Gore's Nobel Peace Prize certainly brought out the mouthbreathers, but it also inspired some insightful commentary. Here's a sample of some of the better stuff I've found around the tubes.

Paul Krugman on Gore Derangement Syndrome:

What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?

Partly it's a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White House. Both the personality cult the right tried to build around President Bush and the often hysterical denigration of Mr. Gore were, I believe, largely motivated by the desire to expunge the stain of illegitimacy from the Bush administration.

...

But Gore hatred is more than personal. When National Review decided to name its anti-environmental blog Planet Gore, it was trying to discredit the message as well as the messenger. For the truth Mr. Gore has been telling about how human activities are changing the climate isn't just inconvenient. For conservatives, it's deeply threatening.

...

Which brings us to the biggest reason the right hates Mr. Gore: in his case the smear campaign has failed. He's taken everything they could throw at him, and emerged more respected, and more credible, than ever. And it drives them crazy.

Steve Clemons on how this will create an "interesting and creative tension" between Gore and the next Democratic president, which is probably Hillary:

Gore actually has a huge global following now on climate change policy -- and Hillary Clinton, if elected, is going to need his approval and support, though it's going to be painful (on occasion) for her to ask for it. Gore's not the easiest guy in the world to work with.

But at the same time, Gore knows he needs a strategic, capable thinker who can push forward hard-to-digest legislative imperatives in the White House -- and if he's not in favor with Hillary Clinton (if she's got the keys to 1600), then his efforts are going to significantly suffer.

Bryan Walsh on why Gore should run: