Go get 'er Al... rip her a new one!

Al Gore has the benefit of life experience to override the college bullshiat that polluted his brain when he was young.

And he sees the college bullshiat writ large in this stupid little twenty-something broad who views the planet through collegiate, naive eyes.

Gore should go for an encore after ripping her perfect little worldview apart and plant a foot in her ass. Literally.

What a dumb, naive twat.

Because certain choices are potentially the correct course of action and you therefore openly advocate them, you are forever forbidden from deriving any profit from them. Got it. So when exactly do the GOP plan on completely divesting from any sort of military contractor?

She had a 20 minute sit-down interview on Bloomberg a few months ago talking about the financial crisis. Dumb biatch is dumb.

Night Talk (new window)

Basically, "Let everything FAIL!" What a brilliant plan.

This thread is going to explode with stupidity.

Intelligent, well-meaning people are stupid and evil, and we should purge them from our society.

I'm gonna set the over/under for versions of "Gore's talking all gay and his shiat's all retarded" at 52 1/2.

/takes the over

Gore should have been President.

That being said, cap-and-trade is a bad idea. He probably has the best intentions, it's just that none of that money will go into nuclear energy research, because we CAN'T do that because it's not GREEN. Why? Because the Sierra club says so!

But "clean coal"? Oh yeah, sure, let's make sure we continue to dig for energy, because everyone wants to be a jetsetting coal miner. There's no future in being a nuclear engineer.

Norad: What a dumb, naive twat.

also, a poor implementation of the 'weak man' argument

This is why I've always liked Gore. It's also why I'm convinced 2000 campaign Gore was a pod person.

Etchy333: That being said, cap-and-trade is a bad idea.

If it were feasible, I'd say taxing the carbon at the source would be the best option. Tax the fuel.

Less incentive to burn it, less incentive to take it out of the ground: no bullshiat.

I don't think it's feasible because no economy will willingly put a gun to its head and pull the trigger.

If You Think It's About Greed, "You Don't Know Me"

No, it's about power. Isn't that the reason politicians do anything?

/flame away

Who would've imagined that a big environmentalist would be investing capital green energy related companies? SHOCKING!

Also, fark her and her line of questioning. I absolutely HATE people who do that. They accuse someone or something or try to imply something, and claim they're only asking them about it because its something they've heard or that they want to clear the air on the issue. Then when the person rightfully points out that its a bullshiat accusation they suddenly become delicate little flowers that are offended, hiding behind "I wasn't implying anything at all, these were just things I've heard before and I'm trying to help you by letting you clarify it..."

It's like that congressman who introduced that bill about presidential candidates and birth certificates, then tried to say he was trying to put the issue to rest and not implying anything about Obama. Luckily, that guy got what was coming to him and ended up being played badly by Colbert about it. I love that Colbert's segment led to him saying in some newspaper interview that "I think it's wrong to imply that I'm the illegitimate grandson of an alligator."

Lemon-Lime Malthus: Etchy333: That being said, cap-and-trade is a bad idea.

If it were feasible, I'd say taxing the carbon at the source would be the best option. Tax the fuel.

Surely taxing the consumer would be better, since they burn the stuff?

At present I think cap n' trade is the best solution for business, but if the schemes don't work well there'll have to be a tax.

Problem: taxes are too unresponsive.

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: If You Think It's About Greed, "You Don't Know Me"

No, it's about power. Isn't that the reason politicians do anything?

/flame away

I think they quite like money too.

I like money.

ninjakirby: This thread is going to explode with stupidity.


Having lived in TN, knowing many people there, etc:

People there love or hate him. The people of TN that hate him, think he is completely incompetent, I am sure she has gotten plenty questions about how he makes his money to fund his energy sucking property.

That being said,

She needs to not get pwned if she is going to bring it up. Think he might have, by the sound of the answer, addressed this issue once or twice before.

PartTimeBuddha: Surely taxing the consumer would be better, since they burn the stuff?

It's simply way too complicated to calculate how much carbon an item "costs"

If you tax the raw fuel, energy and materials providers will have to pass on that cost, eventually raising the prices for the consumer. It's sort the same thing, just simpler and with less hand waving.

People probably don't like because there will be less wiggle room than cap & trade shenanigans.

apistat: Also, fark her and her line of questioning. I absolutely HATE people who do that. They accuse someone or something or try to imply something, and claim they're only asking them about it because its something they've heard or that they want to clear the air on the issue. Then when the person rightfully points out that its a bullshiat accusation they suddenly become delicate little flowers that are offended, hiding behind "I wasn't implying anything at all, these were just things I've heard before and I'm trying to help you by letting you clarify it..."

Technically, it's a fair question.

"Mr. Gore, will you personally benefit monetarily from the legislation you are recommending today?"

If only our representatives were more aggressive in this manner.

"Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, do you or any of your colleagues stand to benefit monetarily from the prolonged military action you are recommending today?"

Gore is small fries.

Lemon-Lime Malthus: PartTimeBuddha: Surely taxing the consumer would be better, since they burn the stuff?

It's simply way too complicated to calculate how much carbon an item "costs"

Ah; I see your point. I was speaking specifically about energy usage: fuel tax. A tax on the energy put in for each good/service. That can work all along the supply chain.

Problem... international production.

Lemon-Lime Malthus: apistat: Also, fark her and her line of questioning. I absolutely HATE people who do that. They accuse someone or something or try to imply something, and claim they're only asking them about it because its something they've heard or that they want to clear the air on the issue. Then when the person rightfully points out that its a bullshiat accusation they suddenly become delicate little flowers that are offended, hiding behind "I wasn't implying anything at all, these were just things I've heard before and I'm trying to help you by letting you clarify it..."

Technically, it's a fair question.

"Mr. Gore, will you personally benefit monetarily from the legislation you are recommending today?"

If only our representatives were more aggressive in this manner.

"Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, do you or any of your colleagues stand to benefit monetarily from the prolonged military action you are recommending today?"

Gore is small fries.

Oh it's a pretty fair question, but she raised it in the most dickishly passive-aggressive way possible.

Revisiting Limits to Growth

*The* challenge of the 21st century (if not beyond), and we're failing miserably, as this partisan, head-in-the-sand coont demonstrates.

apistat: Oh it's a pretty fair question, but she raised it in the most dickishly passive-aggressive way possible.

Indeed. It's a smear. I feel a little sorry for her.

Damn, Gore shut her DOWN.

Then he follows up with "I understand exactly what you're doing, Congresswoman. Everybody here does."... essentially a verbal "mush" (gently placing your hand on a person's face or head, then shoving them back or sideways).

If she has any concept of self awareness, she must have felt like a horse's ass after that.

I'm still not an expert at this, let me see if I have it right. Ahem.

He says amen! and hallelujah! Mr. "Soft in the middle" Gore, wants to be my climate change bodyguard. Or at least my beerbelly bell-weather. One would think after that NSF "I invented the internet" fiasco he'd wouldn't want to end up a cartoon. But it seems he's got a short little span of attention. The incidents and accidents continue, and somehow he manages find his needed photo-opportunity, yet fails to connect with his wanted shot at redemption or spin into the cartoon graveyard. It's a strange world. My street too, I can accept that. He imagines himself an eco-angel, but the hints and allegations.... Vince foster, gaffs, let's just count some votes, this "Waaah But it's business when I do it!!!" Worse still, he's not alone. T. Boone Pickens? Really. A billionaire with his hand out, he can duck back down whatever alley he was roused from.

You know, I don't find this amusing anymore; just get these mutts away from me! My infinitely worn patience has grown thin. There are limits. The things he's talking about will maybe turn that street, my street, into the third world! Or worse, those sand-pounding, naked, machete wielding bonediggers will be riding cattle in the marketplace to do whatever it is they do. Snort DDT, hunt dogs in the moonlight for their meat. What about my wife and family? The rest of my life is so hard, my nights are so long, all my role-models are gone. Gone!

What's his excuse? It's not his first time around, he doesn't speak the language, he holds no currency. As far as I'm concerned he's a foreign man, not some long lost pal. He, damn well, better not walk down my street!

/Betty.

PartTimeBuddha: Problem... international production.

Well, we have tariffs for that.

Really though, any "solution" will need international cooperation, right? This is the name of the game, balls to bone. If China & India decide that they want to continue polluting, in order to gain an economic advantage, there's not much we can do to force the issue.

Economic embargo, I guess...but hey, doesn't China hold lots of our debt? Oh well.

This is the tragedy of the commons.

Lemon-Lime Malthus: Revisiting Limits to Growth

*The* challenge of the 21st century (if not beyond), and we're failing miserably, as this partisan, head-in-the-sand coont demonstrates.

Is my sarcasm nodule throbbing appropriately?

What a farking stupid coont. Did she ask the same questions of the oil barons who came before her committee? Does she demand that the CEOs of Chevron and similar divest themselves from their companies and give over all their monies to charity?

I like how at 1:53, when the Congresswoman's claiming she's simply trying to submit the question her constituents asked of her, the lady in the back just shakes her head.

Lemon-Lime Malthus: PartTimeBuddha: Problem... international production.

Well, we have tariffs for that.

Really though, any "solution" will need international cooperation, right? This is the name of the game, balls to bone. If China & India decide that they want to continue polluting, in order to gain an economic advantage, there's not much we can do to force the issue.

Economic embargo, I guess...but hey, doesn't China hold lots of our debt? Oh well.

This is the tragedy of the commons.

Quite -- but setting tariffs gets to the same complexity. How much energy did Little Timmy's lead soldier take to create?

Not made easier by the fact that about 30% of Chinese energy usage is 'on behalf of' the US economy. Much of the "China must agree targets" furore falls into a different perspective entirely when you consider that side of things.

International agreement... well, I guess let's see what happens in Copenhagen, but no global environmental deal has ever been agreed in a time of global recession. Sucks.

apistat: Also, fark her and her line of questioning. I absolutely HATE people who do that. They accuse someone or something or try to imply something, and claim they're only asking them about it because its something they've heard or that they want to clear the air on the issue.



The farking coont waves an article around and ten seconds later acts surprised by the fact that Gore was a partner in the firm, which is what the article was about. That biatch right there, that's the face of pure farking evil, like Palin.

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: If You Think It's About Greed, "You Don't Know Me"

No, it's about power. Isn't that the reason politicians do anything?


Yep! He's been planning this green path to power for 30 years!

He has ridden the mighty Moon Worm!

moralpanic: Yep! He's been planting this green path to power for 30 years!

Mildy adjusted for a flowery future.

Had it been me, when she asked me if the legislation benefitted me in any way, I would have said "Well, I guess I'll have clean water, fresh air, untainted food, and so will my children and grandchildren will too."
If Al Gore was raking in the money, and it was all going into his bank account, yet it was provably clearing the environment, would that actually be entirely corrupt?

PartTimeBuddha: apistat: Oh it's a pretty fair question, but she raised it in the most dickishly passive-aggressive way possible.

Indeed. It's a smear. I feel a little sorry for her.

How is this a smear? Gore has invested a lot of money, millions, in venture capital for green energy and carbon trading. If he is appearing on capitol hill to push legislation that promotes green energy or carbon trading schemes, he is a lobbyist like all the other lobbyists, and it's important that people understand that. It's not a question that any democrat would ask, so its up to a republican to point it out. Of course, it doesn't mean that you should ignore everything he says, but it's a conflict of interest if he's claiming no financial interest.

/didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

Animatronik: ...but it's a conflict of interest if he's claiming no financial interest.

/didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

Had you actually watched it, you ignorant bint, you'd note that 100% of his take goes to a non-profit. Next time try actually watching the video before running your fool mouth.

Animatronik: /didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

It's a short clip. Give it a look.

So I went and watched the video and H-O-L-Y shiat. That woman isn't fit to participate in a PTA board, let alone represent thousand of voters from a Congressional District. Who the hell elects dumb c*nts like that to represent their interests in the nation's capital?

Could care less actually.

Just love when Republicans profit being in gov and get pissed when being questioned about it.

Also just love when Dems profit being in gov and get pissed when being questioned about it.

Al Gore should go back go his zinc mine and poison more of Tennessee.

Occam's Chainsaw: Animatronik: ...but it's a conflict of interest if he's claiming no financial interest.

/didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

Had you actually watched it, you ignorant bint, you'd note that 100% of his take goes to a non-profit. Next time try actually watching the video before running your fool mouth.

Al Gore is a partner in the venture capital firm of Kleiner-Perkins and a co-founder of the United Kingdom-based investment firm of Generation Investment Management.

So I guess you're saying that Al Gore has no financial interest, none at all, in this legislation? That he doesn't accept any compensation from any non-profit and hasn't taken any financial interest in these firms?

Gore was worth $2 million when he left office and over $100 million now. Did all that comes from books and movies and TV stations to indoctrinate young farkers? Uhh, no. He doesn't have to disclose his sources of income which makes him free to lie about them if he wants to I guess.

The only positive is the tall tales he's telling and the cash he's raking in may inhibit him from running from public office for most if not all of the Obama administration.

And if he does hold a financial interest, it's time for you to stand up and be counted among the gullible lefty morans who don't have a clue how the world actually works with politician/lobbyists like Gore.

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: So I went and watched the video and H-O-L-Y shiat. That woman isn't fit to participate in a PTA board, let alone represent thousand of voters from a Congressional District. Who the hell elects dumb c*nts like that to represent their interests in the nation's capital?

At least one district in TN and one in MN. The crazy is strong with them, but Al pwned her good. It was nice to watch her squirm a bit.

Animatronik: PartTimeBuddha: apistat: Oh it's a pretty fair question, but she raised it in the most dickishly passive-aggressive way possible.

Indeed. It's a smear. I feel a little sorry for her.

How is this a smear? Gore has invested a lot of money, millions, in venture capital for green energy and carbon trading. If he is appearing on capitol hill to push legislation that promotes green energy or carbon trading schemes, he is a lobbyist like all the other lobbyists, and it's important that people understand that. It's not a question that any democrat would ask, so its up to a republican to point it out. Of course, it doesn't mean that you should ignore everything he says, but it's a conflict of interest if he's claiming no financial interest.

/didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

Yeah, why actually watch such a short clip and see the reality of the situation. Why not just go for the headline and then let yer gut tell ya the Truthiness of the siutation.

Animatronik: And if he does hold a financial interest,

Firstly, everyone has a financial interest in conservation and pollution reduction. Secondly, I find it amusing that capitalism is considered a bad thing by you and your ilk when it is like Gore who is profitting from years of investments that were made because he paid attention to the scientific research instead treating it like you and your fellow right-wingers have*.

*: A global conspiracy composed of such ludicrous assumptions that it makes the truthers seem sane.

Murkanen: when it is people like Gore who are profitting

FTFM

Ma'am, you got told, Southern style.

Animatronik: PartTimeBuddha: apistat: Oh it's a pretty fair question, but she raised it in the most dickishly passive-aggressive way possible.

Indeed. It's a smear. I feel a little sorry for her.

How is this a smear? Gore has invested a lot of money, millions, in venture capital for green energy and carbon trading. If he is appearing on capitol hill to push legislation that promotes green energy or carbon trading schemes, he is a lobbyist like all the other lobbyists, and it's important that people understand that. It's not a question that any democrat would ask, so its up to a republican to point it out. Of course, it doesn't mean that you should ignore everything he says, but it's a conflict of interest if he's claiming no financial interest.

/didn't watch any of it, just sayin'

It took longer for you to create this post than it would have to have just watched the video and corrected your own errors....

The GOP has turned into Fox News. They celebrate ignorance. That's why they are failing.

Did any GOP grandstanders ever ask Bush, Cheney or Runsfield if they stood to profit from the Iraq war or the war on terrah?