public discourse over the past few years, Gore has thrown himself lock, stock, and barrel into the 'environmentalist movement'--which is actually a political movement that uses environmental issues to push an ideological agenda.

Gore has bought the propaganda of the movement without question--that mankind is to blame for global warming and that the only way to 'fix' it is to enact sweeping policy changes in society that will reflect a collectivist rather than a free market set of values.

In short, personal freedom of choice will suffer. Free market capitalism will be smashed. The only way the planet can be saved from the exceedingly wicked human beings who have trashed it and caused it to warm up is to put severe restrictions on those sinister human beings and their behavior in commerce and free enterprise.

The truth of the matter is that Al Gore is only listening to SOME of the scientists.

As we have repeatedly shown in countless articles on The Liberty Sphere, the scientific community is far from unanimous on the issue. In fact, with each passing month new evidence emerges that strongly suggests that the 'Al Gore hypothesis' which was born out of the environmentalist movement is totally wrong.

Americans are increasingly waking up to the scam. A poll just this week found that over 70% of Americans now believe that climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon and not primarily a result of human activity.

The hard science supports their belief.

One scientist in particular has some sharp words for Mr. Gore and his film, 'An Inconvenient Truth.' Many of the assertions made by Mr. Gore and the film have been shown to be false. And this could spell real trouble for the Democrats in 2008 if they turn to Gore as their nominee.

Read the entire article here:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article