People in the marketing trade refer to proprietary research called the “Q-Ratings” (or “Q-Scores”) for public figures, celebrities, and brand names. Like Nielsen ratings for TV shows, an individual’s “Q-Rating” refers to the trust and esteem their image has with the public. Q-Ratings, unlike Neilsen ratings, are not publicized. The actor Wilfred Brimley supposedly had off-the-chart Q-Ratings, which is why he did so many TV commercials for healthy breakfast cereals and such. I’m sure Ronald Reagan had terrific Q-Ratings, too. Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan–probably not so good on the Q-Rating scale these days.
I’ve long suspected, but never wanted to fork over a fee to find out, that Al Gore has abysmal Q-Ratings. I’ve mentioned here before Mark Steyn’s great quip that Gore was the first person to win the popular vote without being popular. Today Gore is back with another foot-stomping “It-is-too-so!” tantrum in the pages of Rolling Stone on, what else?–global warming. It’s long and tedious, as you’d expect, repeating the same old talking points yet again, with no self-awareness that folks have tuned him out. Be sure to check out the comment thread: it appears that Rolling Stone readers are sick of Gore and the issue. A few samples:
Algore, aka “Captain Universe,” is like a turtle. He’s got the same story all the time. So kids, as with the New York Times, don’t believe everything you read in Rolling Stone. . .
No Al, it is not real. You are a fraud and this is your money grubbing hoax. You still seem to think that you can make a “difference” and leave your “stamp” on society. You already have. My entire adult life I have followed your career. And you have made a career of telling lies. That is your legacy. . .
Aren’t we all glad that Al Gore is no longer someone with political power in this country? . . .
Wow, what a rambling, mindless piece of tripe. Get lost, Al. . .
rolling stone you do yourself a HUGE disservice by publishing al gore. . .
Perhaps if Mr. Gore managed his own sanctimony a little better he could work instead to convince skeptics by talking to them persuasively rather than heaping them with scorn and accusations of corruption, stupidity, ideology, and fanatics . . . Of course, that ain’t gonna happen. He enjoys his own sanctimony too much. . .
Wow. If you’re provoking that kind of response from Rolling Stone readers, you should not try buying a return ticket from Loserville.
Too bad Gore marred the article with the usual clichés, because buried deep in the article is this attack on the failure of Barack Obama:
President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change. After successfully passing his green stimulus package, he did nothing to defend it when Congress decimated its funding. After the House passed cap and trade, he did little to make passage in the Senate a priority. Senate advocates — including one Republican — felt abandoned when the president made concessions to oil and coal companies without asking for anything in return. He has also called for a massive expansion of oil drilling in the United States, apparently in an effort to defuse criticism from those who argue speciously that “drill, baby, drill” is the answer to our growing dependence on foreign oil.
The failure to pass legislation to limit global-warming pollution ensured that the much-anticipated Copenhagen summit on a global treaty in 2009 would also end in failure. The president showed courage in attending the summit and securing a rhetorical agreement to prevent a complete collapse of the international process, but that’s all it was — a rhetorical agreement. During the final years of the Bush-Cheney administration, the rest of the world was waiting for a new president who would aggressively tackle the climate crisis — and when it became clear that there would be no real change from the Bush era, the agenda at Copenhagen changed from “How do we complete this historic breakthrough?” to “How can we paper over this embarrassing disappointment?”
. . . President Obama has never presented to the American people the magnitude of the climate crisis. He has simply not made the case for action. He has not defended the science against the ongoing, withering and dishonest attacks. Nor has he provided a presidential venue for the scientific community — including our own National Academy — to bring the reality of the science before the public.
Wait! I thought, to quote Carl Pope of the Sierra Club, that Obama is “the best environmental president since Teddy Roosevelt.” Mitt Romney better be worried. Al Gore might be about ready to endorse him.