on electricity or heat as long has you use some sort of offset . Like green power credits or zero carbon footprint? I think it is a bunch of BS. Conserve or don't. There is no way it can be balanced. Is it?
2007-02-28 10:24:55 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I didn't say Gore because I thnk this is about more than one person. Talk about narrow minded.
2007-02-28 11:13:30 · update #1
Gore & Babs, two phony hypocrites, have now been exposed for their lies.
They are TOO important to have to conserve energy. That's for the "little people" to do.
Us peasants.
2007-02-28 10:36:57 · answer #1 · answered by wolf 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Here's how it makes sense to me. Most of us can't afford to spend that kind of money at all. We have smaller houses(although mostly we live in larger houses than we need to) but can't afford to invest much beyond our bills(in alternative energy research, wind farms, etc) but those that have the big bucks can-but I think they're doing me a favor by investing because I believe that reducing carbons still helps. One column is a big plus and the other a big minus. Perhaps one day, we'll figure things out better but for now-I'm glad someone invests in the future for us-I know I can't afford it!
2007-02-28 18:39:34 · answer #2 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why don't you just say Gore=Bad, it's pretty much the same thing and not nearly so convoluted.
Cutting energy consumption is NOT the only route to reduced pollution and energy independence. (And by the way, the energy company says they haven't had a request for Gore's energy bill and haven't given it to anybody. Hmmm, some illegal spying, or just liars making up numbers?)
2007-02-28 18:44:36 · answer #3 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
This is ridicules. The need for energy conservation is a fact. This is like saying that you saying that basket ball players shouldn't listen to coaches because they are short, overweight, and have poor aim.
If you want to discredit officials like this then don't listen to ANYONE they all take bribes anyway.
2007-02-28 18:44:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
That is how the wealthy liberals rationalize making zero effort in reducing their personal consumption of resources. They then put all the burden of change (through taxation, caps, etc..) on you... the little people. Remember... the designers of socialism never live under the system they set up for others to live under. They always build in a way out for themselves first. This is a fine example.
2007-02-28 18:40:01 · answer #5 · answered by yopopso 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Whats really funny about the hypocrisy is they only recently began buying Carbon Credit and buying "Green" power from their power company. Was this move precipitated on his desire to do whats best for the planet of the fact that the light of hypocrisy was beginnings to shine on him.
2007-02-28 18:39:04 · answer #6 · answered by meathookcook 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
So what you are saying is that if Gore lived in a tent and pushed a shopping cart around you would be more likely to listen to his message? it is you and people like you who are the hypocrites.
2007-02-28 18:43:57 · answer #7 · answered by cimra 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well you might be surprised to learn that Bush environmental policies work the same exact way with caps and trades for pollution credits...you might want to look into it.
2007-02-28 18:39:10 · answer #8 · answered by Pete Schwetty 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are hypocrites.
2007-02-28 18:29:23 · answer #9 · answered by JM 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋