Good point ;)

Sounds an aweful lot like Napolean from Animal Farm to me.

Great personal expense - indeed. Gore happens to be someone who has the funds to incur the great personal expense, but still, in using the excessive renewable energy that he does there is less renewable energy available for use by others and therefore they use normal fossil fuel energy. Gore also purchases carbon credits - from a company that I believe he owns.

In other words... Because you dislike the man, he loses no matter what.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't believe he is right about global warming but you'll go along if he behaves more like you think he should if he really believes what he says?

That's kind of like me saying I'll be whatever religion you are if you simply prove to me that you believe it.

If the problem is one of personal commitment (to your definition) then you're just picking the wrong role model. I can point you to plenty of people who come very close to living carbon neutral lifestyles, making all or most of the sacrifices you'd apparently require of Gore. So, since they've done it why don't you go ahead anyway?

Pfft Yes, I recognize the attempt to bait me, but I'm bored.

When Green Power Switch starts turning people away, you'll have a point. Until then, not so much.

And just for fun, with the understanding that one should be able to receive as well as they give...Could you please trade in that wasteful vehicle you drive, Napoleon. There are many other vehicles you could choose. I really don't appreciate your wastefulness. Many people can't afford a vehicle as nice as yours and you should be ashamed of yourself for flaunting it in front of those of lesser means than yourself.

Oops... almost missed your last edit, and wouldn't that be a shame?

Per usual, pick up the part of the story that could be used to slam Gore and run with it... right into a wall.

Gore owns stock.

Your 401K probably owns stock in ExxonMobil.

Does it own ExxonMobil? Do you? Do you ever buy gas from ExxonMobil, Napoleon?

Give it a rest.

I find the man offensive, to be sure. I find any elitist who expects others to do without while he consumes to ridiculous degrees to be offensive. I don't ened to say again who he reminds me of. I find his doomsday hyperbole to be ridiculous.

It was meant to be a rhetocial point, not a literal. I haven't the means to give up consumption of petroleum products.

But I don't think oil companies are evil. I don't think others should be prevented from owning a minivan and won't presume to tell them not to. I also don't believe that others should stop buying from Exxon and I should be allowed to continue, so the analogy hardly is fitting. Or do you not understand the literary reference?

Wow...I guess if you think i should give it a rest, I better stop. I'm so sorry.

Neither does Al believe carbon credits are evil.

Neither does Al

I understand literary reference AND bull**** all at the same time. I multitask.

No need to apologize... not to me anyway.

I don't think they are evil either, however I do think that public policy should value their interests below the interests of society and the planet.