Al Gore’s Energy Consumption is up 10% Since “Going Green”
This is just priceless. Ever since Al Gore went green to save the planet, his energy consumption went up 10%. I giggle just thinking about this and about how so many people have bought into this man’s hoax. Then I start to get annoyed by the same thought.
In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy efficient, the power use at the former vice president’s house has increased more than 10 percent, a nonprofit research group reported Tuesday.
Why does anybody take this man seriously. He is a fraud. pure and simple. Even his propaganda “documentary” used computer generated images stolen from a fictional movie. How this man ever got to be an authority on the issue I will never know, but what I do know is that Al Gore is making a killing off of this whole green movement.
“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, in a news release. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”
Do as I say, not as I do is Al Gore’s motto. I can’t get over the audacity of this man in trying to tell us that we have to “sacrifice” for the good of the environment while he uses more electricity in one month that the Average American uses in one year!
It is all about the money:
“Actions speak louder than words, and Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson added. “Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”
The worst part of this whole thing is that it really seems to be catching on. It is being taught in schools. We see commercials run on a daily basis that push this agenda. We see politicians from both sides of the isle promising to curb global warming. They are afraid not to because they are afraid they won’t look “eco-friendly.” Hell, even Newt Gingrich appeared in a save the planet, save the environment commercial with Nancy Pelosi. Damn that is enough to make me sick.
We need to wake up before it is too late and our money is being stolen from us in the name of global warming. This is a money grab of epic proportions and it will kill the already slowing economy as well as line the pockets of BIG GOVERNMENT.
This “movement” is going to lead to bigger government, higher taxes, and more government intrusion. The liberal trifecta, only now conservatives are poised to enter the ring also.
On a side note, guess whose home is very eco-friendly. President Bush’s. One man talks the talk, the other walks the walk.
America's Watchtower 
You want to know about Al.
Google Al Gore, Maurice Strong
,Bill Clinton, Enron
The History of the Global Warming Scare
Maurice Strong was also the Secretary-General of the 1972 Stockholm Conference ….. Enron’s Ken Lay had meetings with Clinton and Gore to try to get Kyoto …
Saving The Planet with Maurice Strong, 12 January 1998
Maurice Strong 68, and his wife, Hanne, fancy themselves quite the … Strong, Al Gore’s pal, fit the bill. Boutros-Ghali was tossed out last year, …
It’s not the guy stealing the pizza that people need to worry about.
Where has the media been all these years? They’re in on it.
http://www.windfarms.wordpress.com
LikeLike
And this is a surprise to whom?
He is went them all. NWO. Now that I seen who he really is, I can’t believe I ever liked him
The blind can now see! Let there be light!
What a sad world we live in. I can hardly wait for the next president.
Ron Paul………stick around buddy
LikeLike
Hi Mr. Pink
The source you cite is CNS News. This news service has a reputation for being openly biased and publishing some controversial and possibly quite untrue things. Here’s one site (of several) on which these issues are discussed: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cybercast_News_Service
I’m very hesitant to take anything said by that source with anything more than a grain of salt. As a general rule, unless something is reported by numerous news organizations of various political agendas (they all have them, I recognize this) I don’t accept anything as fact.
I’ll leave everything else you say about Gore alone. He’s not worth arguing about considering he’s not running for office. I think he’s a good American, but that’s beside the point. I’ll forgo that to address your next few statements.
1: “The worst part of this whole thing is that it really seems to be catching on. It is being taught in schools. We see commercials run on a daily basis that push this agenda. We see politicians from both sides of the isle promising to curb global warming.”
I fail to see how any of that is bad. Teaching children to be aware that their choices have consequences is a good thing—be that about littering or recycling or the importance of free speech and voting, whatever. It’s all part of preparing them to be a better citizen. The commercials are to raise awareness. Do people really need to throw away plastic water bottles or newspapers when they can easily be recycled? No. It doesn’t hurt anyone to put that message out there. Finally, what’s wrong with both parties working together on an issue? Finding common ground and working out real solutions for this country is what our leaders should be doing. That’s the America I want to live in.
2: “We need to wake up before it is too late and our money is being stolen from us in the name of global warming. This is a money grab of epic proportions and it will kill the already slowing economy as well as line the pockets of BIG GOVERNMENT.
This “movement” is going to lead to bigger government, higher taxes, and more government intrusion. The liberal trifecta, only now conservatives are poised to enter the ring also.”
How? Who’s stealing our money? How does it create bigger government and higher taxes and intrusion? I don’t see you explain any of these points. Not one. You just make a sweeping generalization that sounds dramatic and leave it at that. Where’s the evidence?
Sorry for the book. My husband’s watching a ball game, so I’m occupying myself with the internet tonight.
LikeLike
Hello Project Openletter,
I am a former public school teacher who left the field for many reasons. One of the reasons was the problems with a faulty curriculum. Let me define the term faulty as I am using it.
The faulty curriculum from top down directives has thrown out true History, true Mathematics, true Science and replaced it with anthropology (select opinions), fuzzy math, and anthropological science (again opinions not facts). I would have to retype my entire blog to demonstrate this. But my key point is to reinforce something Mr. Pink Eyes has referred to.
The public schools do not teach facts but they do teach a major propaganda spin. I taught in the schools. I left because of it. I fight with them today because of what they are trying to shove down my child’s throat hence why we pulled her for homeschooling.
What you are describing is an ideal but not reality. What is taught are not lessons on recycling but indoctrination into highly unproven hypothetical arguments often my using fear tactics and irrationality. When the real scientific information is examined neutrally, there is no basis for the fear tactics or for any politician to even open their mouth on Global Warming.
To answer your second point, Mr. Pink Eyes and many others have already answered your questions. It is the proposed European copied “cap and trade”. It will be revived and all it would be is a massive tax hike on businesses at the worst time in the worst possible way in a global economy when the USA is already declining in economic influence.
i.e. Scroll back through all of his articles on Global Warming
LikeLike
Thanks for your thoughtful reply Gary.
My mother is a school teacher. I look forward to discussing your thoughts with her. I’ve never heard her say anything similar to that.
You didn’t address the points about the commercials or both parties working together.
I asked him “how” because he made no argument and did not link back to any prior argument. When making a point, it’s one’s duty to flesh out the argument. A reader shouldn’t have to search for the meat of your information.
Climate change is real. Polution is a major problem. Depletion of natural resources is a problem. Call it “Global Warming” or any of the other names I just mentioned. It doesn’t matter. There is scientific evidence to support that this planet is suffering because of what people are doing. We have a moral obligation to at least attempt to stop or slow the damage we are creating. Again, I’ll pose the question. What’s wrong with recycling? With trying to use cleaner energy sources? With teaching your children to be consious of nature?
Please at least peruse this site if you haven’t already:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/index.html
LikeLike
Project Openletter, Gary summed up what I was going to say quite well. I don’t have a problem with recycling and teaching children to respect the environment. I have a probem with this global warming movement because I believe it is just politically motivated, that is the reason I think it is bad for both sides to work together on this issue, because instead of doing what is right for us they are working to bring bigger government and higher taxes to us. Bigger government will come because of all the restrictions that will end up being imposed on activities such as BBQ’s and other activities we take for granted now. Cap and trade will just lead to us paying more taxes for what is currently free. Just search my blog and you will see many of examples of what I am talking about as well as some unbelievable examples of what is causing global warming..
LikeLike
Hello Project Openletter,
You can address your mother on this topic but bear in mind that each state and each school district and in some cases each school in a district have different value sets. I’ve worked in 3 districts and a number of different schools and it all depends upon the State’s Dept. of Ed values, the Superintendent of each district, Curriculum Director and then the Principal as to what is taught and reinforced.
As for commercials, my family and I do not care for the TV or Cable. We too busy living life. So I’ll pass on the commercials.
As far as both parties working together, that would be an ideal thing provided they stay within the framework of the Constitution. Also, the phrase “Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill applies.” You do not fix a perceived problem if it hasn’t be determined if it really is a problem yet.
I do not disagree on your statements about being dutiful in your writing for your audience. It takes an organized person to keep tabs on all related articles written. But at the same time there are 3 related articles listed in his Top Posts located to the right of your last entry.
Regarding your last paragraph and request. I have read both sides of the argument. I’m also a science geek and I’ve read the science reports behind it as well.
Any real scientist should be a skeptic until there are definitive proven facts that stand up to observation, experimentation and analysis. Global Warming has not met those standards of provable fact. It is a topic of high contention. It is not on par with the statement 2 atoms of Hydrogen bond with 1 atom of Oxygen to make one molecule of water. We know that to be true.
Is climate change real? Of course it is. The climate has always been in a state of flux since the beginning of the planet no matter if you believe it is an old or young earth. Depending on where you live on the planet, you may have 2 or 4 seasons and numerous changes on a day to day basis.
Is pollution a major problem? Yep, always will be. More people on the planet means more resources needed and more pollution produced. The USA has made significant strides in cleaning our part up. But we only have 300 million (or so) of the 6.7 billion people on the planet living here.
Nothing is wrong with recycling, using cleaner or diversified energy sources, or teaching kids to be conscious of it provided that is what is happening. But from the reports on Dateline and reading the curriculum promoted, that is wishful thinking not reality.
Is Global Warming true? Reading all the sides including the data regarding the impact of oceans, the sun, standard cyclical patterns, inaccurate data measurements due to compromised systems, faulty computer programs and other heating and cooling periods that took place long before the human race was industrialized, and a heck of a lot more has led me to conclude real science has a lot of work to do to figure it all out. This is not the time for politicians to open their traps on the topic. Science does not operate by “consensus” it operates by provable facts. Of the things not proven are whether or not CO2 is harmful or beneficial. On top of that, the amount of CO2 produced by the entire population on the globe is equivalent to the width of a dime on a 100 yard football field. The likelihood anything political we do in the USA will have even the slightest dent on a global atmospheric scale is incredibly remote. Gotta remember there are 6 billion other people on the planet who do not live in the USA.
What the concept of Global Warming does strike a glaring similarity to are the goals of the Humanist Manifesto Version II signed in 1973. It is in there where the concept of the environment being global is espoused not science. Much of what is going on today in USA politics is outlined there.
In this age of global economics, doing anything further to hinder business and production in this country will only ensure a quick fall from superpower status. “Cap and trade” or the recent Lieberman bill supported by Obama and McCain would cap our economy and trade away business to other countries. Yah know, the countries who have more people and don’t give a hoot about the environmentalists from here.
Do we have a moral obligation to stem the damage done? Yup, that goes with being good stewards of the planet we were given. Trusting politicians who rarely operate based on morals to solve it is foolish.
LikeLike
Mr. Pink Eyes beat me too it. Maybe I’ll copy my entry, throw in a batch of links and use it for a post on my blog.
Hehehe
LikeLike
Gary, thank you. It’s a pleasure to “speak” with someone who is polite and fleshes out their arguments.
I don’t have the time to respond to all your points (it’s quite late), but my final resonse is this:
Even if “Global Warming” is not a scientific “fact” yet, from what I have seen there is more evidence showing that humans are making a negative impact on the planet than not. It’s certainly a problem and the people in this country need to change their behaviours accordingly. We can only strive to be a leader in this movement, as you are correct, the rest of the world has more impact than we do.
Unfortunately, this means that we will have to in part trust politicians, as the average American does not have the power or influence to reach out to the other citizens of the world to get them to change their behaviours and policies.
LikeLike
I have a cleaning business. In my trunk of my van I have my vacuum, buckets, sprays, solutions, and so on. I refuse to carry them on a bike to work so the air will be cleaner for Gore to use his jet going to the bathroom.
And that’s my final answer!
LikeLike
Project OL,
A few more things to add to the ponder list: Of the daily petroleum usage on average 66% are in products that do not go into our gas tanks.
http://www.anwr.org/features/oiluses.htm
So in order to change our behaviors we will have to change a large amount of our standard consumption habits and not just driving. Panty hose, trash bags, shoes, nail polish, pillows, anesthetics, tires, floor wax and just about anything else related to plastics would also have to be altered in usage to decrease our petroleum consumption.
Can our politicians get the people of the world to change their behaviors? Highly unlikely. My wife is from a different country (Asian continent). To the majority of the world, Americans are arrogant and should mind their own business and butt out.
So when we can fix things here first so that we are modeling good and balanced fiscal, environmental, energy, and all the other methods of operation, then we might earn the right to say something.
Side detail – Pollution and the “Global Warming” are not related. The “Global Warming” is supposedly caused by greenhouse gases. However, the main greenhouse gases are water vapor along with other trace amounts such as CO2 and methane.
Cows belch the largest amount of methane into the air. Termites fart the largest amount of methane. Water vapor is not a pollutant. CO2 is not a pollutant. Both are needed as intricate parts of the ecosystem and plant development.
The topic is a highly complex one that can’t be solved by posturing politicians. They’ve yakked about energy policy since 1977 but have done nothing. It is time for them to get out of our way and give the American people a chance to be innovative once again.
LikeLike
One point to make on global warming is that glaciers that melt are merely going back to where they were several thousand years ago. In the Alps people investigating receding glaciers have found ancient copper mines that were of mined five to 6000 years ago. There are settlements of these miners that have been found, because the glaciers receded and exposed them. The warming that is going on is only catastrophic to the people who insist on living on the coast. While this could be a large problem, the bigger problem is the refusal of the most believers in global warming to accept adaptation as the solution. You can’t stop or fool with Mother Nature.
LikeLike
Nice and usefull post, thanks, this is one for my bookmarks!
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike