bwahaha, you're participating in a nonsensical diatribe about labeling somebody a hypocrite for no real purpose other than to fit in to your prejudgments....and you're saying "It's about rhetoric" for everybody else? Ha ha ha, there's your hypocrisy man. Man, did you even read my post? First, as stated numerous times, Edwards doesn't really make the environment a huge priority in his campaign. His theme is, and always has been, economic inequality. Second, as stated again - the available evidence shows us that Edwards wants people to "sacrifice" by: driving more fuel efficient cars, and installing flourescent light bulbs instead of regular bulbs, and using better insulation on their homes. which is precisely what he did with his own home. Just because you make the random claim - not supported by any evidence - that "ENERGYSTAR IS TEH BULLSH11!!T!!!!" really doesn't help you much. THat doesn't even address the other huge problem with your rationale is that using products that result in lower energy costs is hardly a sacrifice - rather it is the opposite. Bascially your entire argument rests on the fabrication that he says you need to live in a smaller home to save the environment. Find me one quote or implication from his website or public speeches that says that please - I will make this a bona fide, D&D "TIA" style request. So find me the evidence. TIA.
The government should make massive public transportation systems all over the country and get rid of cars altogether except for medical staff, police, mail, shipping, and military services (and work services that require large equipment).
Sam: Don't worry about this silliness. It gives one carte blanche to hold everyone liable for hypocrisy between their rhetoric/politics, and their actions, regardless of the smear campaigns obviously facilitating the innuendo. George W. Bush should enlist, otherwise he's a big fat hypocrite.
The environment doesn't seem to be a strong part of Edwards campaign. I think he just got pulled into that from Kerry. But if one starts talking about conservation, they should expect to have their own actions scrutinized. I don't know why people are attacking Bush and me personally for this statement. I think its wrong that Bush was able to get out of Vietnam service and I feel that all American Citizens regardless of their background should spend a year or two in the military. I think people should understand the grit and work needed during a war or with foreign policy especially if they are directing it.
I would hope that just because Gore is somewhat hypocritical that wouldn't keep you from doing anything to conserve. Just because Gore might be a hypocrite doesn't mean that Global Warming isn't happening. Even besides Global Warming conserving energy will also help your bottom line. I absolutely agree neither political party has moral superiority and given the history of the parties they've swapped views several times. My own view of what party to support depends on the context at the time. In 2008 the Republicans became very arrogant and corrupted so in that respect the Democrats had a moral upperhand. Whereas 12 years ago it was the other way around.
No, my point is that things like using fluorescent light bulbs are relatively small compare with living in a 5000 square feet house rather than 15000. I did NOT fabricate anything, he said Americans need to make "sacrifices". His quote was: Now he didn't list all the sacrifices he want Americans to make, but its pretty clear that he didn't just limit it to "more fuel-efficient vehicles". Let's not play semantics here. I don't understand why some of you get so defensive for something that's pretty cut and dry. Edwards lives in a big house, a lot more than what a reasonable family needs. Good for him, but when he asks the rest of us to sacrifices and conserve energy, he sounds like a hypocrite. If Bush is doing the same thing, you know you'd be the first one to slam him.
so it would conserve more energy if edwards moved to a smaller house rather than 300,000,000 americans swithched to flourescent bulbs?
Actually both would help, and if Edwards moves to a smaller house, he probably will pick up a few more votes.
right on...some politicians are less so than others. But this is about Gore, and for him to trump a cause so much,...the least he can do is wear the damn clown suit he insists we all wear...
the real "Inconvenient Truth" that environmentalist don't want to tell you is that by their plan we'd all have to go back to living in the jungle eating bananas and beating drums as their wouldn't be any energy left to support 6 billion people. Can you imagine a world with no jets, no cars, no electricity, and mass human suffering - mass job loses. The irony is that the very face of the movie is a lie - Katrina wasn't a function of Global warming - it's a function of a city being built underwater and people knowing that bad things were going to happen when "the big one" hit.
Are you being serious? By advocating for tax incentives for Hybrid vehicles or by saying that technology can help us conserve natural resources, by arguing that our dependence on foreign oil is dangerous - I am arguing for mass human suffering and eating Bananas? Demonizing opponents instead of responding with logic and reason and science and good faith is really not helpful. And just because Al Gore does not walk from Seattle to Buffalo to give lectures, it does not make his message less empirically compelling. Attack the messenger, ignore the message is sooooooo easy.
Please provide some math then as to square footage in his new house vs. energy star compliance and the total savings. Thanks in advance. Yes, anyway, I don't see anything about a smaller house here - or else please correct me. THanks. I took that off his website. Where did you get smaller house from? Anywhere, or did you just make it up? Because right now that is all we have. Thanks. Where did you get smaller house from? Did you just make it up? Thanks. Bush would never do the same thing, but anyway I take this throwaway line as a sign either of desperation or lack of creativity. Which one is it? Thanks. Oh, where did you get smaller house from? Thanks.
What bull****. Oh, never mind. CBFC already it addressed better than I could. D&D. Green is More than a Color.
NewYorker's post may have been crude but it reveals an even more inconvenient truth. Even if all of us switched to hybrids and conserved electricity...in the grand scheme of things it is insignificant. Most of the energy waste (will) come from industries, particularly in emerging economies. The pollution is in part a price for the quality of llife we live... I have no problems with conservation but it looks like its the new fad. There has got to be a reasonable middle of the road approach instead of the faked urgency (yeah a lot of it is faked as evidenced by FD's observations on Gore anf the hollywood elite)
I never said Edwards said "You need to live in a small house". What I DID say was him living in a monster house is inconsistent with his message of wanting Americans to conserve energy, which he did say. Is this really that hard for you to understand? You don't seem to want to debate the actual topic, but rather want to argue about semantics, but then again, we all know that's what you do best.
Three things: 1) Hypocrisy (even the contrived kind) is not indicative of a lack of urgency. 2) Climate change is a big animal, even completely stopping all anthropogenic GHG emissions will not stop global warming for a long time (100-1000 yrs). That ball is already rolling. 3) You are correct in the middle road approach. IMHO, the best move is similar to what Gore does, carbon trading. Let the economy work out a solution. Reward those who do well, and punish those who door poorly, but in a "fair-trade" type system the market will work for the best.
I'm glad you understand yourself. Be sure to pat yourself on the back! D&D. And now I know you're dissatisfied With your position and your place Don't you understand It's not my problem
