We endorse ideas and policies, not people.

I always insisted on getting my scientific information from scientists. If you do that you quickly realize our greenhouse gas emmisions has and is continuing to causing climate change.

As far as Al Gore well he's a politician -I wouldn't trust a politician for sound fiscal advice, education advice for my kids, health advice or moral direction why would I make a judgement about global warming based on him?

PS
George Bush is a politican also same rules apply to him also.

So, what do the enviro-leftwing-wackos think about their golden boy now?

Typekey is down. I hope this gets through.

What do I think?

I think Al Gore will be the next POTUSA.

All Al Gore needs to do is announce he will run for President of the United States of America, and you will see the excitement really start. People are waiting.

I said it once before...be afraid. Be very afraid. Your war mongering days are almost over.

A new day is dawning. I thank God for Al Gore.

Neologizer, I did what you said, and quite frankly I could not quickly conclude that global warming is a real threat or even that a threat of global warming should be taken seriously.

However, I have concluded that people like Al Gore care nothing for the environment. What they really care about is power. And they'll use any fading crippled celebrity, weeping widow, unwitting soldier, or whatever to get that power.

Al Gore doesn't even support LIFE. Save the terrorists, abort (kill) the babies, and damn those terrible conservatives for fighting for a cause we don't even like. Freedom sucks. I mean unless of course it's the freedom to have sex with anyone you want and then kill the proof of your consummation.

This is just like death taxes and private education, those rules and regs apply to you, not to the elite DemoRat politicians!

Just ask Froncois Heinz Kerry and the Swimmer! And of course Big Al.

A group calling itself "The Tennessee Center For Policy Research" authored the press release you are quoting above. Their website has no traffic. Their links are to right wing groups. This is an organization that did not exist before Gore won the Oscar. How did they get Gore's electric bills? Did they steal his mail in violation of federal law?
Gore is a former VP. The security system alone burns up up more electric power than most homes.
You guys are pathetic.

So, we should all condemn Ted Kennedy for virtually stopping all wind mill projects in the country to stop the project off Cape Cod?

Will liberals here join us in condemning the liberal elite in Massachusetts for getting a Federal law passed to stop a NIMBY project? Will liberals here join us in pointing out the hypocrisy of Gore, Kennedy, Kerry, and other limousine liberal?

Ideas NOT people right?

Since Gore lives in Nashville, maybe he gets his electricity from the TVA and its hydroelectric power plants. If so, perhaps he could avoid his hypocrisy by encouraging more dam construction. Then the Kennedys could sail their boats in the resulting reservoir.

I wouldn't trust a politician for sound fiscal advice

Trouble is, most of the people in charge of the fiscal affairs of this country are elected, and thus ARE politicians.

What I found at Carbonfund.org was this:

-Carbonfund.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. (Sound familiar???)

-93% of our revenue supports our mission of climate change EDUCATION (not actual reduction like air scrubbers or recycling facilities), offsets and outreach you can see our most recent Form 990-EZ at www.Guidestar.org your donation to Carbonfund.org is tax deductible as allowed by law

But no where does this service indicate that they use the $ for anything other than education, so, where are the Gores and GW kooks that spend their $ on "offsets" helping the cause except thru education??

As I see it, it's simply another 501 (c) created to help hide "the inconvenient truth".... Al baby!!

If someone can prove to me that these offsets are actually used to reduce greenhouse gases rather than just talk about them, I'll stand corrected.

BTW, when someone says " I've purchased carbon offsets", it's like saying "I didn't have sex with that women...Monica Ludewinskee".
What a hypocracy!!

Hey Bigfoot...watch the "sail their boats" thing
(my sport for over 30 years)!! I don't want to be put in the same category with the Swimmer....LOL...just kidding!

The more I research this "Carbon Offsets" deal the more I find it to be a way for the Gore types to justify their indulgence.

Keep digging and even you neologizer will find that the majority of these 501's are scammers that don't actually use the $ for reduction, only education.

Yeah, they may plant a tree or two, but what about the other 93% or so? If they're like any other 501, the lion's share funds overhead...not cure.

Republicans, it's time to let go!
Bush has been in the White House for six years and yet you blog about Clinton and Gore everyday.
You have an unhealthy fixation and should get some help.

> So, what do the enviro-leftwing-wackos think about their golden boy now?

Don't expect much to change on that score. It's a religion to these people, and as such is impervious to facts.

navydad: And how much of that 'climate change education' involves political activity and funding (either through the friont door or the back door) of Dem candidates?

God only knows Hermie. But I would guess after Gore won the Oscar, that there'll be a lot more of it thru the front door since the Hollywierd crowd now believes GW is fact and the lobbyists will be out in force.

My thought is that in order to factualize GW for the HW types, the left only needs to hear it from their leader...Algore.

I've noticed though how Slick Willy maintains a fairly low profile on the topic. Your thoughts???

How many kilowatt-hours of electricity Al Gore uses in his home is a non-issue compared to the blazing ignorance of those who are seeking to drive the United States backward by rejecting science. With a vocal minority in the US screaming their heads off in an effort to discredit both Global Warming and Evolution, we risk becoming the laughing stock of the western world. There is a disturbing similarity between this and the rejection of Galilieo's push for acceptance of Copernican Heilocentrism in the seventeenth century.

There is a lot of talk on this blog, calling those who accept Global Warming as sound science, "left wing wackos" and "ignoramuses". I am not left wing, nor am I an ignoramus. The consensus among the world's leading scientists and climatologists is that man is having an affect on the enviroment. Furthermore, it's come to light that many vocal opponants of global warming have been paid off.

I am at a loss to understand the passionate opposition of many conservatives. Other than working for an energy company or being married to the blblical belief that God has given earth to man to do with as he pleases, I would love to hear people discuss their reasons for rejecting Global Warming.

Now that you mention it, Navy, ol' Slick hasn't said much on the issue. Maybe it's because the vast majority of "spokespeople" for the GW alarmist crowd are such kooks and hypocrites, Gore being the prime example, and Clinton simply doesn't want to be associated with such people. Or it's possible that he doesn't believe the hype.

I heard Laurie David quoted the other day as saying (I'm paraphrasing) that if every household in America replaced 5 incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescents, it would be the same as taking 8 million cars off the road. Now that may or may not be true, but it just doesn't resonate with your average Joe Sixpack. One of the facets of the debate that I find interesting is that you seldom hear actual scientists, other than the few who have been caught up in the politics of the issue, make such claims.

Hey Spook, CAindie before you brings up the point that "The consensus among the world's leading scientists and climatologists is that man is having an affect on the environment".
My argument is; at what level do humans have an affect? If these so-called GW scientists are so insistant upon GW, then show us where we humans need to reduce, but not like they they said ten or twenty years prior, you know, famines (Erhlich Stanford), tidal waves (Whoopies Hubby), earth burning (Leo Dicraprio) and others that have all cried wolf.

Let's see some real hard evidence that doesn't relate to millions of years of cyclic climate.

Another Inconvenient Hypocrisy: Matt is a big war cheerleader, but he doesn't seem to be doing any actual fighting. What's up with that?

I took a look at the Carbonfund site.

It doesn't explain how they have the authority to issue 'carbon credits' to anyone. They aren't affiliated with the UN, the Kyoto signers, or any other mainstream international organization. There is nothing on their site, or any link which explains how received this authority, under what laws they can exist, and how they administer the 'banking' the credits which they 'sell'. Where do they get these credits from?

I smell a con here.

Another Inconvenient Hypocrisy: Matt is a big war cheerleader, but he doesn't seem to be doing any actual fighting. What's up with that?

lots of lefties say crap like this, "oh you support the war, so you should go fight in it."

Why didn't all those moonbats who oppose the war go over there to become human shields? Why don't they all drive hybrids or ride bikes all the time to not support those big bad oil companies?

Does anyone watch the HBO Show "Carnivale"? Al Gore reminds me of the preacher on there. Creepy and something just 'aint' right.

Democrats are hypocrites. John Kerry didn't want the wind farms in his backyard, so we got them here in Illinois now. It's no wonder that Mr. 1-1/2 gallon flush/Cow Flatulent man uses up so many resources.

And let's not forget the many on the Left that want to actually punish people with jail time or job loss if they dare disagree with the premises behind the phoney-baloney global warming hysteria.

Navydad,Spook

The job of a scientist is to ask the question, and then do the research to try and answer that question. Their job isn't to formulate policy decisions. That's where politicians come in. In this case the question is....Are Humans contributing to climate change? Most scientists studying this say we are and they agree that there will be changes if we continue on our current trajectory.

Whatever you think about the issue, it's not the scientists job to tell you to replace your inefficient light bulbs. If your looking for guidance on what to do that's where your policy maker (government) should come in. How do we fix this? Yes, science and policy get all mixed up from time to time and the line is blurred by those who confuse the two.

Cheers!

Eric

Very good! In essence, it is the ability of each individual to judge whether he/she chooses to "change that lite bulb", not the scientist or the politician that should dictate such.

Also, I personally agree that humans contribute to GW, however, at what level, percentage wise, and what if the majority of climate change occurs naturally? The jury is still out on the actual human contribution.

Eric, what I was trying to say, (not very well, apparently) is that the scientists are the ones who, I would think, would know what the solutions are. Certainly it was not politicians who figured out that compact fluorescent bulbs produce the same amount of light, use 75% less energy and last up to 10 times longer than an incandescent bulb. If this were stem cell research, I doubt that medical science would let politicians decide who gets what cure, unless, of course, we go to some sort of national health insurance, but that's another whole topic.

I think Al Gore will be the next POTUSA.

All Al Gore needs to do is announce he will run for President of the United States of America, and you will see the excitement really start. People are waiting.

I said it once before...be afraid. Be very afraid. Your war mongering days are almost over.

A new day is dawning. I thank God for Al Gore.
Posted by: raker13 at February 27,:04 AM

Earth's temprature has always been fluctuating,there's nothing man can do about it, except maybe speeding it up, but really, do we really want to spend billons on delaying the inevitible or instead use that money to find ways of not being dependant on this planet for survival. For that to happen industrialisation and good old capitalism is the only way forward.

Sooooo - none of the liberals would take on Teddy K for killing all of the countries wind mill projects. Ya see people, this is why we think that you're net serious and this is just politics.

Just so the record shows it (in case no one's mentioned it above), Gore apparently purchases renewable energy credits that (more?) than offset the amount of energy he consumes. The way this works is, the energy that runs his home comes from the main grid and so is mostly not from a renewable source. However, he pays extra money to a service which in turn pays renewable energy producers (wind farms mostly) to supply energy to the main grid where it gets mixed in with all the other energy, by nature of the grid. The utility company then reduces its (non-renewable) power production by an equivalent amount. In effect, then, Gore's energy consumption is entirely carbon-neutral and once again you Bushbot attack dogs are full of crap.

For an example of a company that sells renewable energy credits:
www.3phases.com

For an AP story about Gore's use of such credits:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070227/ap_on_re_us/gore_electric_bill;_ylt=AvnRrGlyUy4JMCb1TZpsI_0DW7oF

Suck on that! But, of course, the damage is done so victory is acheived. Keep on truckin, sheeple! baaaaaaa

So, if you're rich enough you can pollute all you want if you buy some guilt credits?

But, the rest of us have to pee in the dark to save energy?

That's fair, I guess.

And I've got some "stupid credits" to sell you. For only $49.95 you can say all the stupid things you want, and I'll find a Conservative to say only smart things to balance it out. 'Kay?

From FAQ page at 3Phases.com: "For the average US residential customer who uses 900 kilowatt hours of electricity per month he/she will pay an extra $18.00 per month [to become completely carbon neutral]."

$18/month is a lot to many people and no one that I know of is saying renewable energy credits are the ultimate solution to the negative externalities of mankind's energy consumption (because demand would probably quickly outpace supply, driving price up to crazy heights, I think), but it is a fact that all of the energy used in Gore's home, in effect, comes from clean, renewable energy sources; therefore, why would Gore feel guilty at all about the amount of energy he uses? At least, any more guilty than any rich person might feel about the benefits that their wealth brings to them personally.

+ I'm sorry that you thought that no one would have to make any sacrifices to save our descendants from environmental disaster, assuming we are on a course towards disaster (which I am not interested in debating with you), but, you Bushbots love to talk about the sacrifices necessary to save us and our descendants from the threat of S. Hussein (e.g. $1-2+ trillion dollars which could have saved millions of lives lost due to things like malaria and starvation or been used for many, many other wonderful uses), so you clearly can see how sometimes sacrifices are required for the greater good (not that I do [or do not] think the Iraq War is going to benefit the greater good).

Anyway, I surmise that you have no interest in sincere debate, as your comments are generally so absurdly vacuous that it becomes difficult to believe the vacuousness could be unintended, so I most likely won't be responding to you further - in case you want to save your efforts.

peas out, m'kay?

Vacuous?
Wow, I see your "Word of the Day" Calendar is paying dividends.

Gore receives his power from TVA like everyone else in that area (btw, you owe me $49.95 for the “why would Gore feel guilty at all about the amount of energy he uses?” statement, but you can have the stupid remark about Iraq for free; I can always use a laugh at your expense.

Thanks for that.

Vacuous?
Wow, I see your "Word of the Day" Calendar is paying dividends.

Gore receives his power from TVA like everyone else in that area (btw, you owe me $49.95 for the “why would Gore feel guilty at all about the amount of energy he uses?” statement, but you can have the stupid remark about Iraq for free; I can always use a laugh at your expense.

Thanks for that.

(The third attempt today to try and post this.)

We now know about Al Gore'Em's hypocrisy, telling others to conserve while his gigantic mansion uses more electricity than 20 average homes... but... but... but... Al buys hypocritical "carbon footprint credits".

How many have also read the story in the Chicago Tribune about the guy with a relatively modest, energy conserving home?

"The 4,000-square-foot house is a model of environmental rectitude."
"Geothermal heat pumps located in a central closet circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet deep in the ground where the temperature is a constant 67 degrees; the water heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. Systems such as the one in this 'eco-friendly' dwelling use about 25% of the electricity that traditional heating and cooling systems utilize."

"A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof runs; wastewater from sinks, toilets and showers goes into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is used to irrigate the landscaping surrounding the four-bedroom home. Plants and flowers native to the high prairie area blend the structure into the surrounding ecosystem."

"No, this is not the home of some eccentrically wealthy eco-freak trying to shame his fellow citizens into following the pristineness of his self-righteous example. And no, it is not the wilderness retreat of the Sierra Club or the Natural Resources Defense Council, a haven where tree-huggers plot political strategy."

"This is President George W. Bush's "Texas White House" outside the small town of Crawford.

While you may not have heard it, this story is not new. The liberal Gore'Em loving media have know the story for years, at least since 2001. You haven't heard it, though, because it doesn't suite their message, their propaganda, and their agenda... It really is AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH!

AAR

(Hope this doesn't double post)

AAR: Although it is clear you are being disingenuous in your comment, I'll bite once, for the readers who might be influenced by your fallacious logic.

Gore, by purchasing renewable energy credits, produces no more CO2 than had his home been entirely and directly powered by solar energy (i.e. none), like Bush's ranch. If he used 22 billion kWh instead of the reported 22 thousand kWh, he would produce no more CO2. The energy used in his home is, in effect, completely clean energy (if anyone doesn't understand how this works, read my post above, and, if that doesn't cut it, follow the provided links). I surmise that you understand this, but just want to make sure no one is fooled by your contrived ignorance, as I said. I have overwhelmingly demolished the logic of this post and it is sad to see how idiotic you are willing to make yourself appear in defense of this propaganda (though, I realize, from reading your comments over the years, you have long ago abandoned interest in being part of the reality-based community in favor of being a commited propagandist).

Further, I have long known about the eco-friendly nature of Bush's ranch and saw many stories in the MSM about it, especially during his initial campaign for President. But, if you want a case of hypocrisy, square his use of solar energy with this quote of his:

"We need an energy bill that encourages consumption."

-President Bush, Sept. 23, 2002, Trenton, New Jersey, speech

Why does he want us to consume, when he conserves? What a hypocrite! LOL!

Anyway, good luck in your continuing efforts to subvert our democracy through your war on truth.

PJAI,

First off, Democrats (Liberals) can STOP their hysteria, doom-and-gloom, end-of-the-world media hype about Global Warming. Democrats are only using their usual and typical propaganda, misleading information, brainwashing, and scare tactics to foster and impose THEIR views, THEIR desires, THEIR solutions, and THEIR agenda on America... on the entire world!

The problem is America's and the world's need for cheap, plentiful, renewable, and relatively non-polluting fuels, electricity, and energy. That's the problem we need to solve now -- NOT GLOBAL WARMING! Coincidentally, however, solve the problem of providing that cheap, plentiful, and renewable energy and we solve both. Solve the energy and fuel problem and Chicken Little's Global Warming problem (perceived or actual) will be solved or significantly reduced too!!!

As to Al Gore'Em... green or otherwise, and no matter how you Democrats (Liberals) spin it, HYPOCRITE Al Gore'Em is using far, far, far more energy than the average American. If we consider all of his houses, cars, limos, planes, trips, and everything else, Gore'Em is probably using more energy than 30, 40, 50 or even more average American families. If that's what Opulent Al needs for his lavish and excessive liberal lifestyle, fine. Al's got plenty of money to do it. Just admit the fact and stop using smoke and mirrors to try and convince the world that Al's "walking HIS talk". Stop demanding and preaching too, that everyone else -- who don't have Al's or his liberal friends millions -- pay more for their energy, pay higher taxes, and reduce the energy they need for their own relatively modest and "average" lifestyles! Stop trying to cut, reduce, or raise the prices on what we have now when there are other solutions!

Gore'Em and his Liberal (Democrat) "religious" followers (yes, it's a religion) preach and insist that everyone else conserve, conserve, and conserve... even as he consumes, consumes, and consumes... along with his wealthy Hollywood friends and wealthy Democrat politicians! In reality, Gore'Em hasn't cut the amount of energy he uses; he hasn't closed off most of the rooms in that lavish, energy consuming house; he hasn't sold his other houses; he hasn't closed his "pool house" which uses the energy of a couple of average Americans in itself; he hasn't cut his driving and flying mileage; he isn't taking mass transit, riding the bus, or car pooling; he isn't driving a small two person electric car; he isn't riding a bicycle to work; he isn't taking a bus or train rather than flying: and on and on and on!

In reality, Gore'Em hasn't changed his lifestyle or given up anything! He's just made himself and the Liberals "feel good" by paying more for what he uses! He isn't doing the things he and his Democrat friends want to force the rest of us and the world to do. So what if he IS paying a little more to "FEEL GOOD" and to make the world "BELIEVE" he's using politically correct "green energy". The fact is, he has the greenback dollars to buy it and he doesn't even miss the measly (to him) few thousand dollars it costs to purchase the higher priced energy or those meaningless, silly "carbon footprint credits"! If Gore'Em weren't using all that "green energy", others could use it instead of the "less green" energy they might be using.

And those "carbon footprint offsets and credits"? Just more useless, feel good liberal political correctness!

How about some "littering offsets and credits"? If a person wants to throw his or her trash out the car window and along the highway, just purchase "littering offsets" from a person who doesn't and wouldn't litter in the first place. Toss that trash out the car window and "feel good", knowing you have purchased "littering offsets and credits"! Want to speed? Purchase some "speeding offsets and credits" from someone who doesn't even own a car. Speed away, safe and comfortable in your "belief" that the "average speed limit" isn't being exceeded. Need some "electricity or heat offsets and credits"? Pay an Eskimo not to heat their Igloo or run their refrigerator as much!

And if Al Gore'Em is a little concerned or embarrassed about his big cars and limos, just purchase some "limo offsets and credits". Pay someone in Venice not to drive their limos in those canals, or pay a native in the middle of the Amazon Jungle not to purchase or drive a limo or SUV through the impassable jungle. PROBLEMS SOLVED! Al Gore'Em and his misguided liberals can "FEEL GOOD" and sleep well, knowing they have solved the world's problems through their useless, misleading, sound good, and POLITICALLY CORRECT "footprint offsets and credits"!!!

And while we transition to other forms of plentiful, cheap, and renewable energy, America must also increase our own petroleum production and refining, and reduce the trillions of dollars we are sending to our enemies and to the economies, workers, and taxes of other nations! That means drilling in ANWR, off the coasts, and other sources of our own petroleum... NOW!!!

AAR

Damn, I guess the New York Times agrees with my "Guilt Credits" assesment. Here's my favorite part, "In that way, the program may actually help sell “larger cars with higher emissions” and thus contribute more to global warming, according to Mary Taylor, a campaigner with the energy and climate team at Friends of the Earth."

AAR, if I ever get PJIA to pay for his "Stupid Credits" I'll cut you in.