Supreme Court Gives Gore’s Oscar to Bush

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: gallo The banner behind him said "Mission Accomplished". An indication that the mission was, from the start, the overthrow of the government of Iraq. There was, of course, no understanding of the political situation in Iraq.

Well, does that not expose exactly what Techno indicated.


I fear Bush was telling us the truth when he said he believes he is doing God's work. The office of President is a secular position, not a pulpit, or a launching pad for Gods wars.

Quote by: gallo Without the oppressive government the result has been civil war with us in the middle, with religious zealots from the several sides who think that they get to have 72 eternal virgins for eternity if they kill innocent people by making themselves walking bombs. Have any of you ever heard anything so stupid? What kind of god do these people serve?

Again, who interfered in other peoples affairs, and made this our responsibility?


Truth be told, I don't see the radical Muslims any different than the radical Christians. The both need about 10 cc's of reality, no make that an intervenous drip.


I'd say Bush using his position as President to divert troops away from Afghanistan, and into Iraq on Gods call is right on par with what we're seeing in the Middle East. Lunacy!


It takes a minimum of two to have a "Culture War".

[brien]

To everyone who took this to the nth degree. I don't burn wood exclusively to heat my home. All I wrote was that I burn wood to keep warm. I didn't write I used it exclusively. I use many types of energy. I also have many vehicles. I also have a 4000 sq ft home with a detached building for an office. I use a fair share of energy but I too, make efforts to conserve. However, I don't traipse around the county telling everyone who is willing to listen that they should cut their energy consumprtion and everything else Gore puts forth in his film, while using a inordinate amount of energy myself. He tells us to use a clothesline therefore I would like to see one at any of his 3 homes. This is the difference.

I merely pointed to the hypocrisy of Mr Gore. I never disagreed with the message. Gore's hypocrisy is there for anyone who wishes to recognize it. Call it swift boating, or anything you like, but it is the truth. Polticians from both sides of the aisle are guilty of duplicitious behavior and Gore is merely one of them. Sometimes, the truth hurts, convenient or inconvenient.

[Boetie]

Quote by: brien I merely pointed to the hypocrisy of Mr Gore. I never disagreed with the message. Gore's hypocrisy is there for anyone who wishes to recognize it. Call it swift boating, or anything you like, but it is the truth. Polticians from both sides of the aisle are guilty of duplicitious behavior and Gore is merely one of them. Sometimes, the truth hurts, convenient or inconvenient.

It turns out that a hit squad did a number on Gore. Funny that the hit squad didn't worry about Gore until he won the Oscar for his documentary. This hit squad is Drew Johnson, president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. Let's see what real news sources say:

ABC News: Group Criticizes Gore's Electricity Use

The next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research issued a statement saying Gore was not doing enough to reduce his own electricity consumption. The group said that Gore used nearly 221,000 kilowatt hours last year and that his average monthly electric bill was $1,359. Johnson said his group got its figures from Nashville Electric Service. But company spokeswoman Laurie Parker said the utility never got a request from the policy center and never gave it any information

.

Ouch oh that hurts you mean a respectable hit squad didn't even get any information from the NES. Oh the swiftboating just doesn't stop. But then again a Tennessee Newspaper decided to check the NES and wrote this:

Group questions level of energy use at Gore home - Nashville, Tennessee - Tuesday, 02/27/07 - Tennessean.com

As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk (the) walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use," said Drew Johnson, president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, identified as a free-market think tank. Gore's power bill shows, however, that the former vice president may be doing just that

Oh a left and a right in the jaw. But not to worry the swiftboaters can always count on their useful fools.

[RickSp]

Great article Boetie.

So the swiftboaters claim that Gore's average electrical bill averaged $1,359 per month when in fact it was under $1,200, but ignored the extra "$432 a month Gore paid extra for solar or other renewable energy sources." So on a comparable basis, Gore's electric bill was closer to $760 per month.

On a fair basis, the swiftboaters overstated Gore's energy use by close to 100%.

Lot more swiftboating going on than hypocrisy.

[brien]

ABC News is no more credible than USA today. The fact remains that Gore uses an inordinate amount of enegry for one person while running around the world pointing his finger at everyone else. Maybe he and Tipper don't use the clothesline that he tells everyone else to use because of the dirty laundry he would have to hang. This isn't just about electricity either. It is about all of the enegry he uses, natural gas and petroleum as well. Great pool house there Al. How many cars and SUV, trucks and vans does he own? FACT: Gore uses an inordinate amount of energy for one person and that is the inconvienent truth that many would prefer to sweep under the rug. Oh wait, they can't because they use vacuums instead of brooms.

This hit squad is Drew Johnson, president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. Let's see what real news sources say:

Now, let's see who is swiftboating when they call The Tennesse think tank not a real news source.

2/26/2007 - Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth” - And Replies - Opinion - Chattanoogan.com

(The Tennessee Center for Policy Research is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through free market policy solutions.)

Not a credible source because the are:

INDEPENDENT NON PROFIT NON PARTISIAN

My, my, isn't that interesting.

Once again, any logical person, when presented with the inordinate amount of energy used by Gore, would have to come to the conclusion he uses far too much energy for one person. Call it swiftboating, or anything you like, but that is Al Gore's the inconvenient truth.

[RickSp]

Yah right. Drew Johnson is independent, non-partisan and non-profit. And if you believe that one, I'll tell you another.

Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth” - And Replies

Drew Johnson comes straight out of the right's network, coming from Exxon-funded American Enterprise Institute and the right-wing-funded National Taxpayers Foundation. The TCPR is part of a national network of state-based right-wing organizations in 37 states as well as prominent nationwide right-wing organizations. Through its network SPN advances the public policy ideas of the expansive right-wing political movement on the state and local level.

Non-partisan? I don't think so.

Given that the TCPR overstated Gore's electricity consumption by almost 100% makes them either liars or bumblers. Either way they are no more reliable than they are non-partisan.

There are questions as to how the TCPR accessed utility bills, who is funding them and who is actually pulling their strings. I very much doubt that their Swiftboat campaign has anything to do with the public good, honesty or integrity. If they lied about being non-partisan and independent, one has to wonder what else they are lying about. Drew Johnson conveniently fails to mention that Al Gore actually pays more per month to purchase 100% 'green' electricity - produced by solar, wind and other renewable resources - through TVA's Green Power Switch program.

TTCPR flies under false colors and can't get their numbers straight. You want to believe a smear compaign based on obvious falsehoods, well that is up to you.

[brien]

Ric;

I suppose there are no left wing liberal smear group and think tanks?

Anyway, the bottom line is as I have written countless times before here. Any logical person can see that Mr Gore uses an inordinate amount of energy for a person who travels around the planet telling everyone he meets to reduce their energy consumption while he in fact probably uses more than anyone he meets. That is the hypocrisy as I see it and I stand by my observation.

[RickSp]

On one hand we have the swift boaters who lied or at least distorted the facts about Gore's household energy consumption and on the other we have the Bush administration who projects a steady increase in emissions at current rates.

What is happening here is that Gore is being subjected to the same sort of character assassination that the Karl Rove and the other scoundrels of the Bush administration use to attempt to silence those who oppose their polices. The polices, which by the way, are usually wrong.

But hey, if you want to believe the phony numbers and the bullshit claims that is your business.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: gallo The banner behind him said "Mission Accomplished". An indication that the mission was, from the start, the overthrow of the government of Iraq. There was, of course, no understanding of the political situation in Iraq. Without the oppressive government the result has been civil war with us in the middle, with religious zealots from the several sides who think that they get to have 72 eternal virgins for eternity if they kill innocent people by making themselves walking bombs. Have any of you ever heard anything so stupid? What kind of god do these people serve?

Sorry to inform you that you got the A-Q mixed up with the people born in Irag. The terrorists who were operating out of Afganistan are the ones who believed they would get the virgins in heaven if they flew those ariplanes into the World Trade Center and elsewhere - killing theirself also in the process, as the teachings of Ben Laden had adviced them. The Irag of people did not and do not have such a belief as a motive to fight. The original mission stated was to overthrow Saddam and his government and to get rid of his weapons of mass distruction in order to enforce U.N. resolutions (which Bush had missinterpreted). But other missions were also an objective for Irag by President Bush.

1. To create a pupet government that is USA friendly and to gain control of the oil fields for economic reasons - with the hope of sending in Haliburton so that the fileds are managed by USA interests. Once the new democratic government was set up and all the people in Iraq were on our side then Bush intended to build USA military bases in Irag so our aircraft would have easy access to other countires bordering Irag. That put Iran on the alert that if the USA ever did set up military bases in Irag that they might be in trouble, especially after being on the "Axes" list.

The trouble in Irag started when the people thought freedom means they can do whatever they want, So they started to loot the locatons formally owned by the government of Irag, the musem, schools, public offices. Then they raided some stores and raped women and other things. Meanwhile thousands of people were suddenly unemployed because their paychecks used to come from Saddam's government - hatred started to manifest because the USA did not give anyone any sort of income but were bringing in people form outside to do the reconstruction work. So a protest started which later evolved into shooting and sniper attacks. Our military then attempted to bring order back to the streets but when we raided houses and shot people to enforce law and order and the unemployed got even madder about being occupied and having their children and friends killed. So a 2nd war erupted. Which is sort of where we stand today.

[Technosoul]

Some of you have stated that Gore is not "living Green" because he uses a lot of electricity in his house (when home). It might be a good thing to conserve using electric energy so that we have enough to go around for everyone without blackouts, but electrical useage has hardly no effect to cause Global Warming or greenshouse gasses. In fact electric cars are bio-friendly. The main cause for Global Warming would be fumes coming out of gasoline powered cars, trucks, and aircraft, etc. Some types of industral polution, and the distruction of the rainforests. Volcanos and a few natural events can add to what humans are doing. Other things can add a little bit more to the problem but they are minor compared to the major cause - which is gasoline. Everyone knows that he was handed down some stocks in a oil company from this father, but that is not like he is investing money to promote the use of oil. We will always have a use for oil even when we stop using it for gasoline - the objective is to reduce that useage to a reasonal amount so that our useage does not put the weather out of balance. If he sold all his stocks in that oil company it would not reduce the useage of oil by even one gal. So you are just griping about nothing. Every human is nature dependant, we cannot live without using things that come from nature, we are interlinked with nature for our survival. So the objective is not to become totally indpendant of nature or the useage of things form nature, as that would be a silly notion. The idea is to use wisdom so that do not over polute the air, soil, or waterways. And so that we do not endanger something in nature by (for example) over fishing an area, and so forth.

How much your electric bill is has little to do with it because electricity is man made, it is more a matter of how you make it (generate it). So do not be silly, you not have dwell in a mud hut with a wood burning stove to reduce the effects of global warming.

[Nono]

Quote by: Gawd Yes, I agree that the founding fathers were being hypocritical, they admitted it themselves, but ...

Source please.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Alright, worded that wrong, but they were unwilling to free their slaves because it would cause a civil war when america was at its weakest, not to mention weaken the economy.

[Nono]

(laughs) Do you have a shred of evidence that the possibility, much less the desirability, of freeing their slaves ever even crossed their minds?

[RickSp]

Quote by: Nono (laughs) Do you have a shred of evidence that the possibility, much less the desirability, of freeing their slaves ever even crossed their minds?

Yes, as a matter of fact. Lot more than a shred.

George Washington did indeed free his slaves on his death and went to some lengths to make sure that his relatives did not undo his bequest. Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson, among others, wrote about the evils of slavery. Jefferson did free the children of Sally Hemmings, who were probably his children. He did not free Hemmings nor another 150 slaves. Of course even if Jefferson had shown a greater inclination to free his slaves, he did not own them or much of anything on his death as he was bankrupt and the bulk of his assets were owned by his creditors.

In his book Revolutionary Characters,Gordon Woods writes about the Founder's optimism that slavery would die out peacefully on its own.

All the prominent leaders though that the liberal principle of the Revolution would eventually destroy the institution of slavery. When even southerners like Jefferson, Patrick Henry and Henry Laurens publicly deplored the injustice of slavery, from "that moment" declared the New York physician and abolitionist E.H. Smith in 1798 "the slow but certain death-wound was inflicted upon it." Of course, such predictions could not be more wrong.

[Nono]

Enlightening. Thank you. I'd been under the impression that slavery was so taken for granted (like hog farming today for example) that abolition would have been inconceivable.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Not at all, they were men of the enlightenment, they knew what they were doing was wrong, they just didn't let their repulsion get in the way of their ultimate goal.

[brien]

Quote by: RickSp On one hand we have the swift boaters who lied or at least distorted the facts about Gore's household energy consumption and on the other we have the Bush administration who projects a steady increase in emissions at current rates. What is happening here is that Gore is being subjected to the same sort of character assassination that the Karl Rove and the other scoundrels of the Bush administration use to attempt to silence those who oppose their polices. The polices, which by the way, are usually wrong. But hey, if you want to believe the phony numbers and the bullshit claims that is your business.

I realize all of the problems with the hypocrisy of everyone in DC and global warming. This is why I pointed out Mr Gore's hypocrisy in his own personal lifestyle.