Comments on: Gore greens his Tennessee home

By: t china

t china — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:29:30 +0000

Yeah, but did he get rid of his polluting jet and start flying first class?
Al G(wh)ore is the consumate neo-cheating hypocrate. He’s a thimble-brained ‘more on’ and I am certainly glad that he wasn’t elected because we’d probably have already had numerous terrorist attacks on the rest of us.

Thank GOD for George W. Bush. Because of him, we haven’t seen any terrorism in the last 8 years.

This (N)obama knee-grow will probably ‘roll over’ to these insurgents and let them kill numerous U.S. Citizens. This ass-hole is an idiot with absolutely NO EXPERIENCE RUNNING ANYTHING! What the hell were you thinking – voting into power someone with NO EXPERIENCE?

I’d like to advocate that the terrorists FIRST ELIMINATE all U.S. KNEE-GROWS to get the ‘chickens to come home to roost’. Can I pay to make that happen? Just think of how much we would save in taxes (via welfare and other confiscatory programs)?

By: LAO

LAO — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:58:53 +0000

I would like to point out that the National Historic Trust has determined that it typically takes 40 to 65 years for any true energy savings to occur when an existing building is torn down and replaced with a more efficient one. There is a certain amount of energy-intensive recycling of building materials that can occur, but not nearly enough to compensate for the loss of the energy invested in constructing the original building and the substantial energy consumed to produce the new building.

In other words, by preserving, improving the efficiency, and utilizing an 80-year-old house, rather than allowing it to be torn down and replaced, Al Gore has saved a tremendous amount of energy. If it could not be saved by anyone but a man of means, then I am grateful that he was able and willing to do it and not leave it to the tear-down madness that has been sweeping the country.

Thank you to the commenter above for providing the age of the house. As many details of Al Gore’s energy consumption that I have heard reported, I am sad to say that I never before encountered the information, nor did I ever hear about the efficiency improvements. I keep looking for the notorious left-wing media, but I just can’t find them.

Thanks for producing this column. I have only recently learned of the site.

By: Pratap

Pratap — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:32:14 +0000

First of all, I am thankful to this site where i have found a lot of information about the same topic. Finally i have found a good enough information containing link “http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/13/gore.home.ap/index.html”.Go through this link and you can find a lot of information.

——————————————————————————–

Pratap

Addiction Recovery Tennessee

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 03:58:50 +0000

Simon, change every occurrence of Democrat to Republican and every occurrence of Gore to Bush in your rant, and you might then have actually said something close to the truth.

By: Simon

Simon — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 05:13:18 +0000

Gore misleads the American people, especially the people who can least afford to be misled.

Come on Democrats: EDUCATE YOURSELVES.

If Democrats [still] tolerate [and remain willing to consider] compelling information that challenges [and raises serious questions about] Democrats’ socialist agenda, misleading propaganda, and uncompromising positions, then there might [yet] be hope for humankind and Western civilization.

Based on considerable firsthand experience, Democrats refuse to and will never tolerate opposing viewpoints or any information that challenges Democrats’ stubbornly held positions. Democrats’ comments on this post, and Democrats’ responses to this comment will, demonstrate Democrats’ intolerance and diminish the above mentioned hope.

Will Democrats ever consider the downsides of Democrats’ policies?

By: Glenn Morris

Glenn Morris — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:48:55 +0000

Oooops!!

Looks like Mr. Greensleeves missed the mark.

“Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month
Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations

NASHVILLE – In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. ”

http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/ main/ article.php?article_id=764

Oh, well, the Green Building Council, the group that touts his home as “one of only 14 homes” qualified for their great honorifics, miscalculated his worthiness by a smidgeon – or are they merely another sham outfit established by “Many Carb” Gore to present him with another certificate to hang on his wall? Consider the energy required to build and assemble all his “greening” wonders, the carbon generated by the workers traveling to and from his little bungalow, the energy consumed and carbon generated in their activities on his property, while his electricity usage INCREASED 10%, and where is he truly eliminating any of the vile elements he professes to detest – yet embraces fully, in order to sell his “carbon offsets” scam?

Barnum said, “there’s a sucker born every minute.” Gore capitalizes on that simple fact.

By: j b cox

j b cox — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 02:17:12 +0000

seems as though you hard line republicans need to worry about the task at hand , and that is the issue that george w is putting on yhis nation . talk about fuel consumption . you are always worried about someone else and never face the real problems. thank you very much

By: Donald W. Bales

Donald W. Bales — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 01:42:40 +0000

Al Gore would have been stupid not to have made the changes. But he only did it after there was a lot of publicity about his energy use. It would have been more convincing and appropriate had he done it before all the news about his house came out. Granted he may need an office and his wife may need an office and in their position they probably do need extra room for visitors.
Still it looks as though he had to be shamed into doing what we wanted others to do.

By: sean

sean — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 03:18:09 +0000

i think people are missing the point.it is not the energy savings put inot the house but the energy used to build such a large house.yes i know it is 80 years old and was upgraded but the issue is people are still building large houses which uses a lot of energy which produces more greenhouse gases and then to spend more energy and greenhouse gases to make it more energy sustainable makes no sense.also another point is joe average with 1500 square foot home earning 25,000 a year could never afford these type of upgrades to his home like gore as done.also people forget that is was under al gores watch as v.p. of the usa that the united states did not sign the kyoto accord.

By: Ipat G. Luna

Ipat G. Luna — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:19:47 +0000

So what if Gore is benefitting from doing good things for the environment? That, in fact is the point and if everyone COULD do that, we will have no problems with the world. He’s being a model for doing things that are right AND benefitting from those. I think considering how unconcerned most people are, that is the right formula to save the world. As the original email implies, even George Bush, who for a long time thought climate change was a myth, went for geothermal heating to save on costs. If Gore had an alternative energy company, and it installed and managed his energy sources at home, then he is walking his talk!

And how do you know he didn’t worry about his energy consumption?