Gave Up Politics for Good, for Good?

Often the simplest explanation really is the best.

A translated article , “White House can do Little about the Environment“, in the Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad, written by an interviewer of Gore, asserts that Gore is not running in 2008 for the right reason:

… the last time that Gore bivouacked in the White House, he was not able to make any progress against earth warming. During the eight years that the Clinton-Gore administration was in power, it introduced not a single important piece of legislation against climate change. The administration signed the Kyoto protocol, but only after they weakened it with crippling loopholes. Thereafter, the administration decided not to exert any effort toward having the treaty ratified by the Senate.

In our conversation, Gore admitted to these shortcomings.

The interviewer’s conclusion?

The lesson that Gore seems to have learned from his defeats in the White House is that in order to bring about real reforms, it is not sufficient to be president, especially if powerful interests are against you. The only way to defeat such opposition is to once again pave the way for the build-up of such an all-encompassing wave of public pressure that every elected politician will feel compelled to take action, even if Exxon-Mobil and their friends are disappointed.

Just because something is a statistical anomaly – in this case, a politician’s leaving politics to do the good he believes in – doesn’t make it impossible.

H/T Watching America