An Inconvenient Hypocrite

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by madanthonywayne, Feb 27, 2007.

  1. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,949
    If only Bush would talk the talk as well, but he's not. Unfortunately his house will not make up for that.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, Gore has lost all credibility on this issue.

    You're saying your words are more important than your actions? I don't buy it.

    If you want to know what someone really thinks, watch what he does, not what he says. If the two are in disagreement, actions speak louder than words.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. IceAgeCivilizations Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,618
    Scoreboard madanthony.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,229

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    *Sigh*

    I think I am going to cry.

    Gore has lost all credibility as far as I am concerned. Bush (with his ranch) is doing what all home owners should be doing. It is a shame he won't sign the Kyoto agreement, but that is another topic altogether.

    But I have to give it to him, he is doing more than what most do and as all of you know, I have never been a fan of the man. He definately just blew Gore out of the water on a personal home owner's stance on the environment. The man's ranch is 'off-grid' while Gore's mansion is using up 20 times the electricity compared the average American household.

    Bush is doing the right thing on his own property while Gore does the opposite. I have to wonder however, why doesn't Bush take a more environmentally friendly stance in his politics if his home is so eco friendly? Gore tells people what they should do and does the opposite. I have to agree with anthony in this instance, Gore dropped the ball and has lost a hell of a lot of credibility.
     
  8. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,217
    Defame! Defame! Defame!

    Am I buying it? No.
     
  9. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,217
    And Madanthonywayne, are you trying to imply that eco-friendly measures are now, just somehow out of the good ol' science, a good thing!?

    How very unusual for you...
     
  10. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,949
    Bush started a war for oil, leading to the deaths of over 3,000 Americans, the wounding of 40,000 more, and countless thousands of Iraqi deaths, the use of depleted uranium in warfare, millions of gallons of diesel and jet fuel expended in Iraq, advocated drilling in ANWR, refused to raise fuel mileage standards for cars sold in the US, and like Gore, drives around in fleets of armored suburbans and air force one. He has single handedly done more to destroy the environment than Gore ever will with his big house.


    Gore responds:
    http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/26/gore-responds-to-drudge/
     
  11. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    spidergoat

    He is spidergoat, its just that you don't want to see it, President Bush has a lot more information on Kyoto, than any of use are privileged to, and just maybe he see thing in the accords that are not a good thing? and are the Kyoto Accords the way to go, not if it wrecks the economy, and from what I have read that is exactly what it would do to the U.S. it would destroy our way of life and revert us back to third world status, everybody else rides for free, and we pay the bill, and after the final bill comes due and we are in the shitter, who pays then?
     
  12. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Since Gore's "house" is a 20 room 8 bathroom castle, it is safe to say it is SLIGHTLY bigger than the average American household. So it only uses 2-3 times more than the average.

    BUT! If we add that he has a giant machine in his basement that recreates the ozonlayer, his house is actually vert economical...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,217
    So did President Clinton before when we initially signed on. And Clinton was the one who balanced the budget.
     
  14. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    spidergoat

    Started a war for oil, Really, and your proof? everything that I have read from reliable sources say it was about 1441, war for oil, that was Bush 1, and I hope so, the market price is a good thing to protect.

    As for drilling in AMWAR, it would cut our dependency of foreign oil, keep the price reasonable, and give the middle east less of a strangle hold on the world markets, and if we opened up all of the known oil reserves around our country we could revert the middle to a non factor on the worlds political stage.
     
  15. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    It's ANWR.
    And there's not much oil up there. Even at the most generous estimated, it'd last America for a few months.
     
  16. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Facial, that balancing act was projections, of the budget and never was fact, and if Bill was so keen on Kyoto, why didn't he singe the accords, he could have.
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,229
    There is a difference. Unlike Gore, Bush is not going around advising and lecturing others on what to do to green up the environment. Nor is he making a huge amount of money from eco-documentaries either. No one is saying that Bush has not destroyed the environment with his political policies. But his home is way more eco-friendly compared to Gore's, and Gore is lecturing others on how to be eco-friendly and ignoring his own advice? It reeks of hypocrisy.

    Gore, may live in a mansion, but it does not excuse his rising energy bill. That's the thing, his energy usage is going up, not down.
     
  18. IceAgeCivilizations Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,618
    Maybe he has a bunch of illegal Mexicans who vote Democrat waving fans to cool the places.
     
  19. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I know I don't get a chance to say it much, but I'm by no means in favor of ruining the enviroment.

    I have replaced all my incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents, I replaced one of my gas guzzlers with a car that guzzles less gas (it gets more than double the mpg of the vehicle it replaced. I almost bought a Prius, but heard they were unreliable.) I also bought all new low E windows for my house.

    It's simply that I, like Bush, think that the Kyoto protocol would destroy the US economy. I'm perfectly willing to what I can, but am not willing to destroy my country to decrease the temperature one degree over the next hundred years.

    I have to say that Gore's actions make it look like he's simply an opportunist using global warming as a political football.
     
  20. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Roman, you proof? the amount of oil isn't known for sure until they start drilling, and if you recall I said to open it all, we have oil that hasn't been touched, east coast, Florida cost, Gulf of Mexico, west coast, Great Lakes Basin, The Permian Basin, the North Slope, and how long has that been producing? and ANWAR has more potential then the North Slope find, we have reserves in Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Kansas, all through out the mid west, if we did start using our own oil we could make the transition to new energy in a more controlled manner, and make the Middle east irreverent, to our energy policies.
     
  21. radicand Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    638


    See that's the thing we righties want to die of foul air and water. Weird, do you think you socialists could ever join us in this?

    Moron!!!
     
  22. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    It's ANWR.
    There's no ANWAR.

    My proof?
    Even the oil companies aren't that hot on developing up there. There's just too much risk. It'd be a costly operation, and probably won't pay back much.

    How would using more oil make the transition to new energy more controlled? It would only postpone the transition. Your reasoning is similar to "if I smoke this crack now, I'm less likely to use it later."
     
  23. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,229
    I'm sorry, but do I know you?

    I would imagine not.

    Therefore, shut up.
     

Share This Page