Thursday, March 15, 2007

More on Global Warming/Cooling/Not Changing Over Near Hurtleg's House...

6 Comments:

Blogger sexyretard said...

Al Gore's hypocrisy is a bit more than merely breathing, there Jeff. Do you not seethe when divorced Republicans talk about "saving marriage?"

7:21 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...

Or think of it like this--the government has been filling the role of nanny or surrogate mother. She tells us what to do "for our own good."

Many of us had parents who cursed but also told us that swearing was wrong. That didn't set the kind of role model that you felt you had to follow.

If these people are our "leaders" (or they want to be) then they need to "lead" by making very real sacrifices (somewhere WELL beyond owning "only" three large houses and buying carbon offsets). The Democrats have for years been getting away with being faboulously wealthy and then talking about "two Americas." How many poor people in Pittsburgh could have been housed and fed by John Kerry and Theresa Heinz all by themselves?

James 2 "If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things needed of the body, what does it profit?"

If the Democrats say they love the earth and see it dying and Al Gore says to the earth "Hey, I'm working on it," but then does those things that cause the earth to suffer, what does it profit? Or if they see the inner cities full of hunger, domestic violence, and hopelessness, and the billionaires Kerry say "we live in two Americas," but stay fully ensconced in the better of the two Americas, what does it profit?

7:54 AM  
Blogger Teofilo said...

Wait, dude, so are you saying government should or shouldn't do anything about the environment and/or poverty? I agree that the Dems and Repubs are overrepresented with hypocrites, but I'm not clear what that has to do with policy. It sounds to me like you're saying that since Gore is a hypocrite his message should be ignored, and if that's the criterion we can pretty much ignore everything published in a government office or by any politician, anywhere, ever.

If your philosophy is that there are no public solutions to social problems, a pretty cheap and safe way to avoid discussing them is simply to say that anyone that calls for public solutions must be an exemplar of upstanding moral behavior. We can quickly eliminate everyone if our standards are strict enough.

1:47 PM  
Blogger Germanicu$ said...

SexyRetard should paint "THE ANTI-HYPOCRISY EXPRESS" on the side of his anti-Volvo and invite his fellow citizens to come over and engage him every Thursday night outside Evanston Public Library. After berating them for their own personal hypocrisies, he can find out who they voted for, and berate them further for the hypocritical sins of their candidates.

This would really only work, though, if he left his car running the whole time.

9:14 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...

No, I don't expect Al Gore to reuse rain water, drive a Chevy Aveo, and power his home using wind and solar power.

But three freakin' houses? That's like saying that you want to save marriage but you have three wives.

Teofilo is right, however, that carbon emissions is or is not a problem quite irrespective of whether Al Gore or the sexyretard is a hypocrite.

It's just that I'd like to see some real leadership, that's all. Is that so bad?

9:38 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...

Incidentally, I'm not against making policy that is good for the environment, regardless of Al Gore's shenanigans.

One thing I appreciated about John Kerry (I guess it was the only thing) was that he admitted to his riches and said during a debate that the tax increase he was proposing was going to hit himself, George Bush, the moderator Charles Gibson, and that was about it in the room. While I think he was lying, he at least demonstrated that at least one policy that he advocated was going to affect him directly.

Would to God that Al Gore would say that under his plan, people like himself would have to pay luxury taxes on houses over a certain square footage per inhabitant.

11:29 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home