Dear Sirs, Anyone who thinks Al Gore is anything but a egomaniacl fool should not be listened to for political / technical insights. Scott

wow- i admit i look a little tired and my makeup could be better... but "sir"?

I am sure Obama or Hilary will be better for the Tech world than McCain. However, Obama or Hilary can also fortify their support by a vice president like Gore to bring this countries superiority back to the same level or above the era of Bill Clinton.

The government doesn't need to play a bigger role in anything. It has the opposite effect of the midas touch. The democrats keep crying about "big brother" yet they want government control on everything. I don't get it!

Obama does get technology, much more so than any other candidate. He even has a specific technology section on his website: (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/) These reporters are foolish not to do their research before making claims like this. Obama understands tech, and he understands it well. I hope that everyone takes the time read his issues page if they are worried about what was presented in this video.

Of course! Ron Paul!!!!!! Do you guys do any research over there? Here is an excerpt from an article published today in fact http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004247663_donors28.html According to the Center for Responsive Politics, employees of Google and Microsoft are number three and four in a list of top contributors to the campaign. (First and second on that list are the Army and Navy respectively.) Congressman Paul has repeatedly said that he doesn’t want to tax or regulate the internet, and internet innovators - who have thrived from the freedom of the internet - support candidates who understand that freedom is key to the success of the e-Economy.

I personally don't know of anyone these days who takes Gore seriously. There's no shame in admitting he was wrong; there's only shame in pride and deceit.

We don't need any more government. NAFTA and a high priced US Dollar was the worse thing for the TECH industry. The best way to fix the tech industry is to remove NAFTA and keep the US Dollar priced where it is. Let the market fix itself without the governments help.

It's not about running tech but about facilitating it. Obama clearly has run the better campaign, utilizing the internet very effectively. He seems to know how to recruit talent. I much rather have a savvy leader with a good team than someone with experience who "knows it all".

Dredging up Al Gore (who isn't even running!) while ignoring Ron Paul is just staggering. It's hard to believe anyone would want Al "I invented the internet" Gore back in charge. He and Bill had 8 years to deal with his alleged environmental concerns and they did nothing meaningful and nothing at all about his current alleged concerns about climate change. Ron Paul may not be a computer nerd like most of us here, but he's smart enough to know what he doesn't know and leave us nerds alone! I'm not convinced the same can be said for the other contenders.

Obama will do fine. Gore gets it too. I just took a peek at a Sarah pic. Pretty cute, pretty cute. Don't blush Sarah. Definitely not a "sir".

These are really stupid comments. No one has defined what "tech" is, but yet they're willing to say that one candidate has it or does not. How is this helpful or even interesting?

When you spend Trillions of dollars on a worthless War, then there is only crumbs left for other projects. Get out of Iraq and we will money for other project. Big deficet Bush does not get the message.

Probably the most significant element of "tech" is the use of Health IT to reduce the 98,000 people who die of preventable medical errors each year and the $2T dollars that the US spends of healthcare. Both Clinton and Obama consider Health IT (electronic medical records, etc.) as a key priority in their broader healthcare plans. Clinton and Bill Frist (Repub ex-Senate majority leader) co-sponsored a bill for health IT adoption. Al Gore was also a huge proponent of Health IT. I attended a conference in which he received and provided coherent, specific and profound answers to extemporaneous questions from a Health IT audience on bar-coded medication administration, computer provider order entry, EMRs, etc.. I'm confident that Hillary could do that as well. Not so sure about Obama, McCain, or anyone else running for Pres. could do that. And certainly not Bush (although I do give him props for his executive order setting a 10 year goal for EMR use across the US).

Sorry...but this is a trick question. The reality is that no one (maybe outside of Mark Warner in VA) in government has a clue about technology. I have a technical degree from a top university near Silicon valley and the reality is that I "get" some of the technology - and I work in the industry. If I am not mistaken none of the candidates have a technical degree. They may have occasionally run into a technical type while at college but my guess is that no one in their inner circle (in law school or in government) would have what would be considered a technical background. I would bet that none (including Al Gore) could even write a simple macro in Excel...let alone understand how a program actually works. It's great that Gore is on Apple's board but lets not delude ourselves, he is there for his government contacts, not his technical savvy. So take it for what it is worth, Obama, Clinton, and McCain (and Gore) are all smart people with legal backgrounds...they are definitely not the people that would be making the technology direction choices at my company.

It doesn't matter who understands tech. By the time their understanding can be useful in office, it will be obsolete. Microsoft is constantly planning the future of tech, but by the time their plans start to take shape, tech has bypassed them. The same thing happens to an even greater extent in politics. As one very minor example, consider closed captions for the deaf. That's a political issue, because companies have no real financial motive to proved closed captions, as their deaf audience is too small to be worth the bother. And the rapid advance of tech makes it easy for companies to bypass such issues. There is no law that Yahoo or Netflix have to provide captions online, so they don't. Netflix even omits the captions that are already on the DVD's they show online, unless they're subtitles for a foreign language. Closed captions are just one minor issue, to illustrate the much bigger issue, that politicians, and even big tech companies, can't anticipate the rapid changes in tech, and can't plan for them. What they have to do is make much more general plans. General enough to take into account any tech advances that might come along. But, when it becomes that general, it's no longer tech.

As a graduate of Annapolis, I assume McCain studied engineering. Both Barak and Hillary have liberal arts undergrad and law as graduate experience. McCain remains an undereducated choice for President, who behaves as if he'd have just as tough a time programming his VCR as my parents do. Both Hillary and Barak at least have graduate degrees. One of the reasons Barak has been so successful has been the work his campaign has done on the Internet, and the use of sophisticated web-based tools for the Precinct Captains and other local organizers for Barak.

One big tech issue is gambling on the internet. It's a big issue because of the amount of money involved. Small time gambling is an issue for local law enforcement, but gambling on the internet is too big for the biggest law enforcement agencies in the world. I personally think the only possible resolution of it over the long run is that it has to be governed by the jurisdiction of the gambling servers, not of the individual gamblers. But that means small countries that allow such servers will be able to victimize big countries like the USA forever, taking their gambling tax revenues from them as easily as taking candy from a baby. But what else can be done fairly? Would the government put an iron curtain on the internet, to make sure people could not leave the country via their browers? Would all of our communications be monitored, to make sure we weren't committing any sins or tax evasion? Or what else could happen?

Keep your preconceived notions to your damned selves. Am I supposed to trust the opinions of shsavaryfamily@prodigy.net more than I am those of the nice lady in the video? Maybe shsavaryfamily@prodigy.net should make a video, and then their baseless personal attacks would have a bit more credence. Like Rush Limbaugh.

WOW, Simballa9, you have thoroughly proven that you, yourself, do not GET tech.