12 October 2007

Peace Prize Goes to Gore

Well, it's official. Al Gore has something to put in his lockbox.

The worst part is the inevitable querulousness and logical fallacies sure to emanate from the right-wing echo chamber: the Nobel Committee has a liberal bias, the U.N. is irrelevant, the "jury is still out" on climate change, and so on.

The ostriches on the right can't win the argument on scientific grounds, so their only option is to discredit their opponents.

I suggest the ostriches establish their own award ("The Inhofe Prize", perhaps?) for advances in rejecting overwhelming scientific consensus. Let the people decide which award they want to take seriously. Let the marketplace decide. The prize can be endowed by Exxon, which shouldn't be any problem.


5chw4r7z said...

So Al did all the scientific study's? Or he won the prize for bringing it to everyones attention?
The U.N. I really don't understand, they've stood on the sidelines and watched more innocent people murdered that any other NGO or government. Most of those guys should be brought up on charges not given awards.

WestEnder said...

Obviously you did not even bother to click the link. Perhaps you figured there was no point; you don't like Gore, you don't like the UN, and you don't want anyone giving you a reason to think otherwise.

I am amazed that you responded exactly as I predicted even though I wrote it right there in the post!

In this case, I have a new prediction: the Gore and UN haters will buy lots of beer and go hunting with Cheney.

LDP said...

And another thing: Al Gore wasn't wearing an American flag lapel pin during his last public appearance. And you're trying to tell me the Nobel Committee doesn't have a liberal bias?

ohdave said...

I was thinking the exact same thing, WE.

Maybe we could go halfsies and sponsor an Ohdave-Westender Anti-Nobel Prize. (Or, if you prefer, a Westender-Ohdave Anti Nobel.) We could accept nominations and publicize our pick for the person who's done the most to harm the cause of peace (and science, and literature.)

WestEnder said...

So many nominees... so little time.

Wes said...

Hmm...if the three categories for the WE-OhDave Anti-Nobel prize are Peace, Science and Literature, I'd go with George W. Bush for the first two. (He's actually helped the cause of literature by causing so many people to write about how wretchedly awful he is.)

As for Reagan, meh. A second-rate actor who became a third-rate President.


Wes said...

The Reagan comment I threw in for two reasons:

(1) Several conservative commentators are now wailing like the banshees they are because St. Ronnie of the Arms Deal never received the Nobel Peace Prize.

(2) I never pass up an opportunity to talk smack about The Most Overrated President Ever.


5chw4r7z said...

I didn't complain about Gore, I just asked if he discovered global warming like he did the internet?
Otherwise ask anyone who knows me, I don't discount global warming at all in fact I try to do my part to eliminate waste.
The Reagan thing, where did that come from?
The greatest president ever.

WestEnder said...

I responded to your query and you are now asking it again. And then you ask another question which has been answered. Holy crap, dude. Please tell me you accidentally did shots after taking Vicodin.

You're also revealing yourself as a dittohead since the dittosphere is the only place propagating the lie that Gore said he invented the internet as well as the absurd notion that Reagan was a great president.

Your snark is totally backfiring. You have no idea, do you?

WestEnder said...

Peter Bronson agrees with you.

I'll let that stand on its own.

5chw4r7z said...

A ditto head because I believe in global warming but don't understand Gore's peace prize?
Whateva, I guess I have to give you credit for not calling me a tool.
Name calling is much easy than rational thought isn't it?

5chw4r7z said...

Wow, just read that, He agrees with me about Gore, but thats it. How can a court rule on global warming? Thats some happy horses#!t in that story.
Don't sterotype me because I'm not on the hippy bandwagon, I half agree with you.

WestEnder said...

I'm not stereotyping you, I'm drawing a valid conclusion based on your own words. It just happens that those words are the same as dittoheads.

If anyone is stereotyping, it's you about me because you think I judge people by whether they're on the hippie bandwagon or not. You can't make such a conclusion from my blog, and certainly not from my comments or posts about Gore. If you notice, not one time did I say he deserved the prize or that it was a great thing.

You are now saying for the 3rd time that you don't understand why Gore won. I directed you to the link, and if you read it and still don't understand why, then you have two possible conclusions:

(1) You don't understand why, therefore there is no good reason;

(2) You don't understand why because there is something you don't understand.

You picked (1), which is yet another reason why I categorized you with the dittohead bandwagon.

I don't think you're a tool; a tool is the nut who blew a gasket on Brian G's post about Gore. I just think your perspective on this issue is determined more by bias than objectivity.