Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

A critique of Gore's lifestyle by Peter Schweizer...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
Fountain79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:35 PM
Original message
A critique of Gore's lifestyle by Peter Schweizer...
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 04:51 PM by Fountain79

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.

The only reason that I put this on here is that I guarantee that this will become the prominent conservative talking points on this issue. How would you respond to this?

Edited for source acknowledgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cherry-picking used to insinuate corruption and disingenuity.
  They would only stop this particular tack if he were to wear clothing purchased from Goodwill with barter tickets earned from raising his own chickens and collecting their eggs on his entirely-without-power shack. And then they would have an appropriately different angle of attack on that lifestyle.

  I'm not sure what useful talking points could be squeezed out of this, not that NeoCon talking points ever make all that much sense, anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Perhaps we could change the focus from Gore to the
"family values" guys that keep getting busted for molesting children and having adulterous affairs?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. ..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dora Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Quibble.
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 04:47 PM by Dora
This isn't a USA Today editorial. It's an opinion piece by Peter Schweizer that appeared in USA Today.

Peter Schweizer is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy.

I imagine we'll see a response from Gore, and perhaps he's already addressed some of these criticisms. Part of the criticism seems to be targeted at Gore's wealth - which I think is pretty hypocritical to be coming from a Hoover fellow. Also - who gives a shit whether it's him or the film studio or the monkey that lives in my purse that's paying for "renewable energy credits."

The bit about the zinc mine was interesting, and I am curious to hear how Gore responds to that. As far as the green energy utility program is concerned, I'd like to sign up for Austin's green energy program - but they're not accepting any new subscribers. We don't know why the Gores haven't signed up - and it's not our business.

There is much we do not know - only what Schweizer ( ) has asserted in this op/ed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. They can choose the truth like this:
The Gores and all the employees of Generation lead a "carbon-neutral" lifestyle, reducing their energy consumption when possible and purchasing so-called offsets available on newly emerging carbon markets. Gore says he and Tipper regularly calculate their home and business energy use - including the carbon cost of his prodigious global travel. Then he purchases offsets equal to the amount of carbon emissions they generate. Last year, for example, Gore and Tipper atoned for their estimated 1 million miles in global air travel by giving money to an Indian solar electric company and a Bulgarian hydroelectric project.

Carbon offsets are still an imperfect tool, favored only by a few early adopters. (An Inconvenient Truth directs viewers to a personal carbon calculator posted at .) Gore acknowledges that the average US consumer isn't likely to join what is, for now, essentially a voluntary taxation system. "The real answer is going to come in the marketplace," he says. "When the capitalist market system starts working for us instead of at cross-purposes, then the economy will start pushing inexorably toward lower and lower levels of pollution and higher and higher levels of efficiency. The main thing that's needed is to get the information flows right, removing the distortions and paying attention to the incentives."

Or they can continue to lie about it. My guess, if they're right wing, they'll choose lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
silverweb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. A couple of things.
(1) The author's profile at the end of the article shows that his entire purpose is to discredit progressives.

(2) How do we know everything he says is true, and not distorted or fabricated to suit his purpose? Are we just going to accept that it's all true because he says so? After all, we know just how honest and forthright other "conservative" authors are, don't we?

(3) "Maybe our very existence isn't threatened." Discredit the messenger to kill the message. We've seen this game played before, haven't we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
samsingh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. we know the critiquers are idiots anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RestoreGore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is a typical tactic...
By those who cannot refute the facts of the movie, so they attack Mr. Gore. Until those who continue to do this list their environmental credentials and what they are doing to be carbon neutral in their attack pieces, they are nothing more than hacks to me.

My Environmental Ambassador
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 28th 2017, 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC