Former VP Al Gore heckled in Boca by teabaggers

[sixmile]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-al-gore-boca-20091114,0,5503886.story

'Saturday night at Mizner Park drew about a thousand attendees, as well as more than 200 loud protesters.

Stationed outside the Mizner Park Amphitheater, the protesters jeered at Gore as he took the podium and at those walking into the open-air venue to listen to the speech.

"This is the most dangerous crisis we've ever faced," Gore said of climate change. He spoke over a chorus of boos from protesters, who were monitored by at least a dozen uniformed city police officers.

Many of the protesters were with the groups Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow and South Florida Tea Party, the latter of which feels that Gore's views will eventually lead to increased taxes and flawed business legislation.

The protesters carried drums, bullhorns and posters. One read "Practice what you preach," accusing Gore of not living a green lifestyle. Another poster read "The masses follow the asses," depicting the protesters' opinion that Gore's message is not backed by scientific evidence.'

snip

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/florida/AP/story/1334870.html

http://www.wptv.com:80/media/lib/90/9/a/6/9a62c046-442a-4f74-b3bc-9938b11b5336/Story.jpg

[donco6]

1. I have to make the comparison -

but this is exactly what the brownshirts did to the Communists as they spoke out in Germany. There were many skirmishes with rocks and sticks after rallies.

[Swede]

2. It all comes down to taxes with these pricks.

Always.

[sixmile]

3. Don't confuse taxes with GREED

Don't you know greed is what drives them?

[Swede]

4. Yes, greed. Tax cuts solve everything.

I got mine,screw you.etc etc.

[C_Lawyer09]

6. I too am tired of the addiction to tax based arguments

by Republicans, but as ironic as this sounds, G.W. Bush's Texas ranch house is much more efficient than the Gore Nashville mansion, this failure to practice what he preaches rankles me some, in addition to his selection of Lieberman as his running mate.

[sketchy]

8. Gore uses green power

There is no failure to practice what he preaches.

[sketchy]

9. AND here is some supporting information

Link:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/government/a/al_gore_energy_2.htm

snip from page 2 of article:

Gore's retort

Through a spokesperson, Gore has responded to criticism of his bloated electric bill by arguing that his lifestyle is actually "carbon neutral" because 1) he purchases all of his power through a special program that supplies "green energy," and 2) he offsets 100% of any remaining environmental impact by investing in projects that promote renewable resources and reduce overall energy consumption. The latter strategy, known as "carbon offsetting," has won acceptance among the environmentally conscious as a way to effectively zero out their "carbon footprint" without living in a grass hut. Some argue that carbon offsets are a cop-out -- the ecological equivalent of expiating one's sins by purchasing indulgences from the church -- but others tout them as a crucial weapon in the longterm fight against global warming. Count Al Gore among the latter.

So, is Al Gore a hypocrite or not?

We are urged to view Gore's lifestyle as hypocritical because on the one hand he advocates energy conservation by all, while on the other consuming an "extravagant" amount of energy in his own home. And put in just those terms, it may seem an open and shut case. But how far, really, do Al Gore's deeds differ from his own words?

In the book version of An Inconvenient Truth where Gore discusses what ordinary citizens can do to help combat global warming, he stops well short of calling for deep sacrifice or lifestyle change.
First, he lists a number of modest steps individuals can take to make their homes and activities more environmentally friendly -- like using energy-efficient appliances, adjusting the thermostat by a couple of degrees, installing solar panels, and using less hot water when possible -- all of which are economically as well as ecologically beneficial, and none of which we have any reason to believe Gore is not taking himself.

Second, he preaches activism -- voting for environmentally enlightened measures and candidates and spreading he gospel of global warming. And in these we know Al Gore has played an exemplary role.

Third, he argues that everyone ought to try to achieve a "carbon neutral" lifestyle. How? By doing precisely what he does -- offsetting one's environmental impact through investments in projects and enterprises aimed at reducing energy consumption overall.

So, where is the disjunct between what he says and what he does? Unless you put words in his mouth, there isn't one. You might argue that it would be better for the environment if people like Gore lived in smaller houses and modified their lifestyles instead of shelling out bucks for carbon offsets -- and you might even be right -- but that's a policy disagreement, not proof that he's a hypocrite. Folks who dislike his politics will no doubt call him hypocritical just the same, but judged strictly in terms of whether or not Al Gore practices what he preaches, the case against him is a sham.

Update: A Tale of Two Houses - "Companion piece" to this forwarded email compares the eco-friendliness of Al Gore's Nashville mansion to President Bush's Crawford, Texas ranch.

Link to A Tale of Two Houses:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_tale_two_houses.htm

[C_Lawyer09]

13. Thanks for the info

Most don't make the effort to validate their argument. That said, from what I've read the jury is out on carbon offsetting.

[drm604]

14. Regardless,

even if one were to concede, for the sake of argument, that Gore is a hypocrite, that wouldn't in any way diminish the message about global warming. What counts is the evidence and what the vast majority of the scientific community says about that evidence, not what some politician (however much I might admire him) says.

[sketchy]

15. But why should one concede that about Gore?

There's been entirely too much conceding already, on issues large and small!

:)

[drm604]

18. FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I said "for the sake of argument". Maybe you're not familiar with what that means. It doesn't mean that I was conceding anything. It means that the discussion about Gore's hypocrisy, or lack thereof, isn't relevant since whether or not he's a hypocrite has nothing to do with the truth about global warning.

I wasn't saying that I believe him to be a hypocrite, I do not. I was saying that even if he were a hypocrite it would have nothing to do with the global warming debate and is simply a distraction.

[C_Lawyer09]

16. When did I say his global warming msg would be diminished?

I said his (and there are many others) hypocrisy rankles me. I don't like Polar Bear habitat being destroyed.

[drm604]

19. Fair enough.

Many people who complain about his supposed hypocrisy are GW deniers trying to divert the conversation into an argument over personalities. If that wasn't what you were doing than I apologize, but I don't agree that he's a hypocrite, at least not any more so than the rest of us who drive cars and use electricity, etc. At least he's out there trying to change how we power those things.

[C_Lawyer09]

20. One of the things that gets me

I advocate his message. I recently read a book by Ralph Nader, can't think of the title right now. As a private citizen Gore has done much for the environmental agenda. As a politician he was milque toast on the environment as well as other things I feel are important. Now, if we subscribe to the lesser of two evils axiom, sure he's leaps and bounds above G.W. but frankly I'm starting to expect more. Both Clinton and Gore appeased many corporate interests for political expedience. I'm not criticizing you, but I've been on du for a few weeks, and what has happened more than several times, is if I'm the least bit critical of any Democrat, seems there is an immediate feeling that I'm a Republican or a troll/freeper and frankly I don't know what the last two mean. Finally, I'll say, and I truly believe, until we get true finance reform that isn't watered down by follow on legislation, we'll suffer weak political representation.

[calimary]

30. Thanks for the info!

And Welcome to DU!

[johnaries]

31. Not any more. Gore refurbished his house to make it green

and purchases more blocks of Green Power Switch than he uses.

Edit to add: Gore had to wait until the City of Belle Meade gave him permission to install the solar panels.

[Drunken Irishman]

5. Except many don't have a pot to piss in.

I've seen the tea-bag rallies. Many look like they just stepped out of the unemployment line.

[Tippy]

10. Many probaby did come from the unemployment line

How about those jokers a few weeks back protesting at the WH....they were hired...

[jwirr]

7. So climate change is not going to hurt their businesses? They are

a bunch of fools.

[Bitwit1234]

11. Of course he had so many secret service and police

nobody could get with 2 miles of bush when he spewed, but if they could have what in the world do you think what would have happened if democrats had harassed him and his fellow republicans the way these slime are doing. And make no mistake they are slime, the dregs of humanity. No Christian values amongst any of them.

[drm604]

12. "increased taxes and flawed business legislation"

They make the tea baggers sound so... intellectual, LOL. I'm trying to envision one of them actually using a phrase like "flawed business legislation". You just know that statement came from the astroturf organizers rather than the crowd who were probably carrying signs about nazis and socialists and such.

[malaise]

17. Like the stupid fuggs

forget where they live. That's what happens when you have a quiet hurricane season.
Anyone who lives in Florida and ignores climate change is a stupid fugg.

[jimlup]

21. Fools

[RFKHumphreyObama]

22. The masses follow the asses

That must be a self-reference for the idiot of a protestor

Seriously, I wish we could throw all these people in an alternative world where global warming has already happened and leave them there for their whole life to suffer the consequences

[UTUSN]

23. He can handle it. And so can Tipper. n/t

[solinvictus]

24. I question Gore's motivation..

.. he stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars if all of his "green" proposals are passed. Plus, if Gore is so convinced of the science behind global climate change, then why does he not debate the issues with opposing scientists?

[sketchy]

25. I think he won't debate opposing scientists because

he thinks that would be akin to debating whether the world is round with opposing scientists. In a nutshell, there just isn't time for that. There just isn't time.

[johnaries]

28. He is not a scientist. He already let them debate. The debate is over.

[ldf]

26. are you for real?

:puke:

[johnaries]

27. He donates his profits to green projects. As far as the opposing "scientists"

They are people like Frederick Seitz and Fred Singer who told us that smoking cigarettes was healthy. They only "issue" they care about is which company is paying them.

[Bjorn Against]

29. Can you name one opposing scientist who has successfully had their work peer reviewed?

[reggie the dog]

32. Can Sarah Palin do the peer reviewing?

golly there really aint no climate change dontcha know.....what happened to all the permafrost? Oh its hiding under the swamps now, but it can come out at any time......

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!