Gore isn't quite as green as he's led the world to believe

[zendari]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: ayabe
Al Gore made a movie about being green?

No.

Again you defend your boys by pointing to other politicians.

What would you describe this film as?

"Corporate America must face up to green and ethical challenges if they are to avoid disaster, former US Vice President Al Gore has told the BBC."

Text

Have you seen the movie? I have.

His purpose is to draw attention to the subject, he isn't mandating from on high that we all start riding our bicycles 20 miles to work and making our own electricity through a human hamster wheel. He wants to crack down on the big polluters who are the major cause of this problem.

Yup, I've seen it.


Former Vice President Al Gore said his conscience is regularly challenged by a consumerism that contributes to the global warming he has made it his mission to reverse.

"It is so hard for those of us who want to live according to our values," Gore said Monday at the Chautauqua Institution, during the latest in a series of lectures he has given on global warming.

"We're embedded in a culture that makes it so easy to just go with the flow and support a pattern that's horribly destructive," he said. "And so we need to address this personally."

Text


Seems like his purpose to to address "consumerism", and he wants people to "personally" get involved. He even admits his own hypocrisy!

"We've fallen into this pattern of consuming more and more and more and I'm part of it, I understand," he said.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: zendari

Yup, I've seen it.

I knew you were a troll, but now you are a liar. Go back to your right wing blogs and get fed some more quotes, you are a cliche.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: slash196
The movie isn't about Al Gore, it's about global warming.

Right, and in typical Democrat fashion..
"WE MUST CHANGE!! WE'LL ALL DIE IF WE DONT!! *whisper* I mean....YOU all must change, but I will continue on"

Typical Democratic bullsh1t. Everyone ELSE needs to make sacrafices and make changes, but *I* dont have to, only you.

I'm sorry, but if your trying to be the champion of the cause it looks pretty frickin bad to not adopt the changes you call for.
It would be like me being anti-gun.

Actually this sounds a lot like what Bush asks of military families.

Dems don't use fear as a political tool, that's your team buddy.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: ayabe
Actually this sounds a lot like what Bush asks of military families.

Dems don't use fear as a political tool, that's your team buddy.

Did Bush serve?
Has Bush asked all of America to sign up to the armed forces?

Gee, so much for that idea....

Fear as a political tool? That goes both ways my friend.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I think that the right wing/republican think tanks read the same article that I did earlier today or yesterday.....

Lamont's victory against Leiberman has sent a clear message that the best chance to win the '08 nomination is someone that is anti-war. And just what Dem has been more vocal than Gore on the national level that isn't severely damaged goods? Better start the smears and discrediting now before he gets a stronghold. After all, he already won the first popular vote for president that he was involved in even with the Repub "he's a liar" machine after him in full force.

Uh no... Lieberman's loss sent a clear message that the new internet blogger-based Democratic party will not tolerate any deviance from their extremist party agenda. In other words, the Democratic centrists just got booted from the party.

As to the war, I'm a pacifist who was strongly against it while most of the so-called Democrats here still believed in the WMDs. The ONLY reason we're there is so that the defense industry has jobs. That's what it's all about. Haven't you people figured that out yet?

I find this kind of thinking truly frightening. I do not believe it. What I find frightening is the possibility you are right. I don't think my fear blinds me because I live with terrifying truths, but I still don't believe it. I think it's simplistic paranoia.

And as far as new internet blogger-based Democratic party not tolerating pro war go along get along Democrats, good. The Republican Party-Lite is worthless and needs to die. Let a new Liberal left party emerge to articulate a real progressive message for the 50% of Americans who don't vote to hear to offer some hope for a caring future. I am sick to death of the deadening effect moderates have moderating everything into the toilet of moderation. Revolution baby. Time for revolution, new choices and new left thinking, voting reform, social security reform, energy independence, American jobs and American people first, socialized medicine and on and on.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I think that the right wing/republican think tanks read the same article that I did earlier today or yesterday.....

Lamont's victory against Leiberman has sent a clear message that the best chance to win the '08 nomination is someone that is anti-war. And just what Dem has been more vocal than Gore on the national level that isn't severely damaged goods? Better start the smears and discrediting now before he gets a stronghold. After all, he already won the first popular vote for president that he was involved in even with the Repub "he's a liar" machine after him in full force.

Uh no... Lieberman's loss sent a clear message that the new internet blogger-based Democratic party will not tolerate any deviance from their extremist party agenda. In other words, the Democratic centrists just got booted from the party.

As to the war, I'm a pacifist who was strongly against it while most of the so-called Democrats here still believed in the WMDs. The ONLY reason we're there is so that the defense industry has jobs. That's what it's all about. Haven't you people figured that out yet?

I find this kind of thinking truly frightening. I do not believe it. What I find frightening is the possibility you are right. I don't think my fear blinds me because I live with terrifying truths, but I still don't believe it. I think it's simplistic paranoia.

moonbeam: are you referring to vics first point, or the second point?

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I find this kind of thinking truly frightening. I do not believe it. What I find frightening is the possibility you are right. I don't think my fear blinds me because I live with terrifying truths, but I still don't believe it. I think it's simplistic paranoia.

And as far as new internet blogger-based Democratic party not tolerating pro war go along get along Democrats, good. The Republican Party-Lite is worthless and needs to die. Let a new Liberal left party emerge to articulate a real progressive message for the 50% of Americans who don't vote to hear to offer some hope for a caring future. I am sick to death of the deadening effect moderates have moderating everything into the toilet of moderation. Revolution baby. Time for revolution, new choices and new left thinking, voting reform, social security reform, energy independence, American jobs and American people first, socialized medicine and on and on.

I find it frithening someone would want a socialist country.
THAT would get me to join the Revolution bandwagon.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I think that the right wing/republican think tanks read the same article that I did earlier today or yesterday.....

Lamont's victory against Leiberman has sent a clear message that the best chance to win the '08 nomination is someone that is anti-war. And just what Dem has been more vocal than Gore on the national level that isn't severely damaged goods? Better start the smears and discrediting now before he gets a stronghold. After all, he already won the first popular vote for president that he was involved in even with the Repub "he's a liar" machine after him in full force.

Uh no... Lieberman's loss sent a clear message that the new internet blogger-based Democratic party will not tolerate any deviance from their extremist party agenda. In other words, the Democratic centrists just got booted from the party.

As to the war, I'm a pacifist who was strongly against it while most of the so-called Democrats here still believed in the WMDs. The ONLY reason we're there is so that the defense industry has jobs. That's what it's all about. Haven't you people figured that out yet?

I find this kind of thinking truly frightening. I do not believe it. What I find frightening is the possibility you are right. I don't think my fear blinds me because I live with terrifying truths, but I still don't believe it. I think it's simplistic paranoia.

And as far as new internet blogger-based Democratic party not tolerating pro war go along get along Democrats, good. The Republican Party-Lite is worthless and needs to die. Let a new Liberal left party emerge to articulate a real progressive message for the 50% of Americans who don't vote to hear to offer some hope for a caring future. I am sick to death of the deadening effect moderates have moderating everything into the toilet of moderation. Revolution baby. Time for revolution, new choices and new left thinking, voting reform, social security reform, energy independence, American jobs and American people first, socialized medicine and on and on.

I might agree with you were it not for the pervasive spirits of nihilism and bitter partisanship within this new extremist-left Democratic party. From my observations, their revolution is not so much to create as to it is to destroy; not so much inclusive as it is exclusive. I see their attacks against the moderates -- condemning them are "Republican Party-lite" -- as evidence of this and their simplistic paranoia, that everyone who disagrees with them on even the most trivial of issues MUST be their enemy. Such tactics cannot be successful, nor can they possibly represent righteous intentions on the part of those who use them.
So it becomes new choices (provided we approve), new left thinking (provided you agree with our thinking), voting reform (provided you vote for the right candidate), social security reform (provided that it screws over the right people), energy independence (as long as we don't drill on our own land), American jobs and American people first (as long as you don't get rich), socialized medicine (pay your taxes and don't you dare complain when the system doesn't work), and on and on (you get the point). Freedom at gunpoint. You should be frightened.

edit: the most frightening part is that all of this is for the best of intentions from the worst of motivations. To help some people who may not necessarily want your help solely for the purpose of screwing over others. Such rationalization could only come from a sick mind.

 

[CaptnKirk]

I'm Al Gore, and I approve this message

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: ayabe
Actually this sounds a lot like what Bush asks of military families.

Dems don't use fear as a political tool, that's your team buddy.

Did Bush serve?
Has Bush asked all of America to sign up to the armed forces?

Gee, so much for that idea....

Fear as a political tool? That goes both ways my friend.

Bush served? :laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: daniel49

moonbeam: are you referring to vics first point, or the second point?

Second point

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Specop 007


I find it frithening someone would want a socialist country.
THAT would get me to join the Revolution bandwagon.

Good for you. You have a vote and freedom of political action. Use it. I personally find your lonely selfish capitalism a disease and the care for one and all totally human and natural and according to the teachings of Christ.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Specop 007


I find it frithening someone would want a socialist country.
THAT would get me to join the Revolution bandwagon.

Good for you. You have a vote and freedom of political action. Use it. I personally find your lonely selfish capitalism a disease and the care for one and all totally human and natural and according to the teachings of Christ.

How is a system of free and voluntary marketplaces selfish?

How are the Robin Hood tactics of socialism "the care for one and all"?

Matthew 6.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I think that the right wing/republican think tanks read the same article that I did earlier today or yesterday.....

Lamont's victory against Leiberman has sent a clear message that the best chance to win the '08 nomination is someone that is anti-war. And just what Dem has been more vocal than Gore on the national level that isn't severely damaged goods? Better start the smears and discrediting now before he gets a stronghold. After all, he already won the first popular vote for president that he was involved in even with the Repub "he's a liar" machine after him in full force.

Uh no... Lieberman's loss sent a clear message that the new internet blogger-based Democratic party will not tolerate any deviance from their extremist party agenda. In other words, the Democratic centrists just got booted from the party.

As to the war, I'm a pacifist who was strongly against it while most of the so-called Democrats here still believed in the WMDs. The ONLY reason we're there is so that the defense industry has jobs. That's what it's all about. Haven't you people figured that out yet?

I find this kind of thinking truly frightening. I do not believe it. What I find frightening is the possibility you are right. I don't think my fear blinds me because I live with terrifying truths, but I still don't believe it. I think it's simplistic paranoia.

And as far as new internet blogger-based Democratic party not tolerating pro war go along get along Democrats, good. The Republican Party-Lite is worthless and needs to die. Let a new Liberal left party emerge to articulate a real progressive message for the 50% of Americans who don't vote to hear to offer some hope for a caring future. I am sick to death of the deadening effect moderates have moderating everything into the toilet of moderation. Revolution baby. Time for revolution, new choices and new left thinking, voting reform, social security reform, energy independence, American jobs and American people first, socialized medicine and on and on.

I might agree with you were it not for the pervasive spirits of nihilism and bitter partisanship within this new extremist-left Democratic party. From my observations, their revolution is not so much to create as to it is to destroy; not so much inclusive as it is exclusive. I see their attacks against the moderates -- condemning them are "Republican Party-lite" -- as evidence of this and their simplistic paranoia, that everyone who disagrees with them on even the most trivial of issues MUST be their enemy. Such tactics cannot be successful, nor can they possibly represent righteous intentions on the part of those who use them.
So it becomes new choices (provided we approve), new left thinking (provided you agree with our thinking), voting reform (provided you vote for the right candidate), social security reform (provided that it screws over the right people), energy independence (as long as we don't drill on our own land), American jobs and American people first (as long as you don't get rich), socialized medicine (pay your taxes and don't you dare complain when the system doesn't work), and on and on (you get the point). Freedom at gunpoint. You should be frightened.

edit: the most frightening part is that all of this is for the best of intentions from the worst of motivations. To help some people who may not necessarily want your help solely for the purpose of screwing over others. Such rationalization could only come from a sick mind.

Yup that sounds real horrible. We'll just have to make sure the people can vote for the fascists again if the left becomes this nuts. You realize, I hope, that people are fundamentally good and that our basic instincts are not to screw each other over but to lift each other up, and that these things are subject to analysis by our remarkable brain power. For example my kind of progressive knows you have to be wary of people you help and that it's generally best to help without others knowing you are.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup that sounds real horrible. We'll just have to make sure the people can vote for the fascists again if the left becomes this nuts. You realize, I hope, that people are fundamentally good and that our basic instincts are not to screw each other over but to lift each other up, and that these things are subject to analysis by our remarkable brain power. For example my kind of progressive knows you have to be wary of people you help and that it's generally best to help without others knowing you are.

I see no reason why all of American politics should be given over to the false dilemma of choosing solely from the similar authoritarian agendas of either the fascists or the socialists. There are other choices (of course), but our current bipartisan system, in its lust for power for power's sake, seeks to hide that from the people, or to drive them to one unacceptable faction out of fear of the other.

And of course I believe that people are inherently good. That is the basis of all my beliefs. Which begs the question from me: why then do you choose the socialist system which refuses to allow people to be good, but instead forces them to be good. In this fashion, I see socialism as no different from medieval Catholicism, that people are evil and won't make the right choices unless we force them to. By God, we'll save their souls in spite of themselves. The best of intentions wrongly applied.
Even worse is the fear that motivates those intentions, which is (in a way) the topic of this thread. That the indirect actions of other people cause direct harm to us, therefore we must force them to choose right action for the sake of our own self-preservation. It is in this way that socialism, like all authoritarians agendas, is unforgiveably selfish. Deep down, your "progressivism" is really for self-preservation, and not actually to help. Sorry.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: phatj

and because there is no "record" of him using "wind energy" he doesn't?

i dont think that what people pay for utilities is public record.... the article doesn't even state that he DOESN'T use wind energy it just states there is no proof that he DOESNT

According to the article:

When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes. Talk about inconvenient truths

Seems the people at Gore's office confirmed that he wasn't.

Reading comprehension FTW!

Fern

 

[Used Rugs]

Ronald Reagan is a hack. His administration was known for killing democratically elected leaders in 3rd counties that wanted to help his own people. Many administration was rocked with sandal and sandal. You want him on a dime? LOL ... Some ppl were born to follow.
?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Used Rugs
Ronald Reagan is a hack. His administration was known for killing democratically elected leaders in 3rd counties that wanted to help his own people. Many administration was rocked with sandal and sandal. You want him on a dime? LOL ... Some ppl were born to follow.
?

I'm no real fan of Reagan, and I'm not at all a fan of putting him on the dime, but I'm confused by your logic. FDR is currently on the dime (as I'm sure everyone knows), and Hitler and Mussolini were both democratically elected leaders.

I have to say, your post demonstrates quite well the blind bipartisanship inherent to democracy that I've been seeking to explain in my recent posts.

 

[Used Rugs]

Omar Torrijos was killed 3 months after reagan took office CIA jackals got him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Torrijos
ecuador leader 4 month after that was killed by CIA jackals. Under Reagan. Lets not forget about Iraq-contra: drugs, weapons and murder, Reagan again.

What fool thinks Reagan was a good president. How quick we in the states we forget. The NEO-CONS are rewriting history. I have not forgot Reagan's crimes.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Used Rugs
Omar Torrijos was killed 3 months after reagan took office CIA jackals got him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Torrijos
ecuador leader 4 month after that was killed by CIA jackals. Under Reagan. Lets not forget about Iraq-contra: drugs, weapons and murder, Reagan again.

What fool thinks Reagan was a good president. How quick we in the states we forget. The NEO-CONS are rewriting history. I have not forgot Reagan's crimes.

You're only increasing your use of faulty logic.

And just so you understand, no one here (that I have seen) is supporting Reagan, nor is that even the discussion. Personally, I can't forgive him for the Asset Forfeiture Law of 1986, which was probably the greatest abuse of civil liberties in the last quarter of the 20th century, but really... none of that is relevant to this discussion, so please silence your incessant quacking.

 

[Used Rugs]

Yes the was a person in this thread that wanted him on a dime

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Used Rugs
Yes the was a person in this thread that wanted him on a dime

No, there was not. What did happen is that a poster (ayabe) engaged in the fallacy of attacking the messenger by pointing out that the author of the OP's article also wrote a book that was favorable of Reagan, and then that poster followed that up with the comment:

I love Ronny, can't wait for him to replace FDR on the dime. :roll:

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Used Rugs
Yes the was a person in this thread that wanted him on a dime

Tip: Read more, spout less.

Unless, of course, you wanna fit right in to P&N. Then, by all means, continue spewing irrelevant, factually incorrect, partisan BS. :roll:

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Thats the best you can do? HAHAHAHAHA. He doesn't use green energy in his house? Oh no! He has 2 houses! I guess that means he doesn't want to help the environment! HAHAHAHA. That is so sad!

even for a dumb ad-hominem, that was rather pathetic. "Look guys two houses!" TWO! OMGAIEENONON" :roll:

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Thump553
A zendari thread is a lot like a Tiger Direct thread in Hot Deals-lots of smoke and heat, no substance.

lmao