If a right-winger used the enormous amounts of energy that Gore does and purchased carbon offsets, the liberals here would jump all over him. But you give Gore a pass when he consumes far beyond the average because he made a movie you like. It's clearly a doubly standard.

To do that, you need to speak to receptive audiences and hence, travel. Gore views this as a necessary evil and buys carbon offsets as a counterbalance. So what's the big deal?

If John McCain flew all over the country telling people about climate change and buying offsets, I wouldn't hold him to any different standard than I do about Gore. If McCain was doing the necessary work of informing people, I wouldn't expect him to go Amish...

This is obviously a very silly argument that some people are making for purely propagandistic purposes.  

If you ask me, most offsets are an excuse for bad behavoir. But Gore's crusade has already accomplished enough good to 'offset' the emissions excused by years of stubborn, arrogant denial, courtesy of the Bush/Cheney team.

a liberal in redsville

Even so, twenty times the national average seems profligate. It's hard to tell for sure without knowing any details.

So let's hear the details. Now Gore has a great opportunity to describe in detail how he is retrofitting and greening his house, and how everyone else can do the same.

Ped Shed Blog

The "good" Gore does is irrelevant. Now we're supposed to make a moral calculation every time someone burns energy, so see if they're worthy of it? That's ridiculous. 18,000 kWh/mth is just ridiculous -- the average American household uses 12,000 kWh/yr. This is the energy he uses AT HOME, not that he uses to preach on the road. He is an energy hog and living far beyond his (and the planet's) means, and you know it.

Tennessee Center's President Drew Johnson comes straight out of the right's network, coming from Exxon-funded American Enterprise Institute.

The climate change community and many others are all too familiar with the AEI and what they do all day. They call themselves a think tank, but "think" here deserves quotes. What they've been mostly known to do is write propaganda and collect checks from Exxon-Mobil.

The last thing we -- or Gore -- should get involved in is a tit-for-tat debate about the exact number of kilowatts Gore uses for this or that. The Hannitys of the world would like nothing better than for that debate to dominate the headlines for a few weeks. "Gore on the defensive!" "Gore can't shake hypocrisy story." "Gore exaggerated claims about toaster -- news at 11!"

The problem is, you're a decent human being, and you're inclined to offer the benefit of the doubt to other human beings. You think people are using words to communicate. But these people are not decent, and they're not using words to communicate. Not one person who's touched this story gives the slightest sh*t about Gore's energy use as such. They care about dominating media cycles and damaging Gore, period. While you're coming up with a spreadsheet accounting for Gore's joules, they're off to some other bullsh*t attack. You'll never keep up.

The proper response is mockery. They've lost on the merits. Gore's message is powerful and it's spreading. All they've got is some utility bills and a stable full of hacks.

grist.org

Libertarians are so astoundingly boring.  How is history supposed to procede, ideally?  Part One, government is abolished.  Part Two, we kill and eat one another.  Part Three, the handful of survivors die of stomach cramps, or bones in their throats, or bad colds.  Part Four, the last bunch of new-borns are either killed and eaten by wolves, bobcats and bears, or raised by them.  How splendid!  Is that a beautiful vision, or what!

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

But Gore's spokesperson has already responded by mentioning green electricity, carbon footprints, compact fluorescents, solar panels and other measures the Gore household is undertaking. And An Inconvenient Truth ends with a number of similar recommendations.

All I'm suggesting is to use the momentum in a positive way. One idea might be to find a green Bob Vila-type and do a walkthrough video of the Gore residence, talking about What is green electricity? What is a carbon footprint? How are solar panels retrofitted into a Southern mansion?

Sure that's all been done before, but not by Gore. The celebrity interest factor is at work now.

Ped Shed Blog

Regarding Al Gore, it is a matter of efficiency. His contributions to the enlightment of the human species and to raising our standard of living, expressed per carbon unit, far exceeds the productivity of any conservative.

Second...

Libertarians are stealth anarchists. I foolishly attended one of their meetings while developing my political views and quickly saw through their propaganda. Their representatives claimed that their fundamental principle was "no trespassing". There is no need for specific laws protecting the environment because, according to the Libertarians, you can do whatever you want with your own property so long as you don't "trespass" on anyone elses property... which incudes dumping chemicals on it. This would supposedly reduce lawsuits. They actually went on to say that if a car drove by and you could smell the exhaust, you were free to sue them for trespassing! Thus, everyone would be careful to never release anything noxious for fear of being sued!

What a load of !@#$%^&*()_+!!! The courts would froze by gridlock! And just try to find time and money to sue everyone who poisons your air and water!

Seems like voting for certain regulations in the first place is MUCH MORE EFFICIENT than hiring lawyer after lawyer for every little case of trespassing. Our lives would grind to a halt under Libertarian rule. I cannot take anything they say seriously.

Their followers only hear the "you can do whatever you want part", not the "but you had better not harm anyone else -- or their property -- in any way".

And how do they protect animal populations that might become concentrated in a few areas? Are we free to kill anything that enter our air space?! According to the Libertarians, my property extends to the upper reaches of the atmosphere. If a plane flies over without my permission, I'd be able to charge a toll! Not only our individual lives, but our entire economy would grind to a halt under Libertarian rule.

Cheers

Whiskerfish

Just because it's coming from the VRW doesn't mean they're not right.

Drudge picked it up, and a friend of mine saw it on the local news here in Seattle just last night.

Drudge is up on almost every local  newspaper and broadcast newsroom computer screen.  This is what has made mass delusional media go nut wing.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Al Gore has changed the world with a single Powerpoint presentation. Yes, he ought to live as he preaches, but let's put our energies towards following his good example and not sling mud around!

I believe that climate change is happening and that humans are a major cause. I believe that we must change our ways and stop trashing the planet. But I'm not going to give anyone a free ride, no matter what side of the political spectrum they're on. Why is anyone trying to defend Mr. Gore on this issue? You discredit yourself when you try to defend the indefensible.

Al Gore needs to start living what he preaches. If he's sincere and smart, he'll use this to make changes in his lifestyle. He'll perform an energy audit on his home, make the changes necessary to bring his electricity and natural gas usage down to a reasonable level, and then make the results public. He should also get rid of his extra houses. But I'm not holding my breath.

Might Al Gore "walk his talk" better?  Perhaps.  But then so could I.  That's the point:  We're all in this together.  Each of us has areas we need to work on.  If Gore is smart, he will deflect these criticisms by turning his home/office into a model of efficiency.  But even if he didn't, that's utterly irrelevant to our present predicament.

Global warming won't be stopped by individual acts of "heroism."  It's a systemic problem, requiring systemic solutions.  Either/or, black/white, good/evil dichotomies applied to individuals aren't helpful in fashioning policies that move us down the road.

Time to let this meme die a natural death.

The point is, no one does the due dilligence to find out to what extent the story really is true. Maybe Gore has a production company running out of his house. Maybe he has lots of guests at his house helping the cause. We don't know. So you and others out there have to rely on "as far as [you] can tell."

That's how Democrats lose elections.

The right wing media machine just doesn't care. It just wants to pump the rumors out, no matter whether they are substantial or not.

See Nancy Pelosi's "private jet":

The story was a simple and rather transparent smear effort. The conservative Washington Times, relying on leaks from the administration and the Pentagon, first floated the story that Pelosi was asking for carte blanche access to military planes. The background on the story was that following the attacks of 9-11, the White House decided the speaker should travel in a military plane, which is what Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL.) did while speaker. Hastert flew in a relatively small plane, since he only had to travel to Illinois. In order to travel to California without having to stop and refuel, Pelosi would have to fly in a larger plane.

Republicans then took the vaguely embarrassing Washington Times story and juiced it by inserting hollow allegations that the press, instead of vetting, simply echoed as fact.

See Obama's madrassa hoax:

"I said [to the article's unnamed writer], `That is a sexy story, if you can confirm it,' " Mr. Kuhner recalled. After Insight posted the article on Jan. 17, Mr. Kuhner said, he was disappointed to see that the Drudge Report did not link to it on its Web site as it has done with other Insight articles. So, as usual, he e-mailed the article to producers at Fox News and MSNBC.

Nice due dilligence, people. Nice, professional reporting. Would this ever happen to a Republican? No way.

The right media machine lowers its standards when it comes to attacking the left. That's because their "professional" standards come from being "ideologically correct." Being actually correct (providing a full, accurate account) doesn't matter. Their sugar daddies will keep paying their salaries even after their journalistic credibility gets blown to smithereens (which should have happened long ago. But somehow, the mainstream media keeps swallowing their McNews and spitting out their memes, giving them a credibility they don't deserve).

Yes folks, it's going out on national news on the other side of the planet.

Talk about a story with legs!

The newsreader smirked in closing "Just think how much he would have used if he was still in the White House", further trivialising climate change, an issue that has yet to make a serious impression on the national discourse out here.

Cheers

Whiskerfish

He is bad because he substitutes poli-science for real science.   He suppresses anything that does not fit his political agenda -- such as the Bush Administrations' multi year support of alternative hydrogen energy sources such as fuel cells.   He also champions science by committee and superstardom rather than science by fact.

He reminds me of Lysenko, the scientist who caught the ear of Stalinist Russian leaders and persuaded them to listen to his ideas about the inheritability of phenotypical characteristics into the genotype (example: a bushel of wheat can inherit the strength of another by placing one next to the other).   The result was a disaterous harvest and near starvation for the Russian people.

Al Gore is doing the same.  He down shouts valid criticisms...he uses the media to force feed his ideas...and he has assembled a Dyanetics-like cast of Hollywood zombies ready to flail anyone who points out their factual errors.

This is a sad day for America when Al Gore is put forth as anything more than a charlatan.

Let's see, the real empirical question is whether Gore's use of energy, at home and on the road, is made up for by a larger, global reduction in energy. He has a house (really a compound with offices and of course the right to extra security that accrues to every ex-VP, no matter one's political party) that uses a lot of energy. Okay, but if he and his wife both work at home they are not doing the daily commute to an office somewhere else.

Ah, you say, but he flies around the world with his message. Okay, but the only way to get the message out is to go to people and talk to them. If he does not succeed in reducing energy consumption around the world, then he failed. If he does, then his individual use was a necessary part of achieving the goal. It is a necessary tool.

I too live in the context of modern society, none of us can really help that. If we want to work to change our society, really just like everyone else, we can only use the tools available to us.

Your story is poppycock, and you knew it when you wrote it. I will say I do hope that Gore does more than buy offsets, that this spurs him to go solar and so on. He can afford it, should be a role model. If you help spur him to that, great. But if you think that even if he were hypocritical (which I do not see) that somehow his alleged hypocrisy means global warming is not happening, then you need a course in logic. It is real, no matter how Gore lives his life. Your children and mine will pay the price. The only valid response to an allegation of hypocrisy by Gore is to reduce your own energy use, otherwise you engage in the same hypocrisy you say he does, which actually makes you the hypocrite.

Daniel Jordan, PhD

Daniel Jordan, PhD

Like spamming comment sections of people who your clients disagree with? "Memetics construction" certainly sounds like a euphemism for paid propagandists.

But these are nits. Good work, Al!

:::: Jan Steinman, EcoReality. ::::

And y'all claim to kill and maim in the name of democracy, pollute and destroy by the will of the people.

I understand the sympathy you have for feelings, but your political system is so corrupt, you shame the world to claim anything.

Your next president will be by decree... after all it is the New World Order.

Should you stand for that ?  Can the rest world afford for America to even exist ?

LOL, I expect Bush will start WWW111 before y'all know what is happening.

America once strong, brave and a beacon for freedom has become the devil's whore.  Forget the BS of environmentalism for y'all have destroyed the Earth, and worse, you want to blame everyone else.

Start looking at the real message your system is sending.... and stop this rehash of old feelings of 'right' and 'good' y'all once had.

all inconceivably INCORRECT !!!!!!!!

yes I am up to a debate, not hiding anything.

Now where is YOUR proof ?

I did a search on Google Scholar, attempting to find some in the mainstream scientific journals.

I searched for manmade|anthropogenic global warming.   It seemed like most of the articles were from 1997 and 1998, and just browing the top hits, I didn't see anything conclusive at all.   There's just a bunch of "what if" type hypotheses.

I think Al Gore has been lumping a bunch of "maybe's" or even, "could be's" in as "yeses".

How typical of Gore-bots.   No facts, just speculation, down shouting and invective.

Question for you: Where are the articles?

you-read-it-here-first.com/viewtopic.php?p=6&sid=4d64563275c1e09bd694607a323cb7e9

Selfish Software is based on the ideas of Richard Dawkins, the selfish gene.
[...]
Selfish Software lives for itself. It does whatever it takes to "survive". Selfish builds whatever structures it needs to propagate -- but even propagation can be counter-evolutionary. I mean look at viruses -- yes, they propogate, but that only makes them more visible and subject to attack and elimination. How about a piece of software that exists in only one copy, and just hangs around in one place for years and years? That's selfish! How about software that has some critical need, but refuses to add an "easy to use GUI" and makes its user learn a cryptic and arcane CLI that also makes the program super efficient. That's very selfish.

I say, Welcome to the Texeme Construct: Home of Selfish Software.

Could you please tell me what your data sources were and the
methodology used for determining Al Gore's consumption of
electricity?
Thank you,

Perhaps others would also like to ask TP.org about this?

Steve E. Whidbey Environmental Action Network

I'll start:
I've lied in love.

So I'm now obviously not morally suitable to ever advise anyone else regarding their love life, or lack thereof. And I was so looking forward to changing my name to Anne Landers.


Steve E. Whidbey Environmental Action Network