Yeah, it's funny. Even with all the recounts and the totals being counted after the voting was stopped and Bush STILL won Florida, those on the opposite side are still in denial. They don't want those pesky facts getting in the way of their denials.
Quote: I like Al Gore and his mission is genuine, and if the election had not been stolen in 2000...
Oye Vey. Not this again.
Missed my intended point. I think. The fraction of people who in 2000, felt the 2000 election was a fraud, still think the same in 2007. Otherwise the fraction that thought it wasn't a fraud in 2000, still have the same perception in 2007.
I blame myself for even clicking on the thread. I will go away, and let the road graders play.....
"They had it before you, They had it during you, They"ll have it after you're gone." Al McGuire on Kentucky basketball tradition.
I don't believe it was 'stolen', but I hope that claim holds up in history, so at least there's an excuse as to how the worst president since Polk managed to get elected twice (Kerry provides a pretty good excuse for the second).
As noted early this morning, Drew Johnson's Tn Center for Policy Research is not recognized as a "legitimate organization" by the TN Dept. of Revenue, yet he's been all over FOX News calling Al Gore a hypocrite. Keith Olbermann further exposes the shoddy manipulative work they do to further the right-wing agenda and simultaneously proves the Al Gore is not a hypocrite - he's walking the walk. With video.
Johnson fudged the numbers, not pointing out to viewers that Gore's electricity is way more expensive per kwh than normal because he buys green energy, so of course his bill would be higher by multiples right off the bat. His usage is higher than average because he lives in a much larger home than average, which houses offices for both himself and his wife, guest quarters, and has extra security measures. Johnson's hosts (Hannity and Gibson) added to the misconception of Gore's supposed hypocrisy by muddying the issue of carbon offsets, rather than clarifying and educating viewers. (This reminds me so much of the bamboozlement employed at OJ Simpson's trial, where jurors were so overwhelmed by confusing information on DNA evidence that they chose to ignore it.)
Johnson's attempts to smear Gore and provide lame documentation should have been uncovered by the "journalists" at FOX who hosted him, much like they insist Dan Rather should have confirmed the origin of the documents that got him in so much trouble. But, as they accuse Rather, this guy was bolstering their case against Al Gore - he's been all over FOX.
Now that he's been exposed as a total fraud, will FOX News correct the record and clear Gore's name, or will they let the smears stand?
Keith Olbermann provides some MATH on the subject:
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
Oh, so it's ok to have higher utility costs because he has a wife to house, a guest house, a pool house, etc. but he tells everyone else it's wrong to drive an SUV. LOL, even the apologists and defenders are laughable in their logic. If he's soooooo committed to energy conservation, BUY A SMALLER HOUSE AND GET RID OF THE POOL HOUSE.
Personally, I don't mind people asking for more personal accountability from Gore. My problem is the fact that all of this just seems like a deterrent from the fact that he's bringing up some viable points and valid issues, and rather than address that they're trying to point out his hypocrisy. His hypocrisy may be there, yes, but it doesn't mean we should skirt the issues he presents.
I don't like Al Gore for various reasons, but I'm willing to admit that he's bringing up some valid points, and as far as I can see, winning his argument on the virtue of his detractors rebuttals.
Interestingly enough, our President, Pres. Bush, has a very, VERY "green" house, and he doesn't "purchase carbon credit offsets" in order to do it.
His house (in texas) is heated and cooled geothermically, he collects rain water, shower water, bath water, sink water, ect in a 25,000 cistern.......and then uses that to water the yard and landscaping....his landscaping is all native plants.........there's more......but I don't remember it all.
Heard it on the Glenn Beck program, on the radio. It was kind of neat, the way Beck brought it up....he was talking about Gore, then started on on "....this house....", went on to list all of the "green" features, etc, then he said, "oh, I'm not talking about Gore's house, I'm talking about Pres. Bush's house.....)
And as for Gore, if he's knocking himself out with all the compact flourescent bulbs and solar panels and what not, and he's STILL using the energy he is, the guy has a problem.....and lemme tell you, a home office does not use much electricity.....and 2 home offices don't use much, either.
I have a home office.....Computer, on all the time, fax, 2 phones, electric heat, calculator, stereo, (and let's face it, for a home office, you can do anything you want if you have a light, a computer, a phone, and a fax - there isn't anything else you need).
No, Al is a 2 faced crock!!! He want's all of us to conserve, while he uses away....but it's supposed to be okay cause he buys "carbon offset" crap....who does he send the money to?
So, he pays a higher utility rate for his "green" power? B.S.. Know where that money goes? To the utility company, but it makes Gore look good.......
.....and I love how he announced that the oscars were "green...." this year...Yeah, they were green alright. How did he get there? On his private jet? How did all the "stars" get there? Did they ride bikes, take public transport? Or did they come in limos?
Was the "event site" heated/cooled? I do believe they were using power there, not? How about the limo rides to the before parties, and the after parties?
al gore is a "greenie" when it is convenient and PUBLIC. Otherwise? He's a waster. He tells us how to live, then does the exact opposite, but he "okays" it by saying he "bought offset credits". That's the biggest B.S. in the world..........so he's allowed to use it if he just pays a little more for it to excuse it? Pathetic.
And yeah, al, if you happen to read this, p.m. me, I'll "sell" you my credits, and hell, I'll plant trees too, for the right price....all so you can "feel good about your wasteful habits". I have room to plant trees, and I will gladly turn my thermostat down to 63 degrees, from the 67 it's set at (during the evening - at night and during the day it's set at 62). All al has to do is send me a check, then he can feel even better about himself.
And, as for his "home" office, and it uses so much electricity.....isn't he still a senator? Or is he not? I don't know. If he is shouldn't he be spending his time in D.C.? How in the hell can a home use that many kilowatt hours when you are supposed to be working hundreds of miles away? I mean, he's not even there, at his house, to use electricity.......
Al Gore has just lowered the global warming crisis, in my opinion, to the same level of "should I wear navy pants today, or black?"
algore is proof of the insanity of his diatribes - it's just that he didn't think he'd get called on it.
arch, don't label me an Al Gore defender here... but I think his "home office" is on a different scope than those of us who have a computer desk in the spare bedroom. I would imagine that his "home office" probably houses two or three full time employees like his personal assistants and whatnot... same for Tipper.
Quote: arch, don't label me an Al Gore defender here... but I think his "home office" is on a different scope than those of us who have a computer desk in the spare bedroom. I would imagine that his "home office" probably houses two or three full time employees like his personal assistants and whatnot... same for Tipper.
And that may be, but to take up 20 times as much energy? Sure, he has a bigger home, but is it 20 times bigger than the avg? And even if it is, with all of his "green" stuff, wouldn't he be able to find a way to knock that down a little bit? Or is it knocked down already, because of his "greenness"? If it is, the guy is a wasteful s.o.b.
Quote: Oh, so it's ok to have higher utility costs because he has a wife to house, a guest house, a pool house, etc. but he tells everyone else it's wrong to drive an SUV. LOL, even the apologists and defenders are laughable in their logic. If he's soooooo committed to energy conservation, BUY A SMALLER HOUSE AND GET RID OF THE POOL HOUSE.
I wasn't defending him, just showing another side to the story that they forgot to tell. If he indeed is buy "green energy" then he is paying 3x what the average pays on the same usage.
Then add the other stuff, and it shows the exaggeration in the initial story, just to swing the point of view toward the journalist point.
Either way, I believe the whole truth is somewhere in the middle as usual.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
If he's "green" and he's paying 3 times the normal amount: first of all, he's dumb, cause the "reg" utility is taking his 3 times the reg. amount.
Secondly, if it costs 3 times the normal amount to be "green", he's about the only one doing it (aside from Pres. Bush).
Thirdly, he's lucky enough to be in a position where $15 grand a year, $30 grand a year, or even $50 grand a year....doesn't mean squat to him.
Want me to be green? Okay. Want me to triple my electric bill? Not gonna happen.
And gore is not as green as he says he is...........and his "purchasing carbon offset credits" is a load of hooey....by doing that, he's saying " I can use whatever I want, as long as I "offset" it by paying extra.............isn't that alot like buying political favors? I mean, if I donate big money to someone that gets elected, I want some returns, right?
Gore is doing the same thing.........from a rich persons perspective......he uses what he wants, not what he needs, then he pays someone to plant a tree and he sleeps well at night, knowing he's "doing his part...".
Here is the "how much will it cost FAQ from the TVA, which I'm pretty sure includes Al's home.
Quote: How much does Green Power Switch cost? Green Power Switch is sold to residential consumers in 150-kilowatt-hour blocks (about 12 percent of a typical household’s monthly energy use). Each block adds $4 to the customer’s monthly power bills. Consumers may buy as many blocks as they like. In other parts of the country, residential consumers who participate in green power programs pay an extra $2 to $10 per month for green power. Green Power Switch is also marketed to commercial and industrial consumers, who are asked to buy blocks based on the amount of energy they use.
Quote: TVA has the capacity to provide as much as 97 million kilowatt-hours of green power annually. Physical laws determine where electricity is ultimately used, so power from these sources will go into TVA’s electric system as part of the Valley’s total power mix, rather than to individual homes or businesses. When the green power resources aren’t operating — for instance, when wind speeds are too low to generate energy — TVA’s other resources will continue to supply reliable electricity
In a nut shell, every customer gets the same power. Allthough buying "green power" does stimulate the industry, you will note that it does not have the capacity or reliability to fill the need for the entire grid.
I wasn't referring to you as defending him, but the author of the article. Part of his defense is he has a house for him and his wife, a guest house, etc....pretty weak excuses.
But the sad thing is that "green" energy does cost more currently.
Much like a Hybrid vehicle cost 5k more than the regular gas version of the same model, because supply and demand isn't high enough, it costs more.Ubr /> If it was cheaper and better, we'd all be doing it.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
I could care less about global warming. What the heck am I supposed to do about it anyway? Why should I get my shorts in a bind because some rich guy with beach front property might have less beach front property in a decade or so. BIG DEAL
The real environmental nightmare is the toxins we have put in our lakes, rivers and streams. Or the growth hormones in chickens. I'm more worried about the pollution in the air than the temperature.
Inconvenient truth. lol. Gore, you will be forever remembered as the bridesmaid and not the bride. THATS an inconvenient truth!
Let Them Eat Tofu! By Ann Coulter Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Even right-wingers who know that "global warming" is a crock do not seem to grasp what the tree-huggers are demanding. Liberals want mass starvation and human devastation.
Forget the lunacy of people claiming to tell us the precise temperature of planet Earth in 1918 based on tree rings. Or the fact that in the '70s liberals were issuing similarly dire warnings about "global cooling."
Simply consider what noted climatologists Al Gore and Melissa Etheridge are demanding that we do to combat their nutty conjectures about "global warming." They want us to starve the productive sector of fossil fuel and allow the world's factories to grind to a halt. This means an end to material growth and a cataclysmic reduction in wealth.
There are more reputable scientists defending astrology than defending "global warming," but liberals simply announce that the debate has been resolved in their favor and demand that we shut down all production.
They think they can live in a world of only Malibu and East Hampton -- with no Trentons or Detroits. It does not occur to them that someone has to manufacture the tiles and steel and glass and solar panels that go into those "eco-friendly" mansions, and someone has to truck it all to their beachfront properties, and someone else has to transport all the workers there to build it. (And then someone has to drive the fleets of trucks delivering the pachysandra and bottled water every day.)
Liberals are already comfortably ensconced in their beachfront estates, which they expect to be unaffected by their negative growth prescriptions for the rest of us.
There was more energy consumed in the manufacture, construction and maintenance of Leonardo DiCaprio's Malibu home than is needed to light the entire city of Albuquerque, where there are surely several men who can actually act. But he has solar panels to warm his house six degrees on chilly Malibu nights.
Liberals haven't the foggiest idea how the industrial world works. They act as if America could reduce its vast energy consumption by using fluorescent bulbs and driving hybrid cars rather than SUVs. They have no idea how light miraculously appears when they flick a switch or what allows them to go to the bathroom indoors in winter -- luxuries Americans are not likely to abandon because Leo DiCaprio had solar panels trucked into his Malibu estate.
Our lives depend on fossil fuel. Steel plants, chemical plants, rubber plants, pharmaceutical plants, glass plants, paper plants -- those run on energy. There are no Mother Earth nursery designs in stylish organic cotton without gas-belching factories, ships and trucks, and temperature-controlled, well-lighted stores. Windmills can't even produce enough energy to manufacture a windmill.
Because of the industrialization of agriculture -- using massive amounts of fossil fuel -- only 2 percent of Americans work in farming. And yet they produce enough food to feed all 300 million Americans, with plenty left over for export. When are liberals going to break the news to their friends in Darfur that they all have to starve to death to save the planet?
"Global warming" is the left's pagan rage against mankind. If we can't produce industrial waste, then we can't produce. Some of us -- not the ones with mansions in Malibu and Nashville is my guess -- are going to have to die. To say we need to reduce our energy consumption is like saying we need to reduce our oxygen consumption.
Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate poor blacks, DDT opponent Rachel Carson wanted to eliminate Africans (introduction to her book "Silent Spring" written by ... Al Gore!), and population-control guru Paul Ehrlich wants to eliminate all humans.
But global warming is the most insane, psychotic idea liberals have ever concocted to kill off "useless eaters." If we have to live in a pure "natural" environment like the Indians, then our entire transcontinental nation can only support about 1 million human beings. Sorry, fellas -- 299 million of you are going to have to go.
Proving that the "global warming" campaign is nothing but hatred of humanity, these are the exact same people who destroyed the nuclear power industry in this country 30 years ago.
If we accept for purposes of argument their claim that the only way the human race can survive is with clean energy that doesn't emit carbon dioxide, environmentalists waited until they had safely destroyed the nuclear power industry to tell us that. This proves they never intended for us to survive.
"Global warming" is the liberal's stalking horse for their ultimate fantasy: The whole U.S. will look like Amagansett, with no one living in it except their even-tempered maids (for "diversity"), themselves and their coterie (all, presumably, living in solar-heated mansions, except the maids who will do without electricity altogether). The entire fuel-guzzling, tacky, beer-drinking, NASCAR-watching middle class with their over-large families will simply have to die.
It seems not to have occurred to the jet set that when California is as poor as Mexico, they might have trouble finding a maid. Without trucking, packaging, manufacturing, shipping and refrigeration in their Bel-Air fantasy world, they'll be chasing the rear-end of an animal every time their stomachs growl and killing small animals for pelts to keep their genitals warm.
Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews
as soon as I read this sentance I lost interest in "the little black dress" girls writing......Stalin and Hitler classified as liberals is a joke.
Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews
as soon as I read this sentance I lost interest in "the little black dress" girls writing......Stalin and Hitler classified as liberals is a joke.
Agreed. Actually, and it's been a while since my last Poli Science course, but aren't Fascism and Communism on compete oppiste extreme's of the ideological spectrum?
Sure she takes things to extremes ...... but so do those on the other side of this argument. Never has so much conjecture been passed off as fact. "Inconvenient", indeed.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
yeppers! about as inconvienent as labeling Hitler and Stalin as liberals...here's some info..if you take a look at planetwide climatology through out history you will see that this global warming thing is nothing new...and the planet has survived...my personal view is that mere humans cannot destroy this rocky orb we call home...even if a full blown nuke war was to transpire I think the earth would,after eons have passed recover...we know so little about our home now it's silly,in my opinion to think that we,as humans, in our arrogance, can predict with unerring certainty , the future of this planet.
I love how she paints 'liberals' as wealthy elitists with no concept of reality while painting 'conservatives' as your hard-working average Joe breaking his back to get by.
That appears to have been the genesis of her political mindset. She is very bright,imaginative and gifted with the "gold medal" in wordsmithing; however, she is viscious in her attacks and makes some of President Clinton's hitmen look like choirboys.
The Fascist Communist characterization is off the mark in many ways but hits home in the single solitary dictator approach of both Stalin and Hitler. While Stalin's communist system brought dictatorship blended with marxist eceonomic means....Hitler relied upon private ownership of goods and services but under his handpicked managers and owners.
Listen folks Al Gore is not feared by the right at all. He is expected to hop in sometime and wreck havoc by upsetting the Hillary/then Obama applecart. Hillary is ticked that Obama got the first crack at the Hollywood money....they did it closed from TV crews [presumably to shelter donors who wished to be unseen]. She will be back with her purse open looking for Babs and the other big shots in political support very soon. She really doesn't want Gore coming in and taking any campaign money so that she can hoard it for the general election in 2008. Interesting!
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, .
Quote: I love how she paints 'liberals' as wealthy elitists with no concept of reality while painting 'conservatives' as your hard-working average Joe breaking his back to get by.
What's equally as funny is that liberals do the same thing.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul. - John Muir
Quote: I love how she paints 'liberals' as wealthy elitists with no concept of reality while painting 'conservatives' as your hard-working average Joe breaking his back to get by.
What's equally as funny is that liberals do the same thing.
Anyone ever hear of "Generation Investment Management"?
From what I can gather, and in point of honesty, from what I would guess, it is a firm that, very simply, makes investments.
Now, perhaps some one could dig deeper than I did, and if so, great. I should note, Gore is the chairman of the company - in one place it says honorary chairman, in another, it says simply "chairman".
My guess is he is also s stockholder. Another guess is he is buying at least some of his "carbon offset credits" from this co., that is a "for profit" business.
My point is, if my assumptions are right, isn't it going a bit overboard to hold him up as a "green" example if he is in fact buying his credits through a company he owns, that is for profit and uses only 5% of its profits on "green power"?
Or am I crazy?
And if my assumptions don't hold water, then "sorry, Mr. Gore, I goofed".
