Al Gore has spoken: The world must embrace a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." To do otherwise, he says, will result in a cataclysmic catastrophe. "Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb," warns the website for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. "We have just 10 years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tailspin."

 

Graciously, Gore tells consumers how to change their lives to curb their carbon-gobbling ways: Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs, use a clothesline, drive a hybrid, use renewable energy, dramatically cut back on consumption. Better still, responsible global citizens can follow Gore's example, because, as he readily points out in his speeches, he lives a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." But if Al Gore is the world's role model for ecology, the planet is doomed.

 

For someone who says the sky is falling, he does very little. He says he recycles and drives a hybrid. And he claims he uses renewable energy credits to offset the pollution he produces when using a private jet to promote his film. (In reality, Paramount Classics, the film's distributor, pays this.)

 

Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.

 

Then there is the troubling matter of his energy use. In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.

 

But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. 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.

 

Gore is not alone.

Democratic National Committee Chairman

Howard Dean has said, "Global warming is happening, and it threatens our very existence." The DNC website applauds the fact that Gore has "tried to move people to act." Yet, astoundingly, Gore's persuasive powers have failed to convince his own party: The DNC has not signed up to pay an additional two pennies a kilowatt hour to go green. For that matter, neither has the

Republican National Committee.

 

Maybe our very existence isn't threatened.

 

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

 

Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.

 

Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.

 

The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060810/...eworldtobelieve

If that's correct then yes, he should do more to advocate his message in his personal life.

 

However, I don't fault him for using airplanes, since it's not like there are hybrid airplanes yet.

 

Mostly I'm glad to see that he has been able to transition past political life to a new cause, much in the same way other prominent politicians have done in the past.

Any man with three homes should not be preaching about stuff like this. Talk about excessive energy.

Well here's a shocker from the guy who also wrote Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy

 

Sounds like a guy who just has a bone to pick with Gore.

 

Besides, the Hoover Institution has a large influence on Republican policy. The opinion piece might as well be written by Cheney.

 

Giving up one of his homes? Does the writer assume he's living in all three of them at once?

 

If you believe in Gore's cause (which the author clearly does not) then I'd say he's doing much more in awareness than by having his house "go green." Sure he should be doing it, but I don't think the major push by the "greens" is directed at homes anyway, more for automobiles and big industry.

 

The point about his house remains but the rest is rather petty in my opinon. I'd rather have him just make the article about how all this "harming the earth" stuff is nonsense & be done with it.

I loathe Al Gore, I don't want him anywhere near a prominent position in the party. B

 

But for his part, I just read in the Economist last week in an article on Carbon Emissions tradings, he offsets all his use with planting of citrus trees in third world countries or something to that tune. It says in the Article Paramount paid for the movie, nothing about the rest of his lifestyle.

 

Also, is it SUCH a shock, that these holier than thou messengers are hypocrites? Right, or Left, they all have skeletons. One's has a hypocritical record of consumption of energy, some had a nice steady habit of Hillbilly Heroin.

I'm going to remember hotcorner and rune's responses next time a republican or conservative gets accused of hypocrisy.

 

Regardless of the motivation behind the writiong of the article, the facts stated if they are true are not petty. It actually annoys me to no end the elitist mentality of people like Gore (and people on the right as well, not just gore and liberals) who from their comfortable position are telling others what to do, and telling others to sacrifice. If Gore who has the money to pay for alternative energy and the such doesnt do it, why should someone who works his butt off all week to make ends meet.

same old BS by the right wing media just another day

From The Desks of Principal Hotcorner and Assistant Principal Rune

To: Al Gore, Jr.

 

FREE PASS

same old BS by the right wing media just another day

 

What is the 'BS' in it? What was fabricated?

 

It's hardly off the wall or crazy stuff.

Hypocrite or not, for the most part his argument holds up. We SHOULD have better standards.

 

Him being a hypocrite does nothing to lessen the strength of his argument. I don't care about Gore at all, so it's not like I'm giving him a free pass. I just think the basis of his argument is good.

From The Desks of Principal Hotcorner and Assistant Principal Rune

To: Al Gore, Jr.

 

FREE PASS

 

Nice job, you lurk in here and then your response is ripped off of someone else :thumbup

 

As for LOC, I admitted both sides of the aisles are essentially case studies in hypocricy. It's not exactly a shock, this guy who claims to be a champion of free speech but is also one who ran a crusade against dirty music. I don't excuse what he does, my problem is some guy who is writing a politically motivated article, as an attempt to undermine one's accepted theory. Ooooh, politicians who contradict themselves, yeah, I'm really going to try to make the case that's not at play.

 

But this article in itself is not intended to just expose him as a hypocrite, given this guy's track record he's trying to use that arguement to try to undermine Gore's stance on GW, as that's somehow just as fradulent.

 

Let me take a wild guess, and claim this author does not subscribe to Gore's theories.

From The Desks of Principal Hotcorner and Assistant Principal Rune

To: Al Gore, Jr.

 

FREE PASS

 

OMFG you're so clever, I see what you did there!

 

 

Of course Al Gore is a speaking out of both sides of his mouth douchebag. He's a politician afterall.

 

*Goes to prepare for the 95,000 named storms that are bound to come in the 2006 storm season*

Of course Al Gore is a speaking out of both sides of his mouth douchebag. He's a politician afterall.

 

 

Why is it that liberals give liberals free passes on almost every issue? Of course unless you go against the liberal agenda like Joe Lieberman...then you are excommunicated and sent to sink or swim on your own.

 

You act like it is just fine that Al Gore be a hypocrite. Do you realize what you are doing?

Of course Al Gore is a speaking out of both sides of his mouth douchebag. He's a politician afterall.

 

 

Why is it that liberals give liberals free passes on almost every issue? Of course unless you go against the liberal agenda like Joe Lieberman...then you are excommunicated and sent to sink or swim on your own.

 

You act like it is just fine that Al Gore be a hypocrite. Do you realize what you are doing?

LOLZ @ calling me a liberal, that's cute.

 

I'm sure that no conservative has never given a free pass to another conservative.

LOLZ @ calling me a liberal, that's cute.

 

I'm sure that no conservative has never given a free pass to another conservative.

 

How am I supposed to support Al Gore's imaging of this important issue when he does not practice what he preaches? How am I, the average American, supposed to do more because Al Gore says so, when I probably am more eco-friendly than Al Gore?

 

I am not asking you to bash Gore, I am not trying to say being less energy dependent and more environmentally-friendly is a bad thing....I am just asking you how you can take Al Gore's message seriously when he does things like this?

 

It just gives me the message that what Al Gore is saying is not practical and therefore not worth my effort....when the opposite may be true.

LOLZ @ calling me a liberal, that's cute.

 

I'm sure that no conservative has never given a free pass to another conservative.

 

How am I supposed to support Al Gore's imaging of this important issue when he does not practice what he preaches? How am I, the average American, supposed to do more because Al Gore says so, when I probably am more eco-friendly than Al Gore?

 

I am not asking you to bash Gore, I am not trying to say being less energy dependent and more environmentally-friendly is a bad thing....I am just asking you how you can take Al Gore's message seriously when he does things like this?

 

It just gives me the message that what Al Gore is saying is not practical and therefore not worth my effort....when the opposite may be true.

 

What opposite may be true?

 

And yeah, it's impractical. I mean, no kidding. It's not easy to be a living, breathing environmentalist.

 

Still, if he's a hypocrite and his arguments are true and validated by science his being a hypocrisy does not change the truth of his argument.

I think one problem is the perception that has remained since 2000 that Gore was a "sore loser" in an election where he did win the popular vote.

 

However, he has now found a passion outside of politics to follow, and I think he's doing a good job at getting people to be aware of the threat of global warming.

I think one problem is the perception that has remained since 2000 that Gore was a "sore loser" in an election where he did win the popular vote.

 

However, he has now found a passion outside of politics to follow, and I think he's doing a good job at getting people to be aware of the threat of global warming.

 

I think the issue with Al Gore is he tries to be this young, hip guy when I think even you will admit he isn't.

 

Why pretend to be something you are not? He comes across as a fake which hurts his cause no matter how just or unjust it is.

 

Al understands the issue is media intensive, but totally misunderstands how to wage the battle to the people who make change.

I think one problem is the perception that has remained since 2000 that Gore was a "sore loser" in an election where he did win the popular vote.

 

However, he has now found a passion outside of politics to follow, and I think he's doing a good job at getting people to be aware of the threat of global warming.

 

I think the issue with Al Gore is he tries to be this young, hip guy when I think even you will admit he isn't.

 

Why pretend to be something you are not? He comes across as a fake which hurts his cause no matter how just or unjust it is.

 

Al understands the issue is media intensive, but totally misunderstands how to wage the battle to the people who make change.

When has the guy ever tried to appear young and hip? Aside from his lame appearance on SNL?

 

Was he on an episode of Laguna Beach that I missed?

He's super, super cereal. Once he saves the world from global warming, everyone is going to be super stoked on him.

He's super, super cereal. Once he saves the world from global warming, everyone is going to be super stoked on him.

 

Yeah, he totally rocks.

 

HICK-A-DOO-LAH!!!!!!!

Honestly, I was disappointed by that South Park episode. I felt like it was spring of 2001 all over again.

This reminds me of Michael Moore. He goes around promoting the proletarian, socialist ideology, yet lives in a fancy and luxurious NYC penthouse.

 

Al Gore is a lot different from Michael Moore. His science is solid and backed by the vast majority of the scientific community.

What does that have to do with Gore preaching use of green energy but failing to use it himself?

What does that have to do with Gore preaching use of green energy but failing to use it himself?

 

I don't believe that it has been said by more than one source.

 

Like I said before, even if that's true, it still shouldn't take away from the message.

 

I'm starting to think that only a non-political figure is going to get people to listen to the threat of global warming. Or, it will have to be a Republican.

 

All this talk about him using this publicity to run for President again is a bunch of B.S. He has not done anything to indicate that he wants to run for President since he lost in 2000.