What I was thinking was Gore's lifestyle was no match for his environmental consciousness and also that a capitalist sleeping in his car would have a mismatch between lifestyle and consciousness.
Exactly, what we are thinking that Gore's lifestyle does not match his words.
But as far as capitalist sleeping in his car. I don't see the connection. Because if he is sleeping in his car (from personal experience) he is usually saving up his "capital" for bigger things than just a pad to live in. Many go to college or are saving up money. So it is a matter of choice and not that capitalist are seeking certain lifestyles.
A better example is a capitalist that squanders his capital and does not use it for maximum gain. For example seeing abandoned warehouses always makes me wonder why he can't think of anything better to use his capital for. Luckily for us those capitalists that squander their capital usually end up loosing their capital to others smarter in the market place.
Posts: 7939 | Location: Santa Barbara | Registered: 19 July 2005
In my first post I was responding to BrentBozo's assertion that Nixon lived in an apartment in New York before he died (which by the way is a pretty extravagant life style in and of itself), by looking the info up and finding otherwise. So--no Nixon did not live a modest life style at the end of his life either. That just points out that it would be extremly unusual to have an ex-Vice President of the US living meagerly or modestly.
I have no idea what you are saying in response to my second post.
Yes that statement of Douglass's was in the quote I made of his before I did the research on Gore's "carbon Nuetral" activities. I agree, they are not carbon nuetral producing (though, I would like a link to your list of the generation holdings). And I stated at the end of my post that he should come clean on this issue and actually buy carbon offsets--support financially programs for forest preservation and restoration, tree planting, etc. that actually create carbon sinks.
However, I think the assertion you make that Haliburton is a Green company is quite laughable.
eley
"Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground"--Sweet Baby James
Posts: 1979 | Location: Texas | Registered: 21 August 2004
eley posted: "In my first post I was responding to BrentBozo's assertion that Nixon lived in an apartment in New York before he died (which by the way is a pretty extravagant life style in and of itself)."
True, eley, but I was thinking merely in terms of the couple- Al & Tipper- not needing anywhere near 10K sq. footage of residence anymore (if they ever did need it) and also becoming more centrally-located so's they wouldn't have to burn as much gas (I know Al & Tipper like to go to music concerts so Nashville would be the place).
It is time for our most environmentally-conscious ex-veep to modify his lifestyle.
Gandhi will always be the example of a national leader (although he was never elected to any office- never ran for any) who lived as his followers did.
Ronald posted: "...if he is sleeping in his car (from personal experience) he is usually saving up his "capital" for bigger things."
Got to hand it to you, Ronald. I wouldn't have the discipline to forego housing in order to save for a long-term goal.
In '86-'87 I was traveling around, living all sorts of places in the western U.S. Stayed for awhile at Monterey CA. Had a really low-paying job (graveyard clerk at a 7-11). Could not afford to get into an apt. anywhere in the vicinity. Had a small truck with camper shell- stayed in that.
I heard Michael Dukakis give a speech at Laguna Beach CA during the '88 campaign. He spoke of global warming. Idea of change of chemistry balance in the atmosphere being able to affect conditions as regards temperature made sense to me. Besides, I hated the California car culture, having been in hundreds of traffic jams. Moved to Portland in late '88 and sold the last car I've owned.
eley, sorry for confusion on your first post. The second one may be my drugs problem. Or maybe:
quote:
The author uses an alias, sounds like a disgruntled employee, isn't getting Hollywood work, but Nat. Rev. has about the same standards as fox.
And for the third post:
quote:
Yes that statement of Douglass's was in the quote I made of his before I did the research on Gore's "carbon Nuetral" activities. I agree, they are not carbon nuetral producing (though, I would like a link to your list of the generation holdings). And I stated at the end of my post that he should come clean on this issue and actually buy carbon offsets--support financially programs for forest preservation and restoration, tree planting, etc. that actually create carbon sinks.
The link you are looking for is under the word "here". I agree those are the standard carbon offset schemes, but I would be open to investing in start up firms that are working on energy products. Because much of that money can be highly speculative thus it is a crap shoot instead of investing in places like Staples.
quote:
However, I think the assertion you make that Haliburton is a Green company is quite laughable.
You may be correct but nothing I have read has said that they are not environmentally conscious. And it still holds that if we want to do massive infrastructure work it will be Haliburton that is there also. Can Staples build dams? There is also two sides of this issue. Inside the company and outside. Their outside work can be both for good on the environment or bad.
Posts: 7939 | Location: Santa Barbara | Registered: 19 July 2005
Thanks for the little bit of your history Brent, and correct me if I am wrong...
You had a choice (much as I have seen and had to experience also) between a car or housing. It seems you could have sold your vehicle and used it to pay for housing. So you also were saving what little "capital" or wealth you had at the time.
At one time I bought a Honda Civic and it was rear-ended in LA. So then I had $2800 and bought a Porche, after at least that much in repairs before it blew up, I gave up on the whole shit and walked to work for a couple of years. LOL.
Posts: 7939 | Location: Santa Barbara | Registered: 19 July 2005
Look who's invested in Halliburton and more, Do As I Say (Not As I Do)
Soros makes Halliburton stealth buy Report reveals billionaire funder of left-wing groups invests more than $62 million
March 2, 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
George Soros
Billionaire George Soros has quietly invested $62 million in the purchase of more than 2 million shares of Halliburton, the major government contractor criticized by his own Open Society Institute and the activist group he funds, MoveOn.org.
The holdings were disclosed in a quarterly filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission by Soros Fund Management LLC.
Vice President Cheney is the former CEO of Halliburton.
As WND reported, another outspoken leftist who had criticized Halliburton was discovered to own stock in the company – filmmaker Michael Moore.
"I think people find that stuff funny – Michael Moore owns Halliburton stock," said Moore in a Nov. 23, 2005, speech carried by C-SPAN. "That's like a great comedy line. I know it's not true. I've never owned a share of stock in my life – anything. Did anyone see that a couple weeks ago? Somebody was yakking away. And I just thought, uh, that's funny, I guess. Anyone who knows me is not going to believe that. Who's going to believe that? Just crazy people are going to believe it."
There was just one problem with that denial, said Peter Schweizer, author of the best-seller book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do)." Tax returns of Moore's non-profit foundation – a non-profit foundation for which there are only two officers, Moore and his wife – showed ownership of 2,000 shares of Halliburton, the company most vilified by Moore in "Fahrenheit 9/11."
"The real question, however, is whether MoveOn.org, the Center for American Progress, and other organizations that have benefited from Soros' charity will see a problem with accepting money earned off Halliburton shares?" wrote Mike Boyer, editor of Foreign Policy magazine.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Originally posted by PeeWee Returns: GG: This is way off topic. I have a book I would like you to read. It was written by a friend of mine, Roberta Bandy. You can read the details here.
I've seen your posts for some time now, and admired your stand. Can I send you a copy or two to read and pass along to others?
I just discovered this post by you and the book looks like a tremendous testimony as to how precious each and every person is and in comparison to the tragerdy of the Peter Singers and et al who do not grasp that. As to how you can send to me, I don't know how to make that possible.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
PeeWee - have you heard or do you have a link to PETA criticizing Al Gore for not being vegan?
You might already have read about Al Gore out of favor with the U.N. on his 'inconvenient truth' spin.
Cows have emerged as the world's top destroyer of the environment according to the United Nations..
quote:
But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together. Producing fertiliser to grow feed, to farm meat and to transport it - and clearing vegetation for grazing - produces 9 per cent of all emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
While contemplating the ill-starred presidency of G.W. Bush, I looked about for some sort of divine analogy. As usual, when in need of enlightenment, I fell upon the Holy Bible, authorized King James version of 1611; turning by chance to the Book of Jonah, I read that Jonah, who, like Bush, chats with God, had suffered a falling-out with the Almighty and thus became a jinx dogged by luck so bad that a cruise liner, thanks to his presence aboard, was about to sink in a storm at sea. Once the crew had determined that Jonah, a passenger, was the jinx, they threw him overboard and--Lo!--the storm abated. The three days and nights he subsequently spent in the belly of a nauseous whale must have seemed like a serious jinx to the digestion-challenged whale, who extruded him much as the decent opinion of mankind has done to Bush.
Originally, God wanted Jonah to give hell to Nineveh, whose people, God noted disdainfully, "cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand," so like the people of Baghdad who cannot fathom what democracy has to do with their destruction by the Cheney-Bush cabal. But the analogy becomes eerily precise when it comes to the hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico at a time when a President is not only incompetent but plainly jinxed by whatever faith he cringes before. Witness the ongoing screw-up of prescription drugs. Who knows what other disasters are in store for us thanks to the curse he is under? As the sailors fed the original Jonah to a whale, thus lifting the storm that was about to drown them, perhaps we the people can persuade President Jonah to retire to his other Eden in Crawford, Texas, taking his jinx with him. We deserve a rest.
then from Catholic University of America
quote:
I have read many of these descriptions of our fallen estate, looking for one that best describes in plain English how we got to this now and where we appear to be headed once our Good Earth has been consumed and only Rapture is left to whisk aloft the Faithful. Meanwhile, the rest of us can learn quite a lot from Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire, by Morris Berman, a professor of sociology at the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC.
He notes reagan's insight [of an ostrich]
quote:
Berman sets his scene briskly in recent history. "We were already in our twilight phase when Ronald Reagan, with all the insight of an ostrich, declared it to be 'morning in America'; twenty-odd years later, under the 'boy emperor' George W. Bush (as Chalmers Johnson refers to him), we have entered the Dark Ages in earnest, pursuing a short-sighted path that can only accelerate our decline. For what we are now seeing are the obvious characteristics of the West after the fall of Rome: the triumph of religion over reason; the atrophy of education and critical thinking; the integration of religion, the state, and the apparatus of torture--a troika that was for Voltaire the central horror of the pre-Enlightenment world; and the political and economic marginalization of our culture.
PeeWee said Gore is distracted, he has missed this next bit
quote:
Meanwhile, the indoctrination of the people merrily continues. "In a 'State of the First Amendment Survey' conducted by the University of Connecticut in 2003, 34 percent of Americans polled said the First Amendment 'goes too far'; 46 percent said there was too much freedom of the press; 28 percent felt that newspapers should not be able to publish articles without prior approval of the government; 31 percent wanted public protest of a war to be outlawed during that war; and 50 percent thought the government should have the right to infringe on the religious freedom of 'certain religious groups' in the name of the war on terror."
I guess that means it's alright to protest the Vietnam war now
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
As for Al Gore, I just heard about the beef production dilemma. In my opinion, he is an earnest man but distracted man.
What is his ernestness based upon and for WHOM? He wants YOU and the rest of the world to change their lifestyle and return to backwards existence, yet his lifestyle remains unchanged. In fact, his consumption is increasing.
Did you watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" documentary? I did not. A reference has been strongly indicatd that Al Gore's intent is to increase taxes to support GLOBALISM - no suprise there! - but I could not find a reference to that specifically, or is it too blatantly obvious.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
GG. Yup I saw The Great Global Warming Swindle and very good it was too. I'm sure there is much truth in it regarding the disputed science over CO2 levels and human cause etc.
I agree too that the current 'panic' will be used as a simple excuse from governments to raise green taxes. As usual, we seem unable to see above the 'economic' ceiling to our perceptions.
I do think however that many of the proposals from the environmental movement make sense regardless.
We DO need to find alternative energy sources. Oil, coal, gas are finite resources and over the medium to longer term replacements will have to be found if we wish to retain our current levels of 'comfort'.
Recycling should be encouraged and increased because it makes sense in every respect within the production cycle. Effective use of inputs and outputs and all that good stuff
Maybe more intangible and fluffy, but I think a vital part of all of this is our perception of who we are as a species in relation to our environment. We in the 'developed world' move further and further away from our connection to the earth. Anything that reminds us and stregthens this natural connection I think has value. I'm sure part of our natural evolution will be to understand the interconnectedness of life. I think this is what we are going through right now.
PS. Just a slight correction. Gore wasn't suggesting going to a backwards existence. He was suggesting technology and new 'green' markets would come up with new solutions.
When the world is run by fools it is the duty of intelligence to disobey
Posts: 1723 | Location: Perth, Australia | Registered: 02 August 2001
We in the 'developed world' move further and further away from our connection to the earth. Anything that reminds us and stregthens this natural connection I think has value. I'm sure part of our natural evolution will be to understand the interconnectedness of life. I think this is what we are going through right now.
"Connection to the earth", as in ???
I believe humanbeings have a grave responsibility to care for what has been given to us by our Creator; however, I fail to see the interconnectedness. Huamanity is significantly created differently than all other living and have been mandated for a greater responsibility than all other living.
"Personalism" is not to be compared to the life of a tree, for instance.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
I still would like to find a link on PETA's criticism of Gore not being vegan. Have you any information?
Gore is an opportunitist of the GLOBALIST KIND, if I ever saw one.
To be honest Geeg, I don't think it's relevant whether Gore is a vegan or not. He's just trying to raise awareness on environmental issues which is needed IMO even if it is currently misunderstood and incomplete. Does the fact that he isn't vegan, live in a tree and wear hemp clothes somehow invalidate his right to speak on the subject?. It's sadly typical that we expect our perception of perfection of others. I guess it's a way of avoiding looking at ourselves.
With regards globalism, it is happening and it is required and I think it it is inevitable. The only question is what form it takes.
When the world is run by fools it is the duty of intelligence to disobey
Posts: 1723 | Location: Perth, Australia | Registered: 02 August 2001
I fail to see the interconnectedness. Huamanity is significantly created differently than all other living and have been mandated for a greater responsibility than all other living.
Humanity is not significantly created differently or has some kind of Divine mission. That is religious dogmatic ego. Basic science proved that a while ago. The planet earth had plants and creatures long before humans were on the scene. They seemed to do ok without our caretaking services for millions of years.
Humans are made of the same chemical elements as absolutely everything else. We are fed from crops and animals made of the same chemical elements. The air we breath is made up of the same elements. The same elements exist in space and I'm sure as we evlove and explore out there we will discover many more.
We are part of a wondrously varied, stunningly beautiful, living and conscious 'system' called LIFE. I think there's cause for thanks and joy just for the wonder of it all.
When the world is run by fools it is the duty of intelligence to disobey
Posts: 1723 | Location: Perth, Australia | Registered: 02 August 2001
Maurice Strong, Al Gore Creators of carbon credit scheme cashing in on it By Judi McLeod
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
There's an elephant in global warming's living room that few in the mainstream media want to talk about: the creators of the carbon credit scheme are the ones cashing in on it.
The two cherub like choirboys singing loudest in the Holier Than Thou Global Warming Cathedral are Maurice Strong and Al Gore.
This duo has done more than anyone else to advance the alarmism of man-made global warming.
With little media monitoring, both Strong and Gore are cashing in on the lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.
Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as "the world's first and North America's only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil."
Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself--the Generation Investment Management LLP, "an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C." of which he is both chairman and founding partner.
To hear the saving-the-earth singsong of this dynamic duo, even the feather light petals of cherry blossoms in Washington leave a bigger carbon footprint.
It's a strange global warming partnership that Strong and Gore have, but it's one that's working.
Maurice Strong is no friend to nations, their borders, and their sovereinty.
quote:
Strong is the silent partner, a man whose name often draws a blank in the Washington cocktail circuit. Even though a former Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the much hyped Rio Earth Summit) and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations in the days of a beleaguered Kofi Annan, the Canadian born Strong is little known in the Unites States. That's because he spends most of his time in China where he works to make the communist country the world's next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless is big cheese in the world of climate change, and is one of the main architects of the coming-your-way-soon Kyoto Protocol.
Gore is the glitzy, media approved front man in the partnership, the flashing neon lights on the global stage warning the masses of the end of Earth, as we know it, and Hollywood's poster boy for greening the silver screen.
The skeptics of man-made global warming believe that Gore and Strong have made climate change "the new religion". Climate change is not the first religion both parties have tried to make stick. Along with former Soviet Union leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Strong, currently president of the Earth Council, has been boasting of replacing the Ten Commandments with the Earth Charter, a golden rule guide for how the masses should treat the environment.
But who cares? It's about the message, not about the messenger. This entire thread is meant to discredit the man and lead attention away from what he has to say (Jason is right, this entire thread is one big ad hom.) But what he has to say still stands, lacking any subtantial argument to the contrary.
Furthermore: If you think An Inconvenient Truth does anything more but scratch the surface (if even), I hope you're not too much attached to your four wheel drive.
Furthermore: Carbon offsets are a sham, as anyone with half a brain should realize by now (So, if I just buy me an offset, that expensive plane trip blowing tons and tons of carbin into the atmosphere didn't happen? Bullshit, just another way to make money off of global climate change)
Finally: Abortion has no relevance whatsoever to the subject.
Okay, I had my say, I hope everybody enjoys the rest of this thread
Posts: 246 | Location: Q | Registered: 25 August 2007
Sounds like the climatologists should work on their debating skills. I have been studying climate change for several years, so my opinion was not influenced by Al Gore, who is not a climatologist, though he worked with them on producing the film.
Ronald, please start a scientific debate on global warming, rather than resorting to character assassination. Personally, I think that once people descend to character assassination, they are revealing that they have a very weak hand.
Sue N.
Posts: 4624 | Location: UK | Registered: 16 November 2004
Sounds like the climatologists should work on their debating skills.
Actually, I disagree. It's simple: the climate is changing, this a scientific fact, it's not open for 'debate'. The climate is changing because of human factors, same thing.
What's there to debate? We either ignore the facts and continue to screw up our living environment, or we pay attention, and save whatever there's left to save. It's that simple. Anyone who doesn't see the facts doesn't see them because he doesn't want to see them. And you can't debate denial; you can point it out (
Read-Only Topic
