If he is such an advocate why did he not see that it was passed?
2007-02-04 04:48:51 · 10 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Wow, he was a great advocate for the cause LMAO!
Now he's getting a ocsar for his latest propaganda piece!
The real question is whether algore will "OUTSTIFF' oscar!
2007-02-04 05:01:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Al Gore was VP. He signed it - a symbolic, non-binding act.
The Senate ratifies treaties, not the President and certainly not the VP. It wasn't 'voted down', it was simply never submitted to the Senate by either the Clinton or Bush adminstration. The VP can advocate, but not force action. He did advocate.
It's fortunate for us it was never ratified. The Kyoto Protocols would cripple our economy with no binding targets for anyone else that matters. Which was, of course, it's prime purpose. Even it's advocates admit that even if everyone followed the KP, it would have only a very small effect. Pointless waste of time on unverified science. NOT a good idea.
Orion
2007-02-04 12:58:53 · answer #2 · answered by Orion 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Al Gore, as Vice President, actually signed the Kyoto Protocol.
The Republican-dominated Senate passed a resolution which prevented the United States from ratifying Kyoto due to concerns that it 'would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States,' amongst others.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/KyotoSenate.html
America remains the planet's top polluter, and our President, despite his words to the contrary, still refuses to implement caps on carbon emissions.
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5143742?source=poll
Amazing, that people are willing to believe that the development and use of new technologies will actually harm our economy (history does not bear this out), and that taking meaningful steps toward saving the planet we occupy is a bad idea. Big oil has done its job well, if so many people have been so blinded.
2007-02-04 13:37:08 · answer #3 · answered by functionary01 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The republican controlled senate made it very clear that they would not ratify the treat. There was very little Gore could to to "see" that it was ratified.
2007-02-04 13:34:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
He had nothing to personally gain from it then. But when it benefits them most, well, they flip-flop on the same issue
2007-02-04 12:59:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dick Cheney is an advocate for stabilizing Iraq. I guess the Vice President isn't powerful enough to "see that things happen".
2007-02-04 12:53:29 · answer #6 · answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Hmmmm......another Gore inconsistency on the issue.
2007-02-04 12:53:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
such treaties are ratified by the senate.
thanks for playing...
2007-02-04 12:51:42 · answer #8 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
correct sir
2007-02-04 12:51:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Right you are!
2007-02-04 12:53:11 · answer #10 · answered by Hunter 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋