 schreibe says: "But there is no doubt. Al Gore is a hero." I like that one! Come on all you think tank.....swiftboat......bullshit artists.......bring it on! why would a "think tank" possibly care about what Al Gore spends on gas?Hypocrisy watch, of course. As shameful as some people feel this is, if a person signs up to lead a movement, he or she is going to be scrutinized. And shouldn't they be? Scrutiny, while surely an inconvenience, helps keep people honest or exposes them. It helps uncover the facts either by identifying a problem, or by refuting the claim. It's mindless adhereance to a manifesto that makes me nervous. A think tank whose director is sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute which is funded by ExxonMobil. Mindless adherence to big oil makes me nervous. People that can't accept the facts written on UTILITY COMPANY RECORDS and say it is all a lie make me nervous. It does not matter Willhelm...... This whole thing is not about Gore's UTILITY COMPANY RECORDS! I could care less! ......we are talking about something that needs to be addressed that is more than how much Gore pays for electric. Where do you swiftboaters come up with these things. I invite you to view my clips and comments on this subject. You may learn something. we are talking about something that needs to be addressed that is more than how much Gore pays for electric.Are you suggesting that because Gore's message is so important we shouldn't try to understand his character? Is the message so important we should not question the messenger's integrity? I get so tired of the "if you aren't with us, you are against us." How are we supposed to get informed if not by questioning? I don't think asking Gore to explain his own carbon footprint is the same thing as calling him a huge liar or snake oil salesman. Many of the same people complaining that someone has the gall to look into Gore's hypocrisy were all over that preacher who slept around with a guy and did drugs because of his hypocrisy. Come-on .... You guys have the gall to talk about hypocrsy! I can't even summon up the effort it takes to respond to this! I have had the chore of living in a hypocritical world for the past 6 years! The liberal world is a very hypocritical one in which to live. To compare that nutty preacher with Gore using some electricity is completely idiotic! Hrm.. if any of you gore-haters actually did further research, you would have found out that gore buys green energy.. at a premium (paying up to 50% more for it...) Linkie: Gore Defends Mansion's Power Consumption (CSBNews.com) Some good points in it: * The Gores used about 191,000 kilowatt hours in 2006, according to bills reviewed by The Associated Press ... far more than the typical Nashville household, which uses about 15,600 kilowatt-hours per year. * His Nashville home is more than four times larger than the average new American home built last year * Johnson (Tennessee Center For Policy Research) said... Again.. this "think-tank" is missing the point.. Gore isn't saying people should go back to living in caves, but they we can all do things to help reduce our carbon footprint.. and thereby reduce emissions... You should be able to live your life much as you do now, but by making some changes (using CF or high efficiency light bulbs, using alternative energy vehicles/hybrids, monitor heating, upgrading furnaces & insulation... ) you can make a big change. ... if any of you gore-haters actually did further researchThat's what I thought was happening by asking questions and getting answers. Why are people that question the man labelled "gore-haters?" Catwisperer did some research and made some points and has some facts concerning the terrible hypocritical use of electricity by Gore... Why don't some of you "swiftboaters" offer a defense of the your bullcrap. You are faced with facts. ......go ahead and defend your position. I still have to say that the whole issue is a smokescreen, and does not matter. It is a non-issue.......as is most of the swiftboating diversions. bignosemousie said:I have no problem with asking questions.. what i DO have problem with is those that immediately took that "press release" from the Tennessee "think-tank" and ran with it, calling Gore a hypocrite... No investigation, no check into sources.. just "ZOOMG! Here's our chance to bash Gore!!!" PS: my initial response was there to answer some of your questions.. ie: his response to the calls for explanation... Well, the investigation is being done and the Goracle worshipers aren't going to like it. Seems the Goracle has decided he can pour out as much CO2 as he wants and then by carbon credits from HIMSELF to offset that use. That's right, he is buying carbon offsets from a company he set up and that company invests in companies that stand to profit from global warming alarmism. So, when he says he is buying carbon offsets, what he is really saying is he is investing money in his own company so he can further profit from his flying around the world in private jets trying to scare others into investing in his company. So, Gore has only one thing in mind, in all this. MONEY! .........n2soon.......you are just one of them Gore Haters.....and you ain't making too much sense. What does it matter where the money goes? So What? He owns a stake in the company, so he can't buy from it? You're just not making any sense at all n2.. of course, that's nothing new.. you've never made much sense  I'm sorry if what I say goes over your head. I try to keep it simple, but obviously not simple enough. BTW, if you think Gore's carbon credit purchases are on the up and up, why don't you call his company and see about buying some carbon credits to offset your own carbon footprint? PS: my initial response was there to answer some of your questions.. ie: his response to the calls for explanation...I appreciate your efforts, as well as those of the Gore camp. I don't understand schreibe repeatedly stating it's a non issue. It may be a non issue for him, but I still liked hearing Gore's response. I don't have to buy carbon credits, I'm already doing more than the average Canadian/American to keep my emissions down And simple doesn't seem to be a problem fo ryou, it is the fact that you are too simple.. you think everything is black and white.. gore's household uses n times that of an average house, so regardless if he purchases his energy from a green source AND pays more for it, plus invests in research & funding (regardless of if he has a stake in the company or not) he must be evil.. that's just a very narrow and simple mind set... Bignosemousie: I'm not convinced it is a non-issue either.. but through my small amount of research, it seems he is at least doing a heck... So, why is it liberals believe anyone with a link to oil companies must by lying because they have a monetary link to what they are saying, but when it is shown that Gore has a monetary link into what he is saying it is perfectly fine? I don't think it has anything to do with money and everything to do with defending one's faith. why is it liberals believe anyone with a link to oil companies must by lying because they have a monetary link to what they are saying, but when it is shown that Gore has a monetary link into what he is saying it is perfectly fine? IThat is a good question. If I profit from my beliefs are they somehow tainted? It's easy to dismiss a sinister connection if someone feels my beliefs are grounded in truth, but a sticky wicket if someone feels my beliefs are unfounded or alarmist . Can we have it both ways? Can we profit from truth without staining it? According to major liberal website Democracy Now, both Clinton and Gore are tied to big oil... to the tune of $3.6 billion. it's wrong to profit from such things when you LIE to the public about them and try to miss lead. Gore isn't lying about climate change... it is real, where some people want o bury their heads in the sand or blame it on earth.. whatever.. you lost.. deal. Meanwhile, Big oil & co, trying to refute climate change, well, we all know they are liers.. and and when they profit from those lies.. it is wrong.. Gore is saying the oceans could rise by 20ft before the end of the century. The co-chair of the IPCC said that would take a over a thousand years. Gore said he is buying carbon credits, but he is giving the money to his own company that doesn't sell carbon credits (call them up and try to buy some if you don't believe me). He is an alarmist who is profiting off the fear he is spreading. He is an alarmist who is profiting off the fear he is spreading.Is that it n2soon, that fully explains why Gore is so out front, and successful on this issue? Gee, what a guy! Imagine, he spent the good part of his adult life conjuring up some story about pollution, and the earth warming up just to make money in the stock market. He is more of a hero than I ever dreamed. A true genius. I'm gonna get some of that stock! The co-chair of the IPCC said that would take a over a thousand years.I don't know where you are getting this stuff about the IPCC. Everything I've read about their comments on the issue seems to agree with the fact of Global Warming......even Bush has said that Global Warming is happening. Bush and the boys had always fought so hard at debunking science and common sense in favor of partisan politics, and special interests.......and now he is doing one of those "flipity flopity's". Oh well, where there is absolutely no integrity or intelligence, and guess there is no truth or common sense. By the way n2soon....that 20ft rise in sea level was just a "projection" of worst case scenarios. Global Warming is occurring as we sit here pounding away at the computer. There's plenty of evidence in real life that can't be disputed, no matter how much you want to conveniently ignore the issue. It will take a whole lot less than a rise of 20ft sea level to change the way of life of millions of people. Or, maybe, to change the way of death of millions of people. I'm thinking about the third world people living in areas that are at or below sea level. If you agree that Global Warming is a fact, then the only other issue is.....how much does man play a part in this event.......and, can ... I think few people are arguing that global warming does not exist. The question seems to be whether we are in a warming or cooling trend right now and how much of an impact man is having on the climate. Bush never claimed man is responsible for global warming. The interesting thing is that no one has been able to prove that man has or has ever had anything to do with global warming. There are reputable scientists who believe that man is not causing global warming and that we are actually in a cooling trend right now. Global warming fanatics often try to discredit these scientists by playing the 6 degrees of separation from big oil game. All of this mass hysteria has been caused by the ... There's no mass hysteria going on here. A debate on this very real issue is taking place. Bush from six years ago did not want to put caps on emissions, so he and his admin downplayed what was going with the real possibility that the earth is warming due to human activity. With Japan and China wanting to get in on the "good life", it can only get worse. Bush has been resisting this since he got in office. It's time for us to look at the facts. Not hype.....not hysteria....not Gore greed....just the facts man! Being a skeptic I'm all for the facts. The problem is that there are few facts and too much speculation. If there is a correlation between man and global warming, that alone does not indicate that man is causing global warming. Take the famous stork argument for example... Last year the stork population increased in Copenhagen. That same year the number of babies also increased in Copenhagen. Therefore the increase in babies can be attributed to the increase in storks. The global warming argument uses this spurious type of correlation over and over in different ways. Now without using a spurious correlation, exactly where is the evidence for man made global warming? Being a skeptic, I put my stock into the idea that Global Warming is a fact way back in 2000, when Bush got in office and immediately pulled out of Kyoto, and started making changes in anything having to do with science and the subject of Global Warming being caused by man. He was very much about putting caps on anything, and at the same time Dick Cheney was meeting behind closed doors with all his oil buddies drawing up our new energy policy. Not a word was said about caps, or about energy efficiency.....much was said about drilling in Anbar Province. Much was said about being able to continue to drive the fuel eating SUV's.....a big tax break was given to anyone who wanted to purchase o... Schreibe, you deciding to put your stock into Global Warming because of Bush, Kyoto, and his policies on Science and Global Warming is fascinating. I suspect that most liberals used this same irrefutable logic to form their own opinions of Global Warming. Bush couldn't pull out of Kyoto since we were never in it in the first place. Just more revisionist history. On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was finalized (although it had been fully negotiated, and a penultimate draft was finished), the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98),[44][45] which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States".On top of that, Clinton also never submitted it to the senate for a vote. when Bush got in office and immediately pulled out of Kyoto, andYou are such a waste of time. Bferman, I'm not a scientist. I don't have the knowledge or intelligence to figure out all the details in this debate on Global Warming (fact or fiction). I do know one thing. I don't trust Bush. I don't trust Cheney. I know for sure they have an agenda that is short term. My opinion is based on my observation of the tactics and priorities of this current administration. n2soon, I don't really care whether or not we were ever in kyoto. I do know that with Bush got selected as the Pres, he immediately ended all discussion. He did this not only with kyoto, but also with North Korea, and several other important issue that should have been addressed instead of being ignored. Recently... screibe, YOU wasted your time. Bush did not waste your time. He may have wasted opportunities, wasted our country's credibility, wasted a lot of money, and wasted our military's time with his inept leadership. However, you alone can take credit for your waste of time, and I do believe your time has been wasted. Perhaps you should have spent your time learning about the science involved in the Global Warming scam, the forces behind the agenda, and the economic disaster that is Kyoto. It seems to me you have no motivation for anything other than irrational fear. Perhaps you should learn a little bit about GW Bush's concern for the environment. Y... George Bush is a concerned environmentalist just because his home in Crawford incorporated some environmentally friendly technology and design? Oh Willhelm, that's rich! 9/15/05 Bush’s US EPA loopholes allow pesticide testing on kids The Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules on human testing, which the agency said last week would categorically protect children and pregnant women from pesticide testing, include numerous exceptions, such as one that specifically allows testing of children who have been “abused and neglected” even without permission from parents or guardians. The rules also allow “ethically deficient” research if it is considered crucial “to protect public health.” screibe, YOU wasted your time. Bush did not waste your time. He may have wasted opportunities, wasted our country's credibility, wasted a lot of money, and wasted our military's time with his inept leadership. However, you alone can take credit for your waste of time, and I do believe your time has been wasted.You might have a point Willhelm, I was just thinking about all the time I'm spending pounding away at this computer when I got other things to do. I guess you could call this my hobby. I never did develop any hobbies or diversions. This way I get to have a hobby and get to save the world from a time wasting, opportunity wasting, credibility wasting, money wasting, mil... It is TIME to take some action, or close the matter. BobbyRutan, Where did this come from? I not sure I want to believe what it is saying. 9/15/05 Bush’s US EPA loopholes allow pesticide testing on kids The Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules on human testing, which the agency said last week would categorically protect children and pregnant women from pesticide testing, include numerous exceptions, such as one that specifically allows testing of children who have been “abused and neglected” even without permission from parents or guardians. The rules also allow “ethically deficient” research if it is considered crucial “to protect public health.” Just do a google search for "bush us epa loopholes allow pesticide testing on kids" and you'll have many hits to choose from. But the particular site I visited is Greenaction Ok.......I clicked on the link and came up with the same paragraph. 9/15/05 Bush’s US EPA loopholes allow pesticide testing on kids The Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules on human testing, which the agency said last week would categorically protect children and pregnant women from pesticide testing, include numerous exceptions, such as one that specifically allows testing of children who have been “abused and neglected” even without permission from parents or guardians. The rules also allow “ethically deficient” research if it is considered crucial “to protect public health.”I still don't want to believe it. Sounds like something out of the middle of the worst part... Yes, and Cheney drinks the blood of innocent Iraqi children. My response to BobbyRutan was not rhetorical. I don't believe that paragraph about using "abused and neglected" children for pesticide testing. If that were true, or even close to being true we would have had a national response that would have overtaken the latest Hollywierd stories on the front page of every newspaper. Right? Lately, with the lack of guts and independence shown by our news media, I'm not so sure anymore. It's a shame that our media.....the backbone of a democratic society is losing credibility. Anyways......I simply do not believe that paragraph. I also don't believe that Cheney drinks the blood of innocent Iraqi children. Seems hard to believe but when your government is for the corporations by the corporations what isn't possible. The rules were revised under intense criticism from environmental groups, scientists and members of Congress after the disclosure that subjects in some earlier pesticide studies were unaware of what they were being exposed to and, in many cases, did not know why the testing was being done. Link |
View the Top Clips from March 1, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|||||
|
|
||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
||||||
