Al Gore's a great teacher and role model, is he "greenwashing" us too?

[Catchawave]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm

"....Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself....."

So, what's the fuss about the Edwards' home? I still love both families and their right to enjoy their successes. May they continue to teach us, and most importantly reach us with their compassionate messages to help us take care of each other and our planet :D

[Deep13]

1. As if Gore could save the Earth by living in a tent!

x(

[ms liberty]

2. There are some inaccuracies in that op-ed,

but I'll leave it to Al to reply - and I'm sure he will!

[NYCGirl]

3. Except that USA Today article is ABSOLUTELY WRONG! IT'S A LIE!

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/8/17/133652/848

About a week ago, USA Today published a piece by Peter Schweitzer, who's a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. It accused Al Gore of hypocrisy, for asking viewers of An Inconvenient Truth to scale back their lifestyles and carbon emissions while ... well, there were a number of charges. According to Schweitzer, Gore owns three homes and stock in Occidental Petroleum, still receives royalties from a zinc mine on his property, does not participate in the green-power option his utility offers in Nashville, and lets Paramount pay for his carbon offsets.

As per standard practice, the conservative media machine spread the charges far and wide -- most recently they popped up on Glenn Beck's show on CNN and, bizarrely, in a recurring poll on AOL's homepage.

Gore's communications director, Kalee Kreider, sent a letter to the editor to respond to the piece, but we all know only a fraction of the folks who read the original piece will read the letter.

First things first: I talked to some of Gore's people today, including Kreider, about the specific charges. Suffice to say, they're false. Gore receives no royalties from the mine, which shut down in 2003. (USA Today actually printed a correction about this, way down on page 10A.) Gore owns no stock in Occidental, and never has (his father did; it was all sold over six years ago). Gore does in fact take advantage of the green power options his utility offers, and was in the process of adding photovoltaic solar cells to his house when the article came out. He pays for his own personal carbon offsets, in addition to the institutional offsets purchased by Paramount (movie distributor) and Rodale (book publisher), which make both the book and the movie completely carbon neutral.

MORE AT LINK

[spooky3]

26. the article at the link did not dispute the info about the three homes

which seems to be the main point of the OP.

[madaboutharry]

4. The author of the article wrote a book called

"Do as I say (Not as I do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy." Take biased Gore bashing articles with a grain of salt.

[Catchawave]

19. I noticed that , but decided to post it anyhow.....

I agree it's a hit piece, but not any worse than some of the hit pieces posted in DU threads, written by DUers against DUers and the candidates they love! I love and respect Gore, I wrote that in my OP.

[AtomicKitten]

5. pretty cheesy low blow

[NYCGirl]

7. I wonder how long the OP will take before he reads the link I posted that proves

the stuff in that article is pure crap?

[Catchawave]

9. He doesn't live in a big house?

I know he shut down the zinc mine in '03. The disclaimer/correction is at the top of the article.

This was to offset the stupid threads attacking the Edwards lifestyle, not to attack Gore. He lives in a big house too, so what?

[NYCGirl]

11. Al and Tipper gore live completely carbon neutral. NT

[Catchawave]

18. Would be nice to learn more about "carbon neutral"

than getting snipped at :D

Does that mean he'd make a better President than Edwards?

[sandnsea]

22. He writes checks to pay for his consumption

to groups that plant trees. That's fine, but it doesn't address the finite amount of resources we have or the rest of the problems excessive consumption creates. It also doesn't address whether people with money have a responsibility to implement new energy technology due to the pure reason that they're the only ones with the money to do it.

[Catchawave]

12. Like the Edwards threads, huh?

I'm happy for the Gore and Edwards successes. I'd rather be hunting Republicans :D

[AtomicKitten]

15. so - do that

and I'm with you on that quest

[Catchawave]

16. Seems Dems enjoy hunting Dems more....lol

Otherwise what fun would DU be? :sarcasm:

[AtomicKitten]

17. ain't that the truth?

It's a full time job fending off the pot shots.

[Virginia Dare]

6. Have any of the Democratic candidates...

potential or announced taken an oath of poverty? Have any of them said they will live in a tent? :shrug:

You can be rich and still be an advocate for the poor.

[zulchzulu]

8. Are we to assume a large home=large pollution maker?

As a home owner, I don't use all of my house with all the lights on and all the windows open with every appliance running full throttle while filling both fireplaces with wood going full blast and the toilets flushing in repeat mode...

People can actually have a large home that has efficient windows, efficient insulation and be fairly frugal with using electricity.

This swipe at Gore as well as Edwards are pretty cheap shots...

[Catchawave]

10. My intention was to prove that

Gore and Edwards have been called hypcrites by the wingnuts, we shouldn't have to be reading about it on DU.

You live in a big house
I live in a big house
The Edwards live in a big house
The Gores live in a big house.

Let's all do the best we can to save this fragile world !

[zulchzulu]

13. I was asking the question not necessarily to you...

My question goes more to whether it's a given that if one owns a large home that they are piggish pollution freaks hellbent on spewing toxics in all directions...'cuz it's oh, so comfy.

[sandnsea]

21. What was the home built with?

Why is it so damn wrong to ask whether the lumber is certified, or the materials are organic and renewable, that they went out of their way to avoid products made from slave labor, that they didn't use illegal labor. We're talking about putting corporate owners in jail for hiring illegal immigrants, but we can't even ask this question of our own candidates??

John Edwards has attacked Walmart for not caring for its employees, DU attacks people for shopping at Walmart - but we can't ask if Edwards is doing everything someone with his means is able to do?? It goes for ALL of them, they need to lead by example.

[Mass]

14. Thanks for reminding me Edwards has a big house.

I had forgotten.

This said, did Gore just built his house?

[JohnLocke]

23. Edwards didn't "just build" his house.

Elizabeth Edwards said they purchased 102 acres - valued for tax purposes at $1.1 million - in 2003 after spotting it while searching the Internet.
The Edwardses began building their home shortly after his Senate term ended in January 2005. They moved in last summer, although construction is continuing on one wing.

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/news/article/10578/edwards-fields-questions-about-his-decadent-digs/

[Mass]

24. The house is new. They did not buy a house that was built thirty years ago.

I understand very well, but you seem to have trouble with any criticism of your great man.

Truth is that I am bored to death with the multiple threads defending or attacking Edwards.

Both camps are getting really boring and counterproductive. I would not have posted a thread attacking Edwards for his house, but twenty threads to defend him are a little too much for me as well (and I probably underestimate that as well).

[sandnsea]

20. I think we should ask him

I'm really disgusted with the attitude on DU. I guess most people haven't been serious about the problems of excessive consumerism and its connection to global labor exploitation, resource depletion, pollution and war. If our richest Democrats aren't challenged to become energy independent, then how in the hell can we expect anybody else to take it seriously. Writing checks is not a solution either.

[LittleClarkie]

25. That's why it doesn't matter to me either way. Edwards or Gore.

Why must someone be poor before they can talk about the poor.

It all just smacks of a smear to me.

I stand by both men.