During the 2000 Presidential Election, both Vice President Al Gore and Governor George W. Bush were asked to sum up their candidacy with one word, to which Gore responded "Lock-box."
This word, and its over use in the first Presidential Debate, became a fixture in the caricature of Gore through the election, especially by the writers and cast of Saturday Night Live. Gore poked fun at himself numerous times over the word, mainly when appearing as a guest host on SNL.
So, why not use the term again, as Gore's new movie "Inconvenient Truth", in summary, aims to put carbon dioxide (CO2) in a lockbox to stop global warming.
I'll admit, I was never much of an Al Gore fan, and when I heard about this film, I asked the same skeptical question that many others are asking, "What does he know about global warming? Give it up!"
But the more I have looked into the release of this film, the more I lean toward supporting, maybe not the film or Gore, but the urging to see the film and judge for yourself.
The Sundance Film Festival hit documentary is almost all Al Gore. The majority of the film, from what I can tell, is going to be Gore laying out the comparisons of different glaciers, snow-capped mountains, hurricane seasons, temperature indexes and other science to show that the planet is under a direct threat from global warming.
For almost a decade there has been talk, and not much focused attention on this issue, but again, this may be a film worth watching, evaluating and figuring out your own personal, non-partisan stance on a world issue, not an American issue.
One way we learn lessons in life is to compare our present habits to the habits of the past, so as to not repeat mistakes. History is a valuable learning tool.
However, "...in my judgment we need to set aside whether or not greenhouse gases have been caused by mankind or because of natural effects and focus on the technologies that will enable us to live better lives and at the same time protect the environment," said Bush in May in response to his reasons in not supporting the film - arguing that debating what causes global warming is not important, but merely developing new technology is the key to solving the problem.
Of course, I could be wrong, but isn't it hard to plan new technologies to fix a problem without first attempting to listening to reasons as to how the problem may have been caused? Do you not often need to find the source, before you can find the solution?
After all, isn't that "strategery"? (reference George W. Bush's answer to the one-word question in 2000)
So, while you're looking for things to do this summer, check out the film.
Theatrical Trailer
Official Website
How much CO2 does my household produce? - I'm almost double the average.
Bush v. Gore 2006 (on the film)
Should this launch Gore to a 2008 Presidential bid?
