Al Gore is a statesman. When he conceded in 2000, it was to avoid a constitutional crisis. So it was especially ironic and poignant in January when the statesman who preferred concession to provoking a constitutional crisis spoke out about the dangers facing our constitution today: governmental eavesdropping on American citizens, breaking the rule of law, torture by Americans, expansion of executive power by a unilateral executive, perpetual war, and the obliteration of our constitutional system of checks and balances.

"An executive who arrogates to himself the power to ignore the legitimate legislative directives of the Congress or to act free of the check of the judiciary becomes the central threat that the founders sought to nullify in the Constitution, an all-powerful executive; too reminiscent of the king from whom they had broken free....

Vigilant adherence to the rule of law actually strengthens our democracy, of course, and strengthens America. It ensures that those who govern us operate within our constitutional structure, which means that our democratic institutions play their indispensable role in shaping policy and determining the direction of our nation. It means that the people of this nation ultimately determine its course and not executive officials operating in secret without constraint under the rule of law.

...as Justice Frankfurter once wrote, 'To find authority so explicitly withheld is not merely to disregard in a particular instance the clear will of Congress. It is to disrespect the whole legislative process and the constitutional division of authority between the president and the Congress.'

...if the pattern of practice begun by this administration is not challenged, it may well become a permanent part of the American system. That is why many conservatives have pointed out that granting unchecked power to this president means that the next will have unchecked power as well. And the next may be someone whose values and beliefs you do not trust. And that is why Republicans as well as Democrats should be concerned with what this president has done."

Gore openly admitted that there are many things he doesn't like about politics; his demonization is no doubt one example. Even today, radical rights trot out false allegations about "algore" claiming to have invented the internet. The obvious tactic is to make him appear untrustworthy on the basis of a trumped up lie. Those same people defend Bush's layers upon layers of lies, believing the pretenses for the neo-conservatives' preemptive war in Iraq. But the point remains that the smears are easy to resurrect; they are in the collective American conscious, rightfully or not.

Already having won the popular vote, he saw the presidency snatched from him in a unprecedented, non-precedent setting Supreme Court decision. He's obviously enjoying his work on climate change with An Inconvenient Truth. He has a lengthy history of involvement in planet earth issues. He says he's happy now, doing what he's doing, but he hasn't said definitely that he wouldn't run.

Would he accept a draft? Should he?