Welcome, guest [login | register]

Posted by Bill S on June 30, 2007 at 1:06:19 pm EDT
In reply to E-85 posted by Blackbeard on June 13, 2007 at 6:21:32 am EDT

rexim, you missed the point about Gore. He claims to have been an environmentalist for years (and to have invented the Internet). And he made An Inconvenient Truth. But at the same time, he has a huge house, a large fleet of cars (one or two of which are hybrids, but not the others), and consumes several times as much electricity and gas than the average US household that doesn't even claim to be energy efficient. He claims that he buys "carbon credits" to offset his usage. But he still is generating lots of CO2 himself. Some would use the term "hypocrite" to characterize this.

Cheney we know about. He doesn't pretend to be an environmentalist, so we already know he is not even pretending to help the environment. That doesn't mean I support or even feel even the least bit favorable toward him. But I do know where he stands (in a different universe than the one I inhabit).

What I worry about is that if people are going to look to Gore as the example of environmentalism, they won't even try to cut back on their energy usage. If they look to Robert Kennedy, Jr, as another of the champions of energy efficiency and protecting the environment, they too will oppose wind farms as "spoiling the view" (as Kennedy does for the proposed wind farm that will be off Martha's Vineyard on the side that the Kennedy compound is located.

What I ask is that if you are going to bill yourself as an environmentalist, then walk the walk, don't just talk the talk. We used to have an old saying, "If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it probably is a duck." Unfortunately, too many of the self-proclaimed environmental leaders only do the "talk", not the "walk" and not the "look".

Replies

View: flat | threaded

There have been no replies

Post a Reply

Before replying, please read the complete thread.