‘Proud’ Polluter Sean Hannity Launches Pathetic Smear Attack Against Al Gore
‘Proud’ Polluter Sean Hannity Launches Pathetic Smear Attack Against Al Gore
On “Hannity’s America” tonight, Fox anchor Sean Hannity attacked Al Gore for what he called a case of “global warming hypocrisy.” Hannity presented no evidence to suggest Gore is currently flying on private jets or doing anything inconsistent with his record as one of our nation’s leading environmentalists. Here’s a review of some of the lowlights from tonight’s show:
Hannity attacked Gore for taking a private jet from New Hampshire to Washington DC in January 2000 in order to attend the State of the Union address.
– Al Gore was the sitting Vice President at the time, and as such, he followed Secret Service security protocols. That is why he did not fly commercially, as Hannity seemed to suggest he should have.
Hannity cited ThinkProgress’s posting from last Friday, claiming that we “outed” Gore for still using private jets. He called it “another moment of global warming irony.”
– It’s unclear what “irony” Hannity is referring to. As Gore’s office explained to us, he reduces his emissions as much as he can, drives a hybrid, flies commercially whenever possible, and purchases green power. In the few instances where he may have flown a private jet, he purchases carbon offsets for the emissions. Nothing in that record is inconsistent with someone trying to reduce his carbon footprint on our planet.
Hannity said: “I travel on private planes, I have an SUV that I’m proud of. I think this global warming hysteria of his is ridiculous.”
– Thus, the real “irony” of tonight’s show was Hannity feigning concern for Gore’s carbon emissions, while expressing his naive belief that his own emissions are having no impact on our climate. If Hannity were truly concerned about carbon emissions, he would follow the example of Al Gore, cutback on his luxurious private jet lifestyle, and begin purchasing carbon offsets. If he’s not concerned about carbon emissions, then he should stop launching politically-motivated hit jobs that don’t have a point.
Watch a video compilation of some moments from the show:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Shorter Hannity:
My fart don’t stink.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:14 pmHannity hates Al Gore who is a good person, but he loves George Bush who is a bad president? Sean is very confused GOPer.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:15 pmDid Hannity even graduate from high school?
February 18th, 2007 at 11:15 pm…and on a more worthy note, John McCain wants to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Sean WHO?????
February 18th, 2007 at 11:16 pmFew parade their asinine ideas as flamboyantly as Hannity.
Consider the source….
February 18th, 2007 at 11:16 pmwhat are you doing up so late, faiz?
something for the west coasters?
have fun!
February 18th, 2007 at 11:25 pmg’nite all…
…and put a tie on O’hannity, you’re not even 1/100th as cool as Bill Maher, so give it up already, Conservative PIG.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:27 pmYou know a smear-tactic is pathetic when you can debunk every point without even doing research.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:27 pmHannity said: “I travel on private planes, I have an SUV that I’m proud of. I think this global warming hysteria of his is ridiculous.â€
This of course coming from a propagandist who talks out of his @$$ about how well things are going in Iraq and denies the existence of separation of church and state. An embarassment to humanity…
February 18th, 2007 at 11:28 pmwhat are you doing up so late, faiz?
something for the west coasters?
Comment by katy
Faiz drew the short straw and had to watch Hannity tonight.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:32 pmPoor thing…
Carbon offsets don’t do it for me.
Al Gore needs to stop consuming so many resources. Set a good example.
Hannity can go to hell. He’s got his head up his ass.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:33 pm1) Hannity is full of crap, always has been, always will be, case closed.
2) I’m not a concern troll or anything, but I have to say I did notice that in An Inconvenient Truth there were quite a few shots of Gore riding in cabs and cars versus none of him riding in buses and subways. Not to say that this Fox smear is worth anything, but I did wonder about that.
February 18th, 2007 at 11:42 pmOn Sunday night, Sean Hannity unveiled his latest smear campaign against Al Gore. Hoping to portray the Oscar and Nobel-nominated Gore as a “Gulfstream Liberal,” the Hannity’s America hit segment will try to paint the former Vice President as a private jet flying, carbon-burning, global warming machine.
And Sean Hannity should know. After all, when it comes to hypocrisy over extravagant travel on private aircraft, Hannity is the master of hot air.
For the details, see:
February 18th, 2007 at 11:44 pm“The Plane Truth: Private Jet-Setter Hannity Attacks Gore.”
I think if the government and Gore was really concerned, they would take commercial airliners instead of private jets. These people we elect are ‘representatives,’ not royalty. They should not only be treated as the rest of the citizens but also fly with them. It is astounding how much more pollution our ‘representatives’ produce as we let them get away with it.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:07 amwow it stated in you press release that you confirmed the fact of Al “tree hugger” Gores’ private use of air travel. That sucks for you, i feel bad that you all are so twisted in to being dupped repeatedly, he probably will get the oscar just like the dixie chicks deserved to clean house at the grammy’s. Global warming histeria is the only ploy the liberals could mustuer up becasue they for one can milk it up til the end of human existence. gore followers make me sick. Try living up to what you preach and you might not have to rely on brainwashing tactics, such tactics that are found in north korea, cuba, nicaragua (communisim and socialist countries.) These countries would kiss GORES RING, if he were to become a president of this beautiful country. which i for one will begin my campaign that goes against everything gore is about. He is a evil man, and i hope that he become the next Emerson and just lives in the woods, hugs trees and become a sasqwatch. I do believe he turned into some type of sasqwatch once before, thats right when he lost the electorial vote.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:24 amStay Sharp!!!
Roberto Caliente`
Hannity is a sad example of an ugly, arrogant American, despite his own blather to the contrary. He should be ignored out of a job.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:49 amwell,we can see very clearly with warlock, err Murdock owned FOX attacking in such a dishonest maner, that maybe money trumps…. global disasters…. sometimes, as well as peace and TRUTH.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:59 amHoly nuts! Sport coat, no tie. He looks like Ahmadinejad! Go away you terrorist-loving filth!
February 19th, 2007 at 1:00 am#14: I think if the government and Gore was really concerned, they would take commercial airliners instead of private jets. These people we elect are ‘representatives,’ not royalty. They should not only be treated as the rest of the citizens but also fly with them.
I’ve got no problem with this. My only concern would be security. If the Secret Service okayed this plan, I’d be all for it. If they thought it placed elected officials at risk, I would think the dangers might outweigh the savings–and it might deter good people from running for office. (There are too few of those as it is!)
February 19th, 2007 at 1:09 amAt least he is admitting that global warming is real and caused by man.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:37 amLong Live ThinkProgress!!! You guys are salvation. Sean Hannity is utterly juvenile, literally immature. Literally, his mental and emotional development was arrested, retarded in adolescence. He absolutely, positively just stopped developing and never got to the maturity of a young adult. It is pretty strange, but nothing could be more self-evident. How can anyone stand listening to his whining, devoid of reasoned thinking, blathering drivel?! Other’s who are developmentally arrested I guess? The guy runs his motor mouth, but nothing of utterly any substance or consequence ever makes it out. But he always gets his ridicule in. That’s why he is not only pitiful, but also repugnant.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:40 amIf Gore’s work in spreading awareness and spurring action on climate change SAVES THE FUTURE OF THE EARTH, will his use of carbon-offset private jet travel to accomplish this be seen as hypocritical or immoral whatsoever?
Assuming Hannity is being honest, he’s operating under the premise that the vast majority of scientists are wrong and part of some bizarre conspiracy, and he therefore could never accept the obvious argument above. But I’m surprised the two women on the program didn’t at least try to make this argument.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:50 am“I travel on private planes, I have an SUV that I’m proud of. I think this global warming hysteria of his is ridiculous.â€
Even if global warming were not true (which it is), how about all the pollution and related environmental problems you are contributing to, Mr. Hannity? Have you ever given those as much as a thought?
Not to mention dependence on oil imported from the MiddleEast.
Ssshheesshhh…. what a nitwit…
February 19th, 2007 at 1:54 amI personally like to refer to him as “Heil” Hannity.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:05 amYo Hannity!
Listen up fool!
I want you to come and peddle your books in my town.
I want you to “autograph one personally” for me.
Then after you do that I will autograph your shiteating grin with my fist.
Capiche you little assbag?
Come on! PLEASE come back out on the road selling your books, I can’t wait for you to sign mine so I can “sign yours”
Hannity, you are a vermin and America and it’s guiding principles of truth, justice and the American way are your host.
We are fixing to get a big bottle of verminicide come Nov 2008 for you.
Maybe Falwell and Robertson can give you a job parking cars for them after your “journalism” foray is over.
“Yo, valet boy! Chop-Chop”, get used to it you greasy little weasel.
Sorry journalism didn’t work out for you.
Hey and Hannity? I am bringing my boyfriend Gino with me as a backup, like I’ll need it.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:07 amMore idiot stuff from the global warming deniers. Watch them paint themselves into a teeny, weeny corner crowded with GW deniers and discredited neocons. Watch them lose their friends in Congress in 2006. Watch them lose more of their friends in Congress in 2008. Watch them consigned to the far fringe of the ultra-rightwing.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:20 amHe’s a very, very little man. Kinda of guy, who used to the crap kicked out of him in the boys locker room due to his lack of significant manhood.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:29 amJeff Gannon
ted Hagget
Mark Forley
Get a clue
February 19th, 2007 at 3:17 amI watched Hannity’s America, waiting to see how laughable Fox Noise’s new show, The Half hour News Hour, would be. At first I was just going to play it in the background and go about some other business, but I grew interested in Hannity’s relentless smearing of Al Gore, WTF is going on, I asked myself. Anyway, I’m going to have Hannity’s America on again, hoopefully weekly, and get in contact with the show’s sponsors, letting them know I will not be buying their products. I was very pissed off with this pathetic excuse for a human ebeing and his hit job on Gore.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:17 amDick Cheney flies commercial airlines all the time. Pity Al Gore didn’t get with the program when he was Vice President.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:04 amLet’s face it. Sean Hannity hates liberals. He uses his Fox News Channel television shows “Hannity and Colmes,” and “Hannity’s America,” and nationally syndicated radio show to personally attack those he dislikes. But there is truth to this saying, “what goes around, comes around,” and the payback is far worse. Especially for people-and Hannity-who claim they are “Christian.”
Sean Hannity,45, is an ambitious, self-serving man with low self esteem. He’s also obssessed with his public image. If you say anything good, or bad about him, Hannity wants to know. Was this disorder developed during his childhood in Franklin Square?
Hannity, unfortunately, will continue to spread his right-wing diatribe on the Fox News Channel. The suits at Fox News Channel are concerned more about ratings, than the accuracy of a news story.
I don’t blame Hannity. I blame Fox News Producer John Finley, Fox News Senior Vice President Bill Shine (Sean’s boss), and Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes for hiring him, and allowing him to spread his venom.
By the way, Hannity should do the environment a favor by replacing his gas guzzling black SUV (which he won’t). But keep the BMW, it’s safer for the kids.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:24 amWhen you do not understand a certain subject, please study the facts and read the expert’s opinion.Hannity prefers to ridicule both message and the messengers, prior to study the facts.Typical of idiocy and intellectually deficient ones.
Hannity is an idiotic buffoon, a circus criature to be exposed.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:10 amHannity really seems to believe himself and not just stir the pot in the name of ‘entertainment.’ He scares me.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:15 amGREAT NEWS GREAT NEWS
February 19, 2007
Congress’ Liability in a
Nuclear Strike on Iran
No more European vacations for our legislators?
Madrid, Brussels, London, Berlin, Paris, Rome, and Vienna may well be off-limits to U.S. members of Congress soon. Just as well: they will still be able to enjoy pleasant summer breaks in Crawford, Texas, or Jackson Hole, Wyo., in the best of companies [1], [2]. That’s certainly preferable to ending up in a European jail for a very long time.
Every one of the 535 members of the 110th Congress is liable to face criminal indictment from the International Criminal Court in de Hague if the U.S. uses nuclear weapons in the impending conflict with Iran.
Following an indictment, every country that is a State Party to the International Criminal Court (ICC) will be required to take into custody any members of Congress……….
February 19th, 2007 at 6:18 amWhy is Hannity still sitting in a comfortable studio? He should be in Iraq fighting in the war he helped to promote. He’s the real hypocrite here.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:24 amWhy is Hannity still sitting in a comfortable studio? He should be in Iraq fighting in the war he helped to promote. He’s the real hypocrite here.
Comment by cynicalgirl
Ridiculous argument.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:01 amYep cynicalgirl, I have been asking chickenhawk SHannity the same question for some time now. I think he should enlist tomorrow and have Michelle Malkin, Bill O’Liely and the remainder of Faux Snooze crowd with him. I wouldn’t be upset if Bill Kristol and Ann Coulter accompanied them also. The problem with that would be that it would take too many support folks if these folks went — at least one additional person for each FNC liar sent to hold their hands, protect them AND keep them from going AWOL.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:02 amI’m not a concern troll or anything, but I have to say I did notice that in An Inconvenient Truth there were quite a few shots of Gore riding in cabs and cars versus none of him riding in buses and subways. Not to say that this Fox smear is worth anything, but I did wonder about that.
Comment by Will
Well my friends that I am working on selling Gore had misconceptions in their heads like Gore wants to take away everyones cars… so there is more than just environmentalism. If people thinks he is trying to make them become soy eating anti-car hippies then they wont vote for him.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:04 amFox goes to the bank on “fear” alone. They have nothing to contribute to American society. So belittling becomes their game. An agenda they are proud of.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:37 amWell my friends that I am working on selling Gore had misconceptions in their heads like Gore wants to take away everyones cars… so there is more than just environmentalism. If people thinks he is trying to make them become soy eating anti-car hippies then they wont vote for him.
Comment by Gerald Gibson Jr
Gore is not an official candidate—votes are not the issue.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:44 am#29: Dick Cheney flies commercial airlines all the time. Pity Al Gore didn’t get with the program when he was Vice President.
Comment by FuzzFlash — February 19, 2007 @ 5:04 am
WTF?! He flies Air Force 2.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:50 am20wordsorless sez:
How so? Elucidate.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:53 amIsn’t there more that enough evidence now to convince the FEC that Fux nOoze is truly an illegal 527 group. Hell, Rupert Murder pretty much admitted this the other day.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:03 amJust goggle; Hannity, Private jet it’s all you need to know about Hannity’s two-face
February 19th, 2007 at 9:04 amIs Sean Hannity another Fox whore, devil worshipper?
February 19th, 2007 at 9:13 am20wordsorless sez:
Ridiculous argument.
How so? Elucidate.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
Although it has become a favorite talking point of the left, it really is a ridiculous argument to cite that anyone in favor of the war in Iraq should be there fighting, or they’re a hypocrit. That’s like saying, “Unless you join the military, you really don’t support the troops.” As I said—ridiculous.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:16 am20wordsorless sez:
You didn’t really ‘elucidate’ there, dolt. All you did was reiterate.
Try again.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:20 amAlthough it has become a favorite talking point of the left, it really is a ridiculous argument to cite that anyone in favor of the war in Iraq should be there fighting, or they’re a hypocrit.
Reality is now considered a talking point by the empty heads on the Right? Who knew…
Actually, supporting the war at this point but refusing to fight in it is hypocritical.
That’s like saying, “Unless you join the military, you really don’t support the troops.†As I said—ridiculous.
Comment by 20wordsorless — February 19, 2007 @ 9:16 am
Not at all. The two are not related. The first statment is a specific based on facts. The second is a generality based on you not understanding the difference bewteen an apple and an orange.
You Fundies really should take a course or two in logic…
February 19th, 2007 at 9:28 amGore is not an official candidate—votes are not the issue.
Comment by 20wordsorless — February 19, 2007 @ 8:44 am
Not yet. But November 2008 is still nearly 1.75 years away…
February 19th, 2007 at 9:30 amAnyone know if they are folded US flags behind Hannity. Two of them.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:39 amWhat do they signify? FauxNews’ faux patriotism?
All window dressing that simply covers up the beating heart of jackals.
I love the way you lefties avoid your own issue. You attack Sean and change the topic but don’t look at the facts. Al Gore owns 3 homes that he has to heat and cool. One is 20,000 square feet and another over 4,000. He tells us to make sacrifices. He is a hypocrite.
ROTFL
February 19th, 2007 at 9:40 amNow,
As I have stated earlier this week, I am an EX troll. And I know my trolls. I was once the CEO of Trolls International.
This UnHappy Happy Guy?
He are a “blackbelt” troll. No changing this one.
DO NOT ANSWER!
Let him type til his piss soaked troll fingers fall off.
Please DO NOT ANSWER this TWIT no matter how tempting.
Hey, this is fun.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:47 amDon’t really know what you’re talking about, do you, Happy Guy?
Part of Gore’s efforts to maintain a ‘zero carbon footprint’ is the purchase of carbon credits to offset his activities. If you cared enough about the issue to actually do even a cursory amount of research, you would have known this, and could have saved yourself some embarrassment.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:49 amAl Gore owns 3 homes that he has to heat and cool. One is 20,000 square feet and another over 4,000.
Comment by Happy Guy — February 19, 2007 @ 9:40 am
Link?
February 19th, 2007 at 9:51 amFunny how people like HappyGuy always equate things a “size” fashion. I mean look at it. Take Happy Guy for example.
Gore’s house “size”
Clinton’s BJ “size”
Texas-Great Big State “size”
Size REALLY DOES matter to these doofs.
I wonder what neocons are trying to hide?
Could it be small appendages?
With no beans? (nuts)
February 19th, 2007 at 9:52 amSorry, 20wordsorless, but it is relevant. Our soldiers are overburdened by the lack of recruiting. Those who believe it is a noble effort owe it to us to set an example and sign up themselves.
During Vietnam we used to ask: What if they had a war and no one came? That’s exactly what’s happening now.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:56 amI am in utter amazement at the complete inability exhibited here to understand such a simple concept. Try this… If you support your kid’s school, why aren’t you in the classroom teaching? If you support your local police and fire departments, why aren’t you wearing their uniforms and responding to emergencies? If you are in favor of a highway improvement project, why don’t you put on a hard hat and jump on the heavy equipment? The answer is obvious. Now ask yourselves, ” If someone supports the war in Iraq, should they go there and fight?” If you can still come up with a “yes” answer, that is a sure sign that you are attempting to turn an apple into an orange, and that you are no longer operating in the realm of reality.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:58 amFuzzflash — your comment about flying commercial is ridiculous. Even the pigs in the White House today are afforded secret service protection at all times and that includes, their own private jets (AF 1, AF 2); other high ranking officials also fly in private military aircraft for SECURITY purposes. They cannot be on commercial aircraft in the event of a national emergency. They must be in communication with Security at all times.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:00 am“Call Troll-O-Rooter, That’s the Name, And Away go Trolls Down the Drain, That’s Troll-O-Rooterrrrrrr.”
Heh.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:02 amSOMEbody would be inhabiting those houses…
February 19th, 2007 at 10:03 amno doubt gore has made sure they are well insulated and energy efficient…
Tell Gore to try and sell his GLOBAL WARMING hoax somewhere else….
February 19th, 2007 at 10:03 amWhy doesn’t Gore sell his global warming Hoax somewhere else……
February 19th, 2007 at 10:05 amGore is a fool, if he is so concerned about warming why doesn’t he propose to do something about all the emissions all the SUV’s running around. The fact that we now drive faster burn more gas pumping more CO2 into the environment need I continue….
February 19th, 2007 at 10:10 amIf you can still come up with a “yes†answer, that is a sure sign that you are attempting to turn an apple into an orange, and that you are no longer operating in the realm of reality.
Comment by 20wordsorless — February 19, 2007 @ 9:58 am
I don’t think amazement is the correct word. More like confusion… And insulting us doesn’t change the fact that you’re still missing the point.
Let’s try it again:
There is a shortage of troops. Those who still support the war at this point during a period of need should be the first to fill that void. Otherwise – what are the options? Take people who don’t support the war?
Pretty simple.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:12 amOf course, he has a SUV, he’s barely 5 feet tall.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:31 am#63 What a grand idea! Absolutely, it’s time for people to “put up” or “shut up”, isn’t it? I believe that those who voted in favor of the troop surge should be required to offer someone from their immediate family to “serve” – this will separate the wheat from the chaff ultimately. Then let’s see how they vote. Sure, when it comes to sacrificing someone else’s loved one on the “altar of war profiteering”, it’s pretty easy….when it comes to sacrificing yourself or one of your own on this “altar of corruption, greed, and graft”, then it’s another story altogether. Let’s press our reps to include this caveat in the next proposal, shall we?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:33 amThere is a shortage of troops. Those who still support the war at this point during a period of need should be the first to fill that void. Otherwise – what are the options? Take people who don’t support the war?
Pretty simple.
Comment by unbelievable
False premise and faulty logic, no wonder common sense escapes you. By the way, you guys insulted me first–you big baby.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:33 amAs for the subject of this thread, the american laughingstock “anti-patriot” Sean Hannity, what can I say?? This man clearly makes an outrageous, bigoted fool out of himself every time he steps before the camera lens. Sean Hannity has become the “poster child” for the “quintessential GOP idiot” who has been brainwashed by a neocon ideology of smoke & mirrors….lies & deception…..corruption & graft. Sean has now eclipsed any shard of credibility he may have left; albeit, argument can easily be made that he’s already at the bottom of the barrel in terms of reputation already. Time for this guy to be “heard and not seen”….. or more favorably…..”not heard from again”. He’s really become pretty classless and irrelevant.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:36 amI love Sean Hannity. I’m just sad that in order to blow him I have to get behind a long line of Republican turds to do so. Sad.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:37 am#66 where are you getting your stats? Clearly, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been telling us this fact for the past year(s)! Perhaps you live under a rock? Perhaps you’re also from that troll planet – Uranus?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:37 amsam seder just came up with sean henemy which waz pretty funny I must admit but lets take it a step further I would call him sean henema cause when he talks the shit just flows and flows and flows
February 19th, 2007 at 10:39 amFecalmouth Hannity?
February 19th, 2007 at 10:43 amAl Gore’s travel is probably not always perfect green, but whose is? American society is hardly set up to for green travel. Gore as a recognizable person probably shouldn’t be on much mass transit (buses, subways) as he would get swamped by the public from both admirers wanting to talk to him and detractors wanting to insult and argue with him. He’s part of the elite, but at least he’s committed to getting a message out, I can’t fault him if he isn’t perfect green under the circumstances. It’s not hypocrisy, it’s the shades of gray of reality in energy wasting America.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:43 amFrom USA Today about Al Gore and his environmental concern.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:44 amNot be sadistic or support the killing of another human being (even if they barely are one), but since Hannity and friends do not see how bad CO2 is for the environment, maybe they would volunteer to be put in a sealed room with their SUV running. That way they can inhale all those wonderful CO2 fumes they claim are so benign.
Now, since that does not prove the existence of global warming, after we revive them from their Co2 intake, we should give them an all expense paid one way trip to a beautiful tropical island, which is due to be flooded by rises ocean levels.
If Hannity et al. got to experience these things for themselves, then maybe they would not be so quick to brag about their wasteful carbon emissions.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:48 am#72
I do not think that anyone can be perfectly green. The point that Al Gore is trying to make is that just by doing small things at the very least, cutting down on your waste that you don’t really need to waste, will go a whole lot further than living life with all the lights on. It really is common sense, since not only will one be cutting down on emissions, but they will be saving money. You hear that republicans?! MONEY, you will save MONEY if you cut down on your emissions.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:52 amFrom USA Today about Al Gore and his environmental concern.
Comment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 10:44 am
It says Gore isn’t using green energy for two of his homes where green energy is available. When USA Today contacted him, he said he’ll make the switch.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:57 am20wordsorless sez:
Yes, the answer is obvious. Making a straight comparison between these occupations and fighting for your country is flat-out ridiculous. In a time of emergency (which the neocons would have us believe this is), everyone sets aside their ‘normal’ lives and does their part. Elvis served…why can’t Hannity, if he believes so fervently that this is the “defining struggle of our generation”? What’s keeping him over here?
At this point, you’ll probably bloviate on about how Hannity is actually doing his part for the war effort by keeping us focused on the things that threaten us (WMDs, Saddam, al-Qaeda, Iran…take your pick). To that I would answer: if these things were the real threat, then why would Hannity need to be on the air every night reinforcing that? Wouldn’t he be of better use driving a Humvee in Baghdad?
The fact that neocon shills like Hannity need to be on the air night and day, constantly catapulting the propaganda, is in itself enough to throw the argument of the overriding necessity of this conflict into doubt.
In short, your argument comparing wartime responsibilities to peacetime occupations is patently ridiculous. Exactly what we’ve come to expect from you, dolt.
“There is a shortage of troops.” is a ‘false premise’?
“Those who still support the war at this point during a period of need should be the first to fill that void.” is ‘faulty logic’?
Wow….how do you find your way home at night?
(BTW, unbelievable didn’t insult you. I did, dolt.)
February 19th, 2007 at 10:58 amBTW, thank you for confirming the one thing that all of us “Right wing fanatics” have known about the Liberal Elites for some time. What’s good for the goose, is NOT good for the gander. I think the hippocracy of the Hollywood and SanFran Intellectual Elite crowd is more disgusting than their views.
I wish Liberalism were just simply a mental disorder and not the potential distruction of our country. BTW, isnt interesting Liberals base their position on popularity poles? Just look at Hillary’s about face on the war since 02. Can you all just admit that the Clintons are evil with a capital E? Then again, the biggest problem with Hillary is the fact that she blows with the wind and you damn well know it. What exactly does she stand for BTW, I can’t seem to zero in on it because it keeps changing.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:06 amUSA Today about Al Gore and his environmental concern in a negative fashion is akin to a environmental polluter pointing out a litterer as the enemy of the American landscape. It’s a national rag with little or no substance, overprinted and overdistributed with the bulk of them blowing around like tumbleweeds on a national scale. Maybe Al Gore should campaign to shut down some of these ‘newspapers’. But alas…where would we turn to for colored graphs and charts?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:14 amDick Cheney flies commercial airlines all the time. Pity Al Gore didn’t get with the program when he was Vice President.
Comment by FuzzFlash — February 19, 2007 @ 5:04 am
Make things up out of thin air often, FuzzFlash?
I bet you do.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:17 amWhere is “Alan Colmes’s America?”
February 19th, 2007 at 11:18 am#29: Dick Cheney flies commercial airlines all the time.
Huh? Dick Cheney has the carbon footprint of Sasquatch. Airforce 2, SUV caravans, diesel powered ass-puckerer, and a light saber run on coal. He orders the Duracell Salad for lunch. When he drives through a neighborhood, all the lights and appliances magically turn on. He is the epitomy of the term WATTAGE WASTER.
You retards deserve to be sitting in the dark in your own stink.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:20 am#81 Do you really want to see that show? Knowing Fox, it will be full of transvestite pet psychics out to destroy Christianity.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:22 amBTW, isn’t interesting Liberals base their position on popularity poles? –Comment by David
I think what you mean to say is, “Isn’t it interesting that Liberal political ideas are far more widely supported by Americans than Conservative ideas?” The November elections certainly showed that. Poll after poll shows Americans prefer (1) an exit strategy for Iraq; (2) no privatization of Social Security; (3) a stronger environmental policy; (4) better schools; (5) health care for all Americans; (6) abortion rights; (7) tougher handgun laws. Americans also trust Democrats to better handle national security and to be more fiscally responsible than Republicans.
I guess when Republicans come up with a viable idea, maybe the polls will show some support for them. Interesting how the Democratic policies reflect the wishes of the American people — isn’t that what we elect these people for, after all?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:31 amMaybe Al Gore should campaign to shut down some of these ‘newspapers’. But alas…where would we turn to for colored graphs and charts?
Comment by jay severin has a small pen1s
Oh, that is the idea. Forget the whole “Freedom of the Press” thing. Who needs that flimsy “Bill of Rights” anyways…/sarc>
Al Gore has been speaking about the effects of Global Warming for years now, but as late as Dec 2006, he had not “put his money where his mouth is”. He uses Paramount’s private jet, to promote his film. Does not use alternative energy for his homes where it is available. Still has large holdings in Occidental Petroleum (read: big oil, big pollution).
Yep, he is the environmental leader all right.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:15 pmWeak stuff there, seanie, real, real weak.
….this is, in fact, “all they’ve got”….
laugh at them, while the laughing’s good
hannity won’t be around too much longer, anyway
the ol’ wingnut hit parade is winding down
February 19th, 2007 at 12:15 pmand a light saber run on coal. He orders the Duracell Salad for lunch. When he drives through a neighborhood, all the lights and appliances magically turn on. He is the epitomy of the term WATTAGE WASTER.
Comment by jay severin has a small pen1s — February 19, 2007 @ 11:20 am
oh jeez, that was belly laugh funny… truly appreciated…
February 19th, 2007 at 12:42 pmHannity is a douchebag. Always has been, and always will be.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:43 pmHBob – BFD, seriously, who cares, besides disgruntled wingnut sour-grapers like you and hannutty?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:47 pmYep, he is the environmental leader all right.
Comment by hacker bob
You’re right, Robert.
Al Gore is not a perfect man. None of us are perfect, right?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:57 pmSo let’s just do nothing.
Yes, the answer is obvious. Making a straight comparison between these occupations and fighting for your country is flat-out ridiculous. In a time of emergency (which the neocons would have us believe this is), everyone sets aside their ‘normal’ lives and does their part. Elvis served…why can’t Hannity, if he believes so fervently that this is the “defining struggle of our generationâ€? What’s keeping him over here? …
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
You’re attempting to turn an apple into an orange with this comment, and I don’t accept your premise.
(BTW, unbelievable didn’t insult you. I did, dolt.)
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
Did you read this my reading challenged friend?
You Fundies really should take a course or two in logic…
Comment by unbelievable
Is it really necessary for me to point out the insult here? By the way, I did say, “You guys insulted me first.” That is a plural noun the last time I checked. Anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension would see that I was not singling out unbelievable.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:13 pm20wordsorles sez:
That’s OK, dolt. You don’t have to accept it. My response wasn’t intended to convert you…it was intended to display to the rest of the readers exactly how flawed and pointless your stupid argument is, and why you so richly deserve the appellation ‘dolt’.
So now it’s an insult to make a reference to your religious beliefs? My, my, my…you Fundies are certainly thin-skinned, aren’t you?
February 19th, 2007 at 1:24 pmSo now it’s an insult to make a reference to your religious beliefs? My, my, my…you Fundies are certainly thin-skinned, aren’t you?
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
I knew it, I knew it! I knew I would have to explain this to you. It wasn’t the term “Fundies” that I took exception to, although the slang is somewhat demeaning. It was the “You Fundies” as in “all of you” and the “should really take a course or two in logic” as in we don’t use or understand logic. That was the insult, and it came from someone who believes in no absolutes, and other such post modern nonsense no less.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:43 pmI noticed that Hannity usually has the exact same opinion as shown as an editorial in WSJ or some other rightie newsrag. Does he even have a brain? Also, why wouldn’t he talk to PBS about the news bias? Oh yeah, he wasn’t being paid by PBS for his “Opinion”. What a fraud that guy is, just like:
Jeff Gannon
February 19th, 2007 at 1:48 pmted Haggard
Mark Foley
20wordsorless -
I’m a liberal (who believes in personal responsibility), and proud of it.
But I understand your points regarding the “if you support the war, go enlist” as well as the blanket absolutes people tend to through around too much.
Regarding the first issue you had with some people here:
I was against the war from the begining and I believe that Bush is most likely the worst president ever, but I’m not constantly protesting nor do I advocate violent action against the president. Even if he doesn’t have respect for the office, I do.
Regarding the second issue:
February 19th, 2007 at 2:01 pmThe only absolute in this world is that there are no absolutes. People who look at the world in absolutes stereotypically categorize others automatically loose credibility with me. The world is made up of an infinite number of shades of grey; which is why I think the neo-con ‘the world is black and white’ has caused so many problems.
Things to be proud of:
February 19th, 2007 at 2:08 pmFamily
Country
SUVs?
Comment by tom baker
It points to his hypocrisy. That is all. If he want others to make sacrifices, he needs to do the same.
Comment by Zooey
I am not saying to do nothing. I am saying that he is not in the position to lecture main stream America. He can afford the alternatives and chooses not to as a matter of conveniance. BTW, as we have talked about before, I will watch “An Inconveniant Truth” tonight. But the real “Inconveniant Truth” is that Al Gore is as guilty as the rest of us, and probably moreso than main stream America.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:10 pm20wordsorless sez:
Somehow, given your history, I doubt that.
So…you don’t wish to be associated with Fundamentalists? Is that what you’re saying?
So now you’re saying ‘we’, as if you do wish to be associated with Fundamentalists?
Sheesh…if your mind is so bereft of rationality that you can reverse yourself in the course of a single sentence, there’s little a course or two in logic could do to help you. Your understanding of logic is on a par with linoleum…which neatly explains your previous posts.
In closing, log off before you hurt yourself.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:13 pmBut the real “Inconveniant Truth†is that Al Gore is as guilty as the rest of us, and probably moreso than main stream America.
Comment by hacker bob
Again Robert, what’s your solution? Who is that perfect person who should be giving these talks and drawing attention to this issue? All anyone can do is learn to do better, and then do better.
We, the inhabitants of this planet, need a solution to the mess we have created. We can listen to the message given by an imperfect man, or we can criticize the messenger’s imperfection.
Which do you suppose would work best?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:20 pmComment by Zooey
How about the messanger lives by his message to start with?
In other words, he can lead by example.
Gore sounds like a drug user telling me not to do drugs. Sure he knows the dangers, but then he contributes more to the problem.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:34 pmhacker bob sez:
As Zooey said, “we can listen to the message given by an imperfect man, or we can criticize the messenger’s imperfection”. Looks like you’ve chosen the latter.
If we can lay aside for a nanosecond the ceaseless ad homenims against Gore and consider the message itself, is there anything in that message you object to, without bringing into consideration the behavior or misbehavior of the messenger?
(Note: I’m not trying to either condemn or exonerate Gore here, I would just like to consider the message itself, as we ought to be doing.)
In the same spirit, regarding your comparison of Gore to a drug user that tells others to not do drugs, which part of the message “Don’t do drugs.” do you find so objectionable? Are you seriously making a case to do drugs, then?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pmWe’re going in circles, Robert.
I hope you do watch “An Inconvenient Truth,” because it’s very good. You will learn more about Al Gore, the man, and you will learn more about his message.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:50 pm20wordsorless sez:
I knew it, I knew it!
Somehow, given your history, I doubt that.
I knew I would have to explain this to you. It wasn’t the term “Fundies†that I took exception to, although the slang is somewhat demeaning. It was the “You Fundies†as in “all of youâ€
So…you don’t wish to be associated with Fundamentalists? Is that what you’re saying?
and the “should really take a course or two in logic†as in we don’t use or understand logic.
So now you’re saying ‘we’, as if you do wish to be associated with Fundamentalists?
Sheesh…if your mind is so bereft of rationality that you can reverse yourself in the course of a single sentence, there’s little a course or two in logic could do to help you. Your understanding of logic is on a par with linoleum…which neatly explains your previous posts.
In closing, log off before you hurt yourself.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
How you can ingnore the plain words of, ” … the slang is somewhat demeaning, ” and insert your own tortured conclusion is beyond me. Go find someone else to explain the clear meaning of words to you—I’ve wasted enough time.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:08 pmHannity is wasting oxygen. Who watches him? At least O’Reilly is semi-charistmatic… Sorta…
February 19th, 2007 at 3:15 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey
Comment by Zooey
It is not the message I object to, I think it is clear that I object to the messenger. I object to his hypocrisy. Just as I would the drug users. No where do I make the case to use drugs and no where do I make the case that we should not do something about global warming. But like many here that say “If you support the war in Iraq, you should enlist”. Well, if you support doing something about global warming, then do something, don’t just give lip service. That is what we are getting from Gore.
Driving a Hybrid is good, but not enough. He should switch to “green energy”, fly commercial (but only when he HAS to), maybe get rid of a home or two( to reduce the energy draw), ride the bus instead of taking a cab, get rid of his oil holdings. Show me some of that and he will have a bit more credibility.
How do I keep my kid from doing drugs? I don’t do drugs. I let her see examples of people that do use drugs. Mainly, I set the example. Gee, funny how that works. I demonstrate the qualities I want my children to have.
Who want to listen to someone that says “Do as I say, not as I do”?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:15 pmFrom Wikipedia…
Hannity attended St. Pius X Preparatory Seminary in Uniondale, Long Island, New York, graduating in 1980. He dropped out of New York University and decided to pursue a radio career.[1] He has received an honorary degree from Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University (2005) [2].[3][4]
I can’t talk because I’m a college drop-out too. :-) Although I went into network administration instead of radio.
Becoming a popular right-winger seems to be getting easier. The crazier your sound (Hannity, Ann Coulter) the higher you rise.
Yikes….
February 19th, 2007 at 3:18 pmIt is amazing that there is very little constructive debate on this site.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:19 pm#95: Are you ABSOLUTELY sure there are no ABSOLUTES?
Who want to listen to someone that says “Do as I say, not as I do�
Comment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
You mean, like a wannabe “wartime president” that hasn’t served in the battlefield in the last war with a conscription in your country, thanks to the “arrangemets” that did his rich and well connected father?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:25 pmAnd, HB, you mean that if you have a beer or two the saturday night, you can’t say anything to, let’s say, if one of your sons is caught DUI, or ends in jail for smoking marijuana or worse?
Dude, you love absolutes too much.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:29 pmJust did a quick google on the “Live Earth” concerts (never mind the pollution they will create)
Seems like in the 80’s Gore was all about trying to ban groups whos lyrics promoted sex, violence, and drug usage. But he is willing to have Snoop Dogg rap about sex, violence, and drugs.
Global Warming is just Al’s “Cause of the Week”
February 19th, 2007 at 3:32 pmDoesn’t Al Gore buy carbon offsets when he flys by private jet, etc?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:32 pmComment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
Do some research…
Al Gore buys carbon offsets when he flys by private jet, etc.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:34 pmComment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
If you watch An Inconvenient Truth you will see that Al Gore has been on this issue since his college days.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:36 pmComment by Evil Spaniard
When I drink, I usually do it at home. If my child sees me drink at home, I tell her that drinking is ok as long as it is done in moderation and as long as you are responsible. I also reiterate that there is a legal drinking age that has to be followed. If I drink away from the home, I make arrangements for a ride home. It is called being responsible.
If my child is over the age of 21, they can drink. It’s legal at that point. If they get a DUI, then they have to get themselves out of that situation.
As for the marijuana argument, my children know that if they end up in jail for drugs, then they stay there. Period. I do not smoke pot or use illegal drugs; I do not condone anyone else, especially my children, doing it either.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:41 pm#110 Just did a quick google on the “Live Earth†concerts (never mind the pollution they will create)
As I did read about it, it will reach about 2 bilion people. If only a 0.1% of these people do anything to reduce CO2 production thanks to the Gore’s initiative, that would mean that 2 milion people will easily offset the environmental cost of ALL the concerts and do a lot of good in addition. But hey, Repugs aren’t good for numbers, I know.
Seems like in the 80’s Gore was all about trying to ban groups whos lyrics promoted sex, violence, and drug usage. But he is willing to have Snoop Dogg rap about sex, violence, and drugs.
I see, you’re seeking for a Saint to canonize, not a person with a good idea and initiative.
Global Warming is just Al’s “Cause of the Weekâ€
The last one allows us to debate right now, being thousands of miles away. If also has made possible to have thousands of computers around the world working in parallel in the resolution of many problems, from weather prediction, to searching extraterrestrial life or decipher the human genoma. But hey, that can be done too with a pencil and paper:
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/help.php
Comment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
February 19th, 2007 at 3:43 pmComment by dixie blood
1) carbon offsets do not stop the production of carbon.
2) If he has been on this issue since his college days, he has no excuses for not living by the standard he preaches.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:45 pmThat doesn’t stop a determined pro-global-warming type. Al Gore is carbon-neutral. That doesn’t mean he lives in a cave using no electricity, never driving, never hosting events to raise awareness, etc. It means he cuts back where he can, and where he can’t he buys carbon offsets. If everybody bought carbon offsets and became carbon neutral, the “green” power infrastructure would completely replace the coal, gas, and oil infrastrcture in the United States.
Those who hate Mr. Gore don’t want to learn what Carbon Offsets are, nor do they care.
“An Inconvenient Truth” was a carbon neutral endeavor. For every time a private plane was used, cars were driven, power was consumed for events, etc., an equal amount of offsets was bought.
That’s the best part about Al Gore. He’s not asking us to completely get rid of everything we Americans seem to love so much. He just wants us to care enough to increase corporate pressure/regulation on creating equally powerful, but more efficient cars. He asks that we offsert our own carbon usage from driving and heating our houses. It’s simple. It’s not even that expensive. I buy carbon offsets every month! It’s SO easy. I’m not 100% carbon neutral yet, but I plan to be one day.
Every little bit counts.
But, remember, it’s SO much easier to shoot the messenger than it is to silence the message…
And hence Hacker Bob trolls on in…
February 19th, 2007 at 3:45 pmYes, they do. What do you think the money does?
It goes to building carbon-free generators. Therefore, by buying carbon offsets, you are building wind and solar farms, biomass generators, etc., and are allowing the decreased reliance on coal and natural gas in the electrical grid. If everybody bought carbon offsets to become carbon neutral, the entire oil infrastructure could be replaced. Easily.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:50 pmComment by Evil Spaniard
I see. Another believer that Al Gore invented the internet.
I am not looking for a Saint, just not a pharisee.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pmComment by Parrotlover77 — February 19, 2007 @ 3:45 pm
Excellent post…
I’ve never purchased a carbon offset (confession) and don’t know how they work. Can you tell me/us more?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pmComment by Parrotlover77
So, If I send you $500, will my car not produce carbon?
Carbon offsets are more about clean up, not halting production.
I am all for the message. Seriously and truely. But Al Gore lacks the credibility to deliver it.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pmDo a little research in Al Gore’s life and you will find that he was, indeed, instrumental in drafting legislation that increased funding to the internet before it was the economic force it is today.
Oh, and he never said he invented it. Urban legend.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pmhttp://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
#114 When I drink, I usually do it at home. If my child sees me drink at home, I tell her that drinking is ok as long as it is done in moderation and as long as you are responsible. I also reiterate that there is a legal drinking age that has to be followed. If I drink away from the home, I make arrangements for a ride home. It is called being responsible.
So you’re doing the same that is doing Gore with the Global Warming, yet you criticize him for “not giving good example”? You’re speaking to your sons against booze, but you drink in front of them. To be consequent with your ideas, you must be absolutely abstinent. You can’t pass without drinking a beer in front of your sons (I’m not calling you drunk), but Gore must pass without air travel, without car, etc.? HB, you’re being an hypocrite here.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pmI live in North Carolina, where we have this website…
http://www.ncgreenpower.org
In there, it lets you estimate your usage and add offsets to your power bill. I added enough units to cover about half of my monthly carbon usage.
I think other states have similar programs. If they don’t, I remember there being a SLEW of links on the Inconvienent Truth website… In fact, I think that’s where I found out about NC Green Power.
http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/carboncalculator/
February 19th, 2007 at 3:59 pmComment by Evil Spaniard
I am not speaking in absolutes about drinking. I speak to my children about being responsable about drinking. I speak to them about doing it within the law and that every action has a consiquence. There is no hypocracy.
Now, If I told them not to drink and drive, then I drank even one beer and drove to the store, I would be a hypocrite. But If I am anywhere and have one beer, I do not drive.
Now, Al Gore says that we should be “carbon nutral” then he needs to be carbon nutral. Otherwise, he is getting behind the wheel with the beer still in his hand.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pmComment by Parrotlover77 — February 19, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
Thank you…
February 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pmIf you send me $500, I will send it to NC Green Power and it will go to creating new biomass, wind, or solar power plants in NC and then us North Carolinians can enjoy a coal plant being shut down in the future, hence reducing carbon emissions later on.
Clean up would imply it’s somehow removing carbons that are already there. No, it doesn’t.
And no, there’s no magic way to throw money at your car and reduce carbon emissions that have happened in the past.
However, if you add 500 units of carbon into the air now and then offset it by reducing 500 units from going into the air in the near future, you are carbon neutral.
It’s pretty basic math. Addition and subtraction. It does, I suppose, require a very small amount of statistics to understand that you do have to wait a little bit for things to even out. But when you consider how carbon positive the world is today, this is one of the best things you can do after you make your home and car as energy efficient as possible.
I saw a flyer from my power company about how much carbon can be saved by using those florescent bulbs instead of incondescent. It’s freaking unbeleivable. And you save money too. But not many people do it.
I no longer use incondescent for any of my lighting. The new florescent bulbs are just as warm-colored as incondescent, and they run cool and last up to 6 years.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pmComment by Parrotlover77
Thaks for the link to NC GreenPower. I am in NC as well. Unfortunately, there is little I can do abotu the “electric grid” as I live on base. I just use less electricity and drive less in order to decrease pollution.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:07 pmFlorescent bulbs are mandatory for use in base housing and in our office space.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:10 pm#119 I see. Another believer that Al Gore invented the internet.
Absolutes, hb, absolutes. Baaad.
No, he didn’t invented the Internet. In fact, the ones that invented the TCP protocol where Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn, from the IEEE in 1974. Worth knowing.
As for Gore, nowadays is a director on the board of Apple Inc., and an unofficial adviser to Google’s senior management.
In the late 1980s, Gore introduced the Gore Bill, which was later passed as the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991. The bill was one of the most important pieces of legislation directly affecting the expansion of the internet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore
But no, he didn’t invent internet. He simply allowed it to exist, and is a major part of it nowadays, far more than Bush is.
I am not looking for a Saint, just not a pharisee.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Absolutes again. And, most probably Al Gore fits a lot more in the Good Samaritan role. Remember, the not orthodox jew nor christian that goes to the heaven thanks to his good deeds, before the orthodox jew that did nothing.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:10 pmHonestly, the way the grid is mixed together now, you have no idea where your power “comes from” because the grids are all interconnected. But the more coal plants shut down or reduced to minimal generation, the better. If for nothing else, then future generations being able to go fishing and not having to worry about mercury poisoning.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pmCarbon Offsets: I know a great way for someone to purchase carbon offsets! My wife and I will begin building our new home mid-March. I plan on installing Energy efficient appliances and taking “some” steps at other energy savings. However, when I researched alternative methods, I discovered I couldn’t afford it. I’ll be happy to implement other methods if anyone wants to help in the purchase.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:12 pmLOL! Same here. Donate to my adding a solar panel to my roof! :-)
In all seriousness, I can’t wait to actually make the solar step! You get a nice tax break on those things, you know.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:14 pmComment by Parrotlover77 — February 19, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Add geothermal to that too…
February 19th, 2007 at 4:18 pmRemember, the not orthodox jew nor christian that goes to the heaven thanks to his good deeds, before the orthodox jew that did nothing.
The orthodox jew or christian that does not live by the laws of God gets not ticket to heaven either. Using your reference.
It is one thing to say you believe and be concerned, it is another to act on your beliefs and concerns.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:19 pmSolar panels are a great idea and I would love to use them, but I just can’t afford it. Why do they have to make “energy saving methods” so much more expensive!
Evil Spaniard: Are you ABSOLUTELY sure there are no ABSOLUTES?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:20 pmI would love to use solar panels, but I can’t afford it. Why do they have to make “energy savings methods” so expensive?
Evil Spaniard: Are you ABSOLUTELY sure there are no ABSOLUTES?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:23 pmBecause they are not as cheap to manufacture.
There are tax breaks — look into those in your state. You might find that you can scrape up enough cash to buy something like that in Decemeber and then get your refund check in January to offset the cost more easily.
Otherwise, write your representatives. Tell them you want more subsidizing and tax breaks to go to “green” products so that the prices fall.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:28 pmComment by Parrotlover77 — February 19, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
Check this out Tarheel…you made a delta (that means difference trolls) today…I calculated my carbon offsets and have now made myself carbon neutral with my own carbon offsets. Wind and methane. It’s easy.
Thanks.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:46 pmThanks! That made my day!! :-)
February 19th, 2007 at 5:13 pmwell hey – let’s go ahead and wrap this thread up, now that we know that right-wingers and republican’ts don’t like al gore, and will go to any extreme (violating their own “hypocrisy codes” along the way) to say something bad about a guy who’s wronged no one. courageous work there, fellas….i’m sure the gipper’s proud of you and hannity.
if patriots like you weren’t out there on the front lines, debunking this global warming thing, a needless war might break out, costing us billions of dollars – stay the course!! – don’t let vegetarians kill jesus!
February 19th, 2007 at 5:16 pm‘Cut back’ should be two words, guys. Send your message to the copy editor. It will pack more punch if it is error-free.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:27 pmComment by tom baker
Tommy boy, who is debunking global warming?
Gore is a hypocrite. That is the point I was trying to make, that’s all. He is a media whore trying to keep his face in the news.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:30 pmWhy doesn’t Gore fly commercial and by carbon credits?
February 19th, 2007 at 6:15 pmComment by mandolin — February 19, 2007 @ 6:15 pm
He does, stupid!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pmk bob. if you say so. i’ll lleave you and mandolin to work over the tough issues like that one.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pmComment by hacker bob — February 19, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
You are beyond stupid!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pmComment by tom baker
Tommy boy. Show me where I have disputed global warming at all. I do not dispute it is an issue. I just do not like to be preached at by someone who is a worse violator than me. I guess buying carbon offsets can buy him out of his responsibility for creating/contributing to greenhouse gasses. Kind of like KD Lang showing up at a PETA function wearing leather boots, or the president of PETA using animal produced insulin then saying it is wrong to use animals for medical research (except in her case since she works for the greater good) or Mark Foley telling us that child sex predators are evil.
Seriously, would the message not be better coming from someone that practices what they preach?
February 19th, 2007 at 6:41 pmWhen will Hannity do an expose on GWB claiming to follow the prince of peace while he wages war and uses it as the answer to everything?
February 19th, 2007 at 6:55 pmHannity is a brownshirt facist tool.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:07 pm#148: Seriously, would the message not be better coming from someone that practices what they preach?
The message is coming from literally thousands of people who practice what they preach (people who drive hybrids, people who ride bicycles to work, people who have solar panels on their houses, etc.). The problem, of course, is that these people don’t have a public forum the way Gore does. I have absolutely no problem with Al Gore raising awareness for global climate change. I would have no problem with George W. Bush doing it, either, even though I think he’s otherwise a reprehensible human being.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:09 pmalternative energy is expensive because it is a threat to big oil, coal and corn.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:10 pmIt says Gore isn’t using green energy for two of his homes where green energy is available. When USA Today contacted him, he said he’ll make the switch.
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!! Two of his homes. He’s a climate-wrecker. If we all lived like he did, the Greenland ice cap would be long gone.
Gore is part of the problem.
Hannity is an idiot.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:30 pm#148 It is impossible to completely eliminate one’s impact on the environment, all a person can do is REDUCE their impact by making changes where they can.
Its unfair to say someone is a hypocrite for having to do something (for national security) on an occasional basis. G-damn no one is perfect & we are all human.
You can’t expect an environmentalist to NEVER drive or ride in a car, throw away a disposable piece of paper, or do something else that impacts the environment- its impossible.
The point of this is if everyone made at least very small changes in their habits, it would make a dramatic impact.
What is amazing is Hannity trying to feign the highroad by pointing out another’s supposed hypocracy, while STILL calling global warming ‘hysteria’ & being proud of his obnoxious vehicle.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:35 pmI wonder how many homes Hannity would PROUDLY have if he could.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:37 pmFox “News” and Sean Hannity, the channnel for idiots being led by the idiot boy who GAVE UP and QUIT on trying to get a college degree because he was just too damn stupid. What a loser on a channel for losers. The whole channel needs a canned laugh track like its pathetically awful and unfunny “comedy” show. I laugh every time he opens his whining pie hole!
Here’s an example of his incredibly moronic, polemic tact: “There’s obiviously no global warming because it’s cold outside today!” “Do you or do you not agree that it is cold outside today? Yes or no! YES OR NO!”
Hannity is the Emperor of the Idiocracy that is Fox viewership! Really, does anyone know of someone slightly intelligent who enjoys watching him or Fox “News?”
February 19th, 2007 at 8:50 pmI don’t like th whole idea of carbon offsetting.
I agree with Katharine Mieszkowski (Salon):
When you stop and think about it, the whole idea of driving a car, paying money into a green kitty to offset the CO2 from burning the gas, and then calling the car trip carbon-neutral, is ludicrous.
The windmills may offset the driving, mathematically, but so what? The windmills should, and likely could, have been built without my 6 cents or even Dave’s $216,000. (Indeed, wind turbines and other clean energy would be sprouting up everywhere, without green offsets, if the prices of fossil fuels included a charge for their climate destructiveness.) Crediting me or the DMB with climate neutrality for financing green energy, while the actual implementer — a wind developer here, an insulation installer or a mass transit builder there — also takes credit, is double-counting.
But it’s worse than padding the books. Carbon offsets are disturbingly redolent of the sale of indulgences in the Middle Ages, by which the wealthy could expiate their sins without prayer or good works by greasing the palms of the Church hierarchy. Leaving aside whether carbon emitting is “sinful,” the purchase of carbon offsets smacks of the same corruption that turned indulgences into “get out of Purgatory free” cards and helped set off the Protestant Reformation.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/10/truths/
February 19th, 2007 at 8:52 pmI agree with this too (Oikos):
1. Carbon offsets are not necessarily effective. If you drive somewhere, you instantly pump a measurable amount of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. If you pay a company to invest in a renewable project or plant some trees, how do you really know how much that reduces emissions by?
2. Carbon offsets are immoral because they allow people to pay someone else to deal with the problem, rather than taking responsibility for the problem themselves.
3. Flowing on from 1 and 2, carbon offsets interfere with other effective measures to combat climate change because they allow people to distance themselves from the problem and so they reduce the pressure on individuals, governments, businesses and communities to take measures that actually will have a real impact.
http://greenomics.blogspot.com/2007/02/carbon-offsetting-neutral-shmeutral.html
February 19th, 2007 at 9:30 pmMy question to Mr. Hannity:
“What can you do personally to reduce your own emissions ?”
February 20th, 2007 at 12:17 amThere’s no such thing as global warming, boasts Sean Hannity. In fact, Hannity does his best to increase fuel emissions by driving his SUV to work, and flying private jets to speaking engagements across the nation, paid for by private organizations.
He lives in his own distorted world, dubbed “Hannity’s America.” He is right, and everyone else is wrong. This aggravating man is on the road of self destruction, and he will take his family, friends, and collegues with him.
Sean, “You’re not proper!”
February 20th, 2007 at 1:31 amI wish someone would put Hannity’s head through a meat grinder, it might fix his brain.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:34 amOops. Typo. I meant colleagues.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:35 amBy the time the Hannities of the world are convinced about GW, it will be too late.
I personally don’t have much hope. I believe that homo sapiens are destined for extinction.
Life will continue on, without us.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:25 am#151 #148: Seriously, would the message not be better coming from someone that practices what they preach?
The message is coming from literally thousands of people who practice what they preach (people who drive hybrids, people who ride bicycles to work, people who have solar panels on their houses, etc.). The problem, of course, is that these people don’t have a public forum the way Gore does. I have absolutely no problem with Al Gore raising awareness for global climate change. I would have no problem with George W. Bush doing it, either, even though I think he’s otherwise a reprehensible human being.
Comment by Luke — February 19, 2007 @ 7:09 pm
What is really rich, is that if one lives a true carbon neutral life, quickly is accused despectively of being deranged, a loonie, or a tree hugger by the “Conservatives” (that’s good, what they want to conserve at all?)
And, bob, Bush, the “Conservative” president (I know, I know, you don’t like him, and “president” is capitalized, but he doesn’t deserve it), is a far worse hypocrite than Gore (but, really, I don’t think that Gore is an hypocrite), because he does vacation 2 months per year, has one work, and when he is confronted with a single mother working three jobs to pay the bills, he says that having tree works is the “American way”. Nauseating. He hasn’t done a good job in a work, much less in three simultaneously.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:24 amhttp://www.eff.org/
EFF: Legal Guide for Bloggers
Updated April 20, 2006
Whether you’re a newly minted blogger or a relative old-timer, you’ve been seeing more and more stories pop up every day about bloggers getting in trouble for what they post.
Like all journalists and publishers, bloggers sometimes publish information that other people don’t want published. You might, for example, publish something that someone considers defamatory, republish an AP news story that’s under copyright, or write a lengthy piece detailing the alleged crimes of a candidate for public office.
The difference between you and the reporter at your local newspaper is that in many cases, you may not have the benefit of training or resources to help you determine whether what you’re doing is legal. And on top of that, sometimes knowing the law doesn’t help – in many cases it was written for traditional journalists, and the courts haven’t yet decided how it applies to bloggers.
But here’s the important part: None of this should stop you from blogging. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Internet bullies shouldn’t use the law to stifle legitimate free expression. That’s why EFF created this guide, compiling a number of FAQs designed to help you understand your rights and, if necessary, defend your freedom.
To be clear, this guide isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. Only an attorney who knows the details of your particular situation can provide the kind of advice you need if you’re being threatened with a lawsuit. The goal here is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.
Please note that this guide applies to people living in the US. We don’t have the expertise or resources to speak to other countries’ legal traditions, but we’d like to work with those who do. If you know of a similar guide for your own jurisdiction or feel inspired to research and write one, please let us know. We can link to it here.
Table of Contents
or, see an index of all the questions » http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/questions.php
Blogger Legal Liability Issues
The Overview of Legal Liability Issues FAQ briefly addresses some common legal issues that affect you as a publisher, especially situations where you may face legal claims or threats based on the information you published on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Intellectual Property addresses issues that arise when you publish material created by others on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Online Defamation Law provides an overview of defamation (libel) law, including a discussion of the constitutional and statutory privileges that may protect you.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Section 230 Protections discusses a powerful federal law that gives you, as a web host, protection against legal claims arising from hosting information written by third parties.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Privacy addresses the legal issues surrounding the privacy rights of people you blog about.
Bloggers As Journalists
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Reporter’s Privilege is useful to bloggers who report news gathered from confidential sources.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Media Access can help bloggers who need to get access to public records and government meetings, as well as secure press passes to help with newsgathering.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Freedom of Information Act can help bloggers use open government laws to get information from the government.
Other Legal Issues for Bloggers
The Student Bloggers’ Legal FAQ addresses legal issues arising from student blogging. It focuses on blogging by high school (and middle school) students, but also contains information for college students.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Election Law addresses the legal issues you may face blogging about political campaigns.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Labor Law addresses legal issues with workplace blogging, including union organizing, protections for political blogging away from the workplace, and whistle blowing.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Adult Material addresses the legal issues arising from publishing risque adult-oriented content, including obscenity law, community standards on the Internet, and the new 2257 regulations.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:29 amAnd, bob, Bush, the “Conservative†president (I know, I know, you don’t like him, and “president†is capitalized, but he doesn’t deserve it), is a far worse hypocrite than Gore (but, really, I don’t think that Gore is an hypocrite), because he does vacation 2 months per year, has one work, and when he is confronted with a single mother working three jobs to pay the bills, he says that having tree works is the “American wayâ€. Nauseating. He hasn’t done a good job in a work, much less in three simultaneously.
First, we are not talking about Bush, we are talking about Gore. Secondly, we are talking about global climate change, not employment and salaries.
Most people would like to see someone live a carbon nutral life. I know it is impossable to be completely carbon nutral, or non polluting, but is is a worthy goal. But most people are less likely to follow advise of someone that is not practicing what they preach. Why would I listen to the uneducated teacher? Why should I listen to someone that contributes more to pollution than I do?
The message is a good message, but the messenger needs to live by it.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:15 am“Why should I listen to someone that contributes more to pollution than I do?”
Because as you say, the message is a good message, regardless of what Gore does or doesn’t do.
This idea that because the messanger is somehow less than perfect, one should not listen to the message on its merits is, how should I put this?, Wrong!
And really, how in the world can you be upset with Gore, who has the correct message and at least tries to reduce his CO2 emmissions, and, yet, at the same time not be critical of Hannity who has the wrong message and is proud of polluting and wasting resources? It’s just astounding to me.
But, hey, Gore’s not the only game in town. Perhaps you will listen to Sir Nicholas Stern?
“Lest anyone criticize Sir Nicholas over his high-polluting air travel, he is quick to add that he’s buying carbon offsets for these trips.”
And,
“Sir Nicholas, who plans later this year to return to the London School of Economics as a professor, tries to live a life of low carbon emissions. He seldom drives his car, preferring to take transit to work or ride his bike.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070220.STERN20/TPStory/National
February 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pmReally folks, Not all people of Irish extraction are as stupid as Hannity!
February 20th, 2007 at 6:46 pmWhenever Sean Hannity lifts his arm or leg, takes a piss, opens his anus or mouth(interchangeable in that case), he POLLUTES the earth…even when he exhales, he POLLUTES the earth. What to do? Stick a pipe up his ass and shove the other end into his big mouth and VOILA! You have it–PERPETUAL MOTION!!!!! Noxious wastes and gas just go ’round and ’round and DON’T COME OUT HERE!!!!!
February 20th, 2007 at 8:12 pmAs a first timer here (I found myself inadvertently redirected to this site from another search, but so be it), I find that I am elated that places like this exist were our fellow Americans can openly discuss their passions, disgusts, etc. in an open forum without fear of true retribution for their opinions as so many other nations are/have been. On the other hand, I am a bit disgusted…And that is that almost everyone here has to resort to name-calling, degrading, “liar-liar-pants-on-fire†comments.
As far as Sean Hannity goes…well he is no different than Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc, etc. They are living the American dream. They have a product in which a large audience, listens to, pays advertising for, etc. I would suspect that the vast majority of this contributing audience is not hurting too terribly bad. So if you don’t like his message, don’t listen.
The fact of the matter is simply this…we (as a nation) have a horrible memory. We rarely see things through (which is a travesty). We have cycled through the party’s through-out the decades in the hope that the “new†party in power will take care of whatever “itch†we have at that time…but we need not forget that we are a Nation. We ALL believe that Freedom, Justice, Humanity etc. is the way of life…we ALL love seeing our kids grow up, we LOVE that we have the opportunity to make something at whatever life throws at us (and yes for all of you that will ding me on this, I do mean if “life gives you lemons, make lemonadeâ€), we LOVE that we have the time and FREEDOM to sit here and BLOG AWAY on whatever is bothering us…
At the end of the day, we voted in President Bush (again) because we believed that he would protect our country better than any of the other candidates…and there have been no more attacks on US soil (thank God). If 2008 changes that confidence, we then, so be it, but we will have voted for a Presidential change and NOT the congress attempting to be the commander-in-chief…
At the end of the day, over 70% of congress voted to send us to war (and please don’t give me that nonsense about “if I only knew then what I know nowâ€â€¦I’m sorry but that is weak leadership rhetoric. Hind sight is ALWAYS 20/20, so please do not go there..)
At the end of the day, we have liberated over 50 Million people in Iraq from a HORRIBLE dictator who raped, tortured and killed millions of innocent people.
At the end of the day…WE ARE AMERICANS…
and I could keep going and going and going….
February 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pmHi Robert,
Concerning your,
“From USA Today about Al Gore and his environmental concern,” post at #74.
Apparently the accusations made against Gore are false. See the following:
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/8/17/133652/848
February 21st, 2007 at 5:32 amThe saddest thing of all is how many people actually listen to the Hannitys, O’Reillys, and Limbaughs and think those guys are reporting ‘news’. These listeners must have had marginal educations and can’t distinguish between opinion and reproducible, provable fact. The audience for this kind of nonsense never holds these guys to account when they deliberately lie, are proven wrong, or actually break the law themselves, but get sucked in by the fear-mongering and somehow seem to fall for the same, lame baloney over and over.
This situation is the right wing’s triumph — they know that if you repeat something often enough, people will tend to believe it. Who needs facts? Who needs manners? And an open mind? That’s for sissies! Real men — and Ann Coulters — never change their minds. Their kindergarten-level discourse consists of name-calling, blaming, whining, outright lying, and even a tantrum or two if the occasion calls for it. They have succeeded in fostering mistrust of science and journalism, to the point that evolution must stand on equal terms in school curricula with intelligent design, and faux scientists on the Monsanto or Exxon payroll get equal air time to cast doubt on climate change with Nobel Prize winning scientists who do the actual work of science. Spin is confused with real journalism, to our great peril.
We have become a fearful nation, and along the way we lost our determination. We’re scared of things we don’t understand and, instead of seeking the truth, we prefer to hide behind the words of talk radio hosts who comfortingly tell us we don’t need to change, we don’t need to learn, we don’t need to do the hard work of citizenship and consider other points of view. Oh, how easily led astray are we!
February 21st, 2007 at 10:24 amthe saddest part of all of this is: NO SANE PEOPLE GIVE A CRAP WHAT HE SAYS. he is preaching to BRAIN-WASHED vidiots. if we ignore him, perhaps he will go away…nah. clearly it is gonna take a squad of “cleaners.”
February 21st, 2007 at 11:52 amThis idea that because the messanger is somehow less than perfect, one should not listen to the message on its merits is, how should I put this?, Wrong!
#168: By your logic, many people that have blasted Bush (either because they simply hate him or, as with anyone else, is less than perfect) should actually listen to him. You cannot make your case that way.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:17 pm“#168: By your logic, many people that have blasted Bush (either because they simply hate him or, as with anyone else, is less than perfect) should actually listen to him. You cannot make your case that way.”
That’s right, I agree with you, people should not simply blast Bush because they hate him, or because he is imperfect, they should “listen to him” i.e. look at his policies and where they have led and judge them on their merits. And it is my opinion, along with most people in the country, that his policies, such as his Iraq war policy have led to disaster. I say this not because I hate Bush, or because he has problems with speaking the English language, but because it is plain to see.
In addition, his policy of not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol and only taking half measures to fight global warming is another policy that I think will lead to disaster. Again, it’s not because I hate him it’s because I have listened to what he has to say and find that compared to the danger we face his policies are weak and do not go far enough.
And believe it or not I have cited his positive contributions in the fight against climate change approvingly. See my post #154 at the bottom of the following thread,
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/16/hannity-gore/
Finally, I agree with people like “partyaside” #171 that the name calling on found on this thread is out of place. I wish this site had moderators, and killed the troll posts, from both sides. These issues, to my mind, are too important for that sort of behavior and deserve honest and reasoned debate. Which is not what you get from the likes of Hannity, by the way.
I stick by my position that one needs to judge an idea on its merits not on whether the messenger is perfect. I can make my case that way and I have.
Or do you think we should just judge policy based on personal charisma? “I don’t think Gore is right on global warming because he’s stiff and boring.” I would submit this kind of “logic” is not a rational way to proceed.
February 21st, 2007 at 6:02 pmOn that note Tavita (or anyone else please)…is there a more productive debate blog around other than this? (and if you are gong to respond, please do so seriously, not with a bunch of nonsensical banter). As I stated initially, I am (well, was) a first timer to this one (or any other for that matter), and whereas I LOVE the passion that both sides have here, spending SO much time and energy berating a person on the radio/tv that has a very large portion of the population watch/listen to/believe is kind of silly…you guys keep doing whatever you want, but there are a few “returnees†on this line that have some great points to debate…like, Tavita, 20wordsorless, and to a lesser extent TripMaster Monkey (I love the fact that you refuse to give up though — EVER — that is a byproduct of a fantastic upbringing). If there is nothing else, then so be it, and I will continue here…
February 21st, 2007 at 11:16 pmHi partyaside,
I guess it depends on what you want to debate or discuss. If it is global warming and climate change, I have found the discussions and debate on
http://www.realclimate.org
to be level headed and productive. It’s run by climate scientists and I have found them to be very patient with people, though they will delete the name calling kinds of posts. I could be mistaken, but I think you will find the tone there refreshing compared to this thread.
Another site I have enjoyed is
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/
which bills itself as “The Science Policy Weblog”
Then there is WorldChanging.com at
http://www.worldchanging.com
They cover a wide variety of enviromental issues and specifically say they will kill troll posts. And they do.
There is also, don’t laugh, Treehugger.com at
http://www.treehugger.com
They cover enviromental issues and “green” products. I’ve found the comments there to be fairly reasonable without name calling.
All of these sites try to be nonpartisan and I think they generally succeed, but I am rather left of center so you may not agree. In any event, I have found their comment sections to allow reasoned debate and comments from both sides.
If there are other sites out there that debate things outside of the science and enviromental policy areas I don’t know because that’s not were my interest is right now and the internet is a big place…
Perhaps I’ll see you someday at one of those sites.
February 22nd, 2007 at 12:07 amOutstanding Tavita, thank you very much. ThinkProgress — Have a nice life…I’m out…
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:11 amSwift Boat Sean strikes again.
That intelligent people take
a word of his demagoguery as
serious journalism, is a sure
indication of the complete lack
of cultural development by his
fan base. Sean “is” strictly a
Wedge Issue type of guy. At
one time his imitation of an
Austrian Paper Hanger, was at
least amusing. Now, with our
Nation in dire straights, due to
a complete and utter failure of
the Faith Based Empire Building
strategy of the Republican Party,
poor Sean is becoming more
and more hysterical with each
passing failure. Global Warming
is just another wedge issue in
Sean’s attack dog Repertoire.
So predictable, only a masochist
would even bother to tune him
in. We all know Global Warming
is caused by the liberals Sean,
as well as Cancer, HIV, and the
price of tea in China. Thank the
Gods we have Sean to dictate
to us how we should think.
I haven’t heard his voice, since
the day the US invaded Iraq,
going after all the WMD that he
had told us for months the Iraqis
had stock piled.
Fool me once…………..can’t get fooled again.
February 23rd, 2007 at 6:28 amAl Gore is a fool. The globe is warming slightly, so what? Greenland used to be green too. The cataclismic affects won’t be felt for 100 -500 years. By then we will have the technology to deal with it. Hopefully we’ll have reliable and affordable alternative energy before then. I’m a Republican and believe the Earth is most likely warming a bit. I also think that Al Gore is a power hungry nut. (Full idclosure: I voted for Gore in 2000) Even though his original intentions may have been noble it seems pretty clear that they have morphed into something very different. His movie claims sea levels will rise 20 feet yet just weeks ago the IPCC revised downward their sea level prediction to 17 inches. No disconnect there Al.
February 23rd, 2007 at 2:04 pmIf Al Gore and his ilk were around when Greenland was green, how hysterical would they have been as the planet started to cool?
As for your WMD comment BK…Can you please name me the country that stated before the war that Saddam did not have WMD’s? Oh yeah, there are none. Hindsight is 20/20.
JV says,
“The globe is warming slightly, so what? Greenland used to be green too. The cataclismic affects won’t be felt for 100 -500 years. By then we will have the technology to deal with it.”
It’s warming slightly now, but it is very likely to warm more if current rate of C02 emissions are not drastically reduced, see the IPCC report you cite. Their “high scenario” is 4.0 C with a likely range of 2.4 C to 6.4 C.
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
In addition, the last time Greenland was green the world did not support 6.6 billion people with 100s of millions in vulnerable coastal areas.
http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop
More to the point, what technology is going to solve the following problems?
1. The destruction of the world’s coral from bleaching as ocean temperatures continue to rise.
2. The ocean turning into a green slime due to the effects of ocean acidification from C02.
3. The increase in the strength of hurricanes, typhoons, and cyclones (will Gore’s anti-hurricane machine save us from the CAT 5s?).
4. Sea level rise up to 7 meters. (I’ll deal with the IPCC report on that below.)
5. A rapid spread of tropical diseases into formerly temperate areas.
6. An increase in droughts in some regions.
7. And an increase in floods in other regions.
8. Global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) could be up to twenty percent lower than it otherwise might be.
As far as sea level rise, Gore did not make any predictions as to when it would happen, he only showed what would happen if Greenland and Antarctica melted, something I think people should be aware of. And while the IPCC did down grade the prediction of sea level rise, it could be that their predictions are too conservative.
http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=4370560
And the report acknowledges this:
“Dynamical processes related to ice flow not included in current models but suggested by recent observations could increase the vulnerability of the ice sheets to warming, increasing future sea level rise. Understanding of these processes is limited and there is no consensus on their magnitude.”
It seems to me that rather than waiting around for cataclysmic affects it would be wiser to invest in an ounce of prevention rather than wait for a pound of cure.
Perhaps you don’t have children, but I do, and while I won’t be around in 100 years, they, or at least my future grandchildren, will be, and I’d prefer not to gamble their future on the hope of some imaginary technology solving cataclysmic affects that we have created.
Since JV claims to be a Republican, perhaps he and others will be interested in what a respected economist, Sir Nicholas Stern, has to say about Global Warming and Climate Change. See below:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/sternreview_index.cfm
February 25th, 2007 at 8:11 pm[...] of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains: What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon [...]
February 26th, 2007 at 7:15 pm[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office [...]
February 26th, 2007 at 10:52 pm[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains: What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon [...]
February 27th, 2007 at 10:06 amWhy doesn’t anyone seem to take into account the effects of Earth’s shifting orbit around the sun and the measurable change in solar output. The temperature on Mars has gone up as well. Shouldn’t that be reason enough to suspect that the Sun may be a larger influence on planetary temperatures than saying man is 90% responsible? Sure there are things we can do to reduce our “carbon footprint”, but in the long run, we’re living on the Suns time. When it finally spends its fuel… this planet is history.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:53 am[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office [...]
February 27th, 2007 at 11:22 amThis rightwinger has no trouble at all understanding this carbon credit crap.
AGW is the new religion, and carbon credits are indulgences. We just need a Martin Luther to come along now.
February 27th, 2007 at 3:04 pmTo poster number 186. The reason no one looks at the changes in the sun is because if it were found out the sun was the reason, then they couldn’t go after big oil as well as severely lower America’s economy.
This is all about politics. I say this because I’ve found out on my own that the sun has been acting up in recent decades.
February 27th, 2007 at 3:40 pmOhhhhhhh. Now I get it, these ‘carbon credit’ things. But why not just give us poor folks who can’t pony up for them a tax cut for not using them? Or why don’t Gore & the Oscar-people from hollywood buy them FROM US?
February 27th, 2007 at 3:43 pmI’d like to try and give some wise advise about retrospection and thinking about what you say. Are you, good sir, smart and well read as you are, as well schooled in climatology as a proffesional climatologist, who has devoted all his time to studying the sun’s effect on the earth and how the climate changes, in the long run?
Call up BASC sometime. The people who actually know what their talking about, have provided the raw information everyone else bases things off of, and done the double-blind studies and tests over long periods to see how things work in the climate all tend to agree. Global Warming is real. Humans are accelerating and intensifying it’s effect.
February 27th, 2007 at 3:58 pmYes, over huge periods of time the world goes through different climatogical phases, and yes, we should be heating up now. But not this much, and not so fast.
I listen to Hannity every day. His point is that GORE is a hypocrite by talking about global warming but flies around in private jets instead of using commercial flights. Darryl Hannah was on his show today, an environmentalist liberal, and she concurred with Sean’s opinion on Gore’s hypocrisy. Get your facts straight.
February 27th, 2007 at 7:29 pm^The poser above me is apparently a fan of “truthiness”.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:00 pm[...] about nothing, except that people will try to bring you down if you become too successful. See Sean Hannity. Don’t think for one moment that this is nothing more than an attempt to curb the “Is [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 12:06 pmIf Gore was really so concerned about his carbon footprint then why didn’t he accept his award for his “documentary” via global satellite vs. flying out to the location of the ceremony? I mean, if you want to set an example, wouldn’t that be the logical thing to do? And it’s not like he’s ignorant of the technology or idea to do so. He sits on the board at Apple after all – one of the most environmental unfriendly computer businesses out there.
Offset that
February 28th, 2007 at 12:14 pmRe. #30
#
Dick Cheney flies commercial airlines all the time. Pity Al Gore didn’t get with the program when he was Vice President.
Comment by FuzzFlash — February 19, 2007 @ 5:04 am
WHAT???? Air Force Two is constantly flying. That plane is a real fuel sucker. He’s on it all the time. Now I don’t attack him for that, that is the security’s decision.
HOWEVER! Early in 2002 I had the misfortune to be on the NYS Thruway going home up near Albany. We were all shuttled off the road and held “prisoner” at the Thruway rest stop for two hours. Why two hours you may ask? So that they could thoroughly scrub one of the busiest interstates in the nation of all traveling traffic so that Chickenhawk Cheney could go flying up the Thruway in a convoy of black Suburbans. He was on his way to one of his undisclosed locations. Probably Fort Drumm.
So, you may be entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts. This slimeball hasn’t ridden commercial since he went to work for Halliburton.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:16 pm[...] ‘Proud’ Polluter Sean Hannity Launches Pathetic Smear Attack Against Al Gore [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 12:22 pm“It is disappointing to see Apple ranking so low in the overall guide. They are meant to be world leaders in design and marketing; they should be world leaders in environmental innovation.” – Greenpeace
http://news.com.com/Greenpeace,+Apple+clash+over+toxic+waste/2100-1014_3-6110513.html
I mean, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t ol’ Al sit on the board at Apple?
February 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pmAfter reading down the list, I finally found someone that mentioned that maybe, just maybe, the sun is hotter, so we are, Mars is, etc. etc. Hopefully, the Martians will go green before it’s too late.
Thanks #186!
February 28th, 2007 at 1:10 pmIf Gore is truly as passionate about reducing his carbon footprint as he makes himself out to be he would ditch the extravagant lifestyle and donate his carbon credits to someone that can’t afford it. Gore could offset the emissions of 30 families living like wife and me with the amount of electricity he uses. Who cares if he drives a hybrid SUV? It’s still an SUV, and is less efficient than a smaller hybrid. He should lead the way for the elite by living below his means.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:44 pm[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains: What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 6:00 pmCarbon Credits…..Please. What a bunch of suckers! Carbon credits are like sinning all week then going to church and putting 25 bucks in the coffer expecting to get into heaven.
I bet you could track the carbon credit money back to Gore somehow. P.T. Barnum was right. There are suckers born every minute.
Gore is just a hipocrite. He tells you what makes him rich and electable. Don’t forget there is tape of him in a debate accusing Bush senior of dropping the ball in the first gulf war because he didn’t go after Saddam because..I quote….. he has WMD, tortures his own people, and has ties to Osama??? Must be nice to be on the other side of the fence now that it suits him? He is an aristocratic douch bag!
Flip Flop, Flip Flop, Flip Flop!
March 1st, 2007 at 10:58 am#186
You’re right Mike, however you can’t argue facts with liberals, note that vitually all the responses by the left tend towards personal attacks and unfounded claims. Global warming could be (and probably is) caused by natural cycles, some of which may not be known. To assert that it’s all man’s fault is preposterous. The unfortunate part of all of this is that the liberals want to control every part of everybody else’s lives and this provides a great vehicle for their extreme enviornmental agenda. Gore’s assertions are so full of holes that it would take volumes to refute, however, he has the media behind him and that makes his assertions true regardless of the lack of science behind them.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:46 pmVery true Rolling. Although I must give them credit for not retorting right away with something about my misspelling of “Hypocrite”. Something like trailer trash Tobey Keith loving red state living no-spelling red-neck. I’m sort of bummed?
March 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 amI just saw this from National Geographic. It will be interesting to see how this theory pans out. Hopefully it will include more hard data from Mars to compare to Earth.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
March 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 amI suppose if OJ gives a couple of million dollars to an abused women’s shelter he can be excused for killing Nicole.
The same principle as carbon offsets.
Bill Baggett
March 2nd, 2007 at 6:48 pmJefferson City, MO
Wow,
Posted facts and they removed them! WOW. Why?
March 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 pmLet’s all step back see that there is a boat load of hypocracy on both sides. But many of you seem to have it hard for Al. He has several houses which are far larger than someone who is so concerned about being Green would need. As for purchasing carbon off sets. Let’s really be real. How can a single family who is suppose to be Green need to purchase carbon off sets. But your global warming money where your mouth is Al!
March 2nd, 2007 at 10:16 pmThe sun accounts for the current increase in global warming, apparently not,
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/04/its-sun-stupid.html
Mars warming, apparently not,
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/10/global-warming-on-mars/
March 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 pm[...] news operation,” notes Markos, the greater platform it has to peddle unfounded smears against the [...]
March 11th, 2007 at 3:10 am[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains: What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon [...]
March 21st, 2007 at 6:02 pm[...] Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) has said Al Gore is “full of crap” and compared people who believe in global warming to “the Third Reich.” During today’s Senate hearing, Inhofe used a considerable amount of time to attack Gore’s use of carbon offsets and try to convince him to sign a sham “energy ethics pledge.” (Find the real facts on Gore’s energy usage HERE and HERE.) [...]
March 21st, 2007 at 6:08 pm[...] Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) has said Al Gore is “full of crap†and compared people who believe in global warming to “the Third Reich.†During today’s Senate hearing, Inhofe used a considerable amount of time to attack Gore’s use of carbon offsets and try to convince him to sign a sham “energy ethics pledge.†(Find the real facts on Gore’s energy usage HERE and HERE.) [...]
March 21st, 2007 at 9:11 pm[...] position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains: What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon [...]
April 10th, 2007 at 1:22 pm