It depends on the question.
Time has a rather silly article with a rather silly headline: Is Al Gore the Answer? Well, it depends on the question. The answer is "yes" if the question is any one of the following:
- Which 2000 Presidential candidate lost the Florida vote no matter how many times it was recounted?
- Which 2000 Presidential candidate made a movie so full of inaccuracies that a judge in England set viewing guidelines before students could watch it?
- Which 2000 Presidential candidate would have won the election if he could have carried his home state?
- Which former Presidential candidate preaches from the church of global warming while sucking enough energy for his own home to light a small town?
The answer is "no" if the question is any one of the following:
- Which former Presidential candidate wanted to streamline regulation and reduce taxes so that the economy would grow?
- Which former Presidential candidate is not an environmental chicken-hawk opportunist?
- Which former Presidential candidate is willing to make personal sacrifices to help the environment?
Enough about Al Gore. The author is about par for the course in showing his liberal bias. Here are a few examples:
"Which is not to say that Clinton's candidacy is entirely without purpose now that she is pursuing a Republican-style race gambit, questioning Obama's 20-year relationship" with his pastor. Why, exactly, is this a "Republican-style" race gambit?
"and a year that should have been an easy Democratic victory, given the state of the economy and the unpopularity of the incumbent, might slip away. " Really?
I can't figure out if this guy is really concerned about the "easy Democratic victory" slipping away or if he is one of the many media morons who still can't get over the fact that Al Gore lost the election.