An Inconvenient Truth

Just saw Al Gore's documentary tonight. If you prefer action movies, go jerk off to Jerry Bruckheimer (whose wife is a flake, btw). If you want to open your mind, watch "An Inconvenient Truth."

I'm not going to jump in the deep end of the pool before walking in, step by step, through the shallow end first. I admit I'm not very well schooled about global warming. So I'll need to refer to a contrary report before I form my own opinion.

Problem is, there are so few of them that it won't be easy. The few that are out there, however, mostly are the result of heavy-handed politicking. Don't know if you caught "60 Minutes" several months ago, when there was a report about a scientist whose credibility was trampled by the Bush administration because the scientist, James Hansen, wanted to communicate the truth about global warming, whereas the president wanted the American people to hear anything but. A White House staffer -- a politician far less qualified than Hansen in the field of science -- edited his report and the administration tried to keep the scientist quiet and damage his reputation, built on superior work over a period of more than 30 years.

This is another example of how the right-sided bully will run right over the conscientious left simply because of greed. The core problem is that the pursuit of oil -- the pursuit of money -- is placed above all else. I know this cliched complaint is tremendously tiresome; I really do. But even if you're like me and you know little about global warming, just do yourself one small, serious and important favor: Ask yourself why the government won't acknowledge the seriousness of global warming. Why won't the government concede one time that maybe it has overlooked something -- anything -- or that perhaps the Al Gores of the world do have good ideas and legitimate viewpoints? If nothing in life is perfect, how come you never hear President Bush admit a mistake, an oversight, an error in judgment, a bad decision? It must mean that everything is perfect here in the good 'ol USA.

It almost seems like there's some cultish, underground e-mail list that goes out to all the Republican subscribers, that might include a paragraph like this:

LINE OF THE WEEK: OK, people, ya know how the Democrats are really pushing this global warming thingy? From now on, let's just all say they're full of crap. Scientists and politicians on the left are all full of baloney, we'll tell 'em. Just deny that global warming even exists. Make them feel like they're crazy, like they're the only ones who see the elephant in this living room. And like a junkie alcoholic, deny, deny, deny. Got it?

FINAL NOTE: And who sent me that whoopee cushion after last month's newsletter? I got Cheney real good with that one. Thanks.

I fail to believe that the ruling party is the only party that has good ideas. So if the other side puts a note in the suggestion box and it continually gets brushed aside, how fit is our democracy? That so few people vote in America is bad enough, but to have those who do vote continue to march on the same line, touting the status quo as if our country is in good shape? Seriously, is it that big of a deal to acknowledge that our city, our country, our planet likely will endure tremendous harm in the very near future? I guess it is, but is ignoring this very real possibility make it go away?

The Republicans and their nifty little spin machine believe in being certain more than they believe in being right, so unfortunately, I don't expect anything to change anytime soon.

Actually, that's what the right is hoping we'll say, so we'll continue to perpetuate this defeatist cycle and not take action to change the circumstances. The right is OK that such a small percentage of those qualified to vote actually do so. It figures that a noteworthy increase in the number of voters means a change is so desperately needed. When voter turnout is low, it means we're OK with the status quo. Are you?