Impeach Bush!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(km5er @ May 7 2007, 09:28 PM) [snapback]437259[/snapback]</div>

So you're saying he's just gullible and stupid?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ May 7 2007, 11:01 PM) [snapback]437279[/snapback]</div>

yep I am from the South. And I do not think Bush is a good president. But I am not dumb enough to praise the Clintons as if they are any better. You bush haters really are a fun group. You have the chance to put a democrap in office next time and you are going to blow that also. Distorted facts ......

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(km5er @ Aug 30 2007, 06:47 PM) [snapback]504641[/snapback]</div>

Like I keep saying... A generic democrat is not the answer either. I guess you can nice personume that I am typical Bush hater but you would be mistaken. Our problems go much further than GWB and the current administration. Our society is playing a huge part in our problems and nothing short of a complete change of mind is going to fix it. IE, it is going to take a shift in the attitudes and practices of civil society. To think 1 person taking position as president is going to change everything for the better is a fairly ignorant concept . Our problems run much deeper than that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Aug 30 2007, 08:55 PM) [snapback]504713[/snapback]</div>

Your ploy to target Al Gore won't work with me. He is a hypocrite IMO. Until he reduces his consumption he will remain so IMO.

There are a plethora of changes that need to take place but a few of the main ones that come to mind:

A. Religion and it's power over the masses

B. Capitalism and it's intent (this includes marketing, lobbying, subsidies etc)

C. Our love of goods over humans

D. Consumptive practices

E. Ignorance

A few simple changes in our value systems and worldviews would allow many of our major problems to fade away. Like the idea of solving for patterns where one solves multiple problems in one swoop without creating new ones.

By "creating the conditions condusive to life" (Creare Condiciones Sub Quibus Vita Foveature) we could subvert many of our woes. It works for the natural world. Life originates from life.

I completely understand that the idea of this ecotopia is a pipe dream but small steps go a long ways towards a healthy society. We know where our current path is leading. We've seen it throughout history in previous failed civilizations......

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Aug 30 2007, 11:14 PM) [snapback]504722[/snapback]</div>

I think it is interesting that when I have been to a Christian church on Sunday morning I have heard on various occasions sermon's that advocate B through E of your list:

B: The pursuit of money and profit at the cost of other more important aspects of our lives is wrong.
C: All the posessions in the world will not give you peace in your heart. Your priorities should be God, family, business.
D: Excessive consumption (food, things, habits) are not what God wants for you. We are to be caretakers of creation, not abusers.
E: God gave you a mind to learn with and to not use it for that is resisting what He wants for you.

I realize this is not what many here in FHOP think of when bashing religion and generalizing about how religous people think and what they feel is important. As for A, it will never happen because people WANT to believe in God and to look at the world in those terms.

 

Bush bought the ranch in 1999 and had a local church build the house with volunteer effort incorporating the latest technology. Gore's home is not new, and has been in the family for generations. He has been retrofitting the aging structure piecemeal.

As is usual for republicans in general, and the OP in detail, lies by misdirection, lies by omission, rampant dishonesty.

 

"I realize this is not what many here in FHOP think of when bashing religion and generalizing about how religous people think and what they feel is important. "

I don't think F8L (nor anyone but Burritos) is saying religion=evil and should be banned. He has a problem with the controlling nature of it, and the violent effects it has on world governance. It is true, that Christianity teaches B-E (as well as many other religions), but it is untrue that Christians are any better at the follow through of it than anybody else. We're all flawed and trying to improve. No one is advocating the destruction of religion, but religion does need a return to its humble roots of teaching to B-E, and get rid of the corruption, power, and politics (as well as the perversion). Turn the other cheek, humility, and modesty of your beliefs is still taught, but seldom practiced. Instead, we have monstrous glitzy churches, trying to outdo each other.

But Jesus needs your money! Call now! 1888-bullsh**

Churches are supposed to be small, humble, and tolerant but they rarely are anymore.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Aug 31 2007, 08:34 AM) [snapback]504906[/snapback]</div>

Thank you for clarifying my post Darwood. You hit the nail on the head. I am obviously athiest but as you can see a lot of my views mirror some of the good teachings in religion. This is where I feel there is common ground.

 

Amen!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Aug 31 2007, 10:34 AM) [snapback]504906[/snapback]</div>

Agreed that Christians are no better at applying these principles than anyone else. I thought it was interesting though that his list seemed to be very similar to the principles of Christianity. My reading of F8L's (and many others in FHOP) view of religion is that "we" would be better off if people didn't believe/participate in it because he thinks it prevents them from thinking independently.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(amtrak115 @ May 3 2007, 06:58 PM) [snapback]435081[/snapback]</div>

Nicley put, I wonder how much money the demmies will spend on their investigations??


Good thread kow..

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 31 2007, 08:44 AM) [snapback]504915[/snapback]</div>

In some cases that could be true. There are many people who DO NOT think for themselves and follow blindly. These are people the sheep that are easily led by bad people to do wrong in the name of religion. We see this again and again. Given a choice between maintaining our current situation regarding religion and having no religion at all I would choose no religion at all but that is not a rational option. Many of the rational teachings in christianity are mirrored throughout the world in other religions, cultures, and tribal practices. A lot of them are simply sustainable practices for a quality life. So do we need it? I don't think we do but that is my opinion. Since freedom of personal beliefs is an important right I do not wish to take that from anyone yet, like Darwood clarified above, I do wish to have it's power reduced and brought back in line to a point where only those who want to feel it's effect can and those who don't are not subject to it as is the case now. You don't see me railing against Wiccans or Buddhists. That is because the threats to my livelyhood come from Judaism and it's various forms.

 

Let me just say that I did not hijack this thread and turn it into a religious bashing thread.

Now to stay on topic, I commend Bush for having a green home and I think that Gore is a hypocrite for not doing so. He has plenty of money to off get renewables.

But let me ask this, do the righttards here feel that Bush is doing a good thing by making and living in a green home?

If NO, do you think that Bush is stupid for trying to live in a way that the intellectual leftist enviromental eco-nazi's would prefer people to live?

If YES, why? Don't righttards think that global warming was all BS, so why would bush go out of his way to reduce the carbon footprint on the earth? Why not just live conventially like all his other righttard brethren?

I do believe in global warming. Gore should try to reduce his consumption to be a good example. His actions are hypocritical. Nonetheless, if his message affects millions and millions to reduce global warming, his impact will be far more meaningful whether he lives in a superduper mac mansion or an igloo.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Aug 31 2007, 02:04 PM) [snapback]505075[/snapback]</div>

Is there any group of people you don't hate and despise?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Aug 31 2007, 02:04 PM) [snapback]505075[/snapback]</div>

Enough already.

Exactly what *do* you know about Gore's house that you haven't read on a NeoCon Blog?

You're comparing a 4,000 sq ft house built from the ground up to be energy efficient to a 10,000 retrofit that is still under construction and renovation.

"TIME quoted Kalee Kreider, a spokesperson for Gore, saying that the Gore family tries to buy green energy to reduce their carbon footprint. She continued to say that since the controversy, the Gore family was "in the midst of installing solar panels on their home, which will enable them to use less power." She also added, "They also use compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy efficiency measures and then they purchase offsets for their carbon emissions to bring their carbon footprint down to zero." [18] WKRN-TV reported that the Gore family obtains their power from the Nashville Electric Service's "renewable energy initiative", The Green Power Switch program [21] which depends upon "wind, solar, and methane gas." [22] The Detroit Free Press further noted that "Gore purchased 108 blocks of 'green power' for each of the past three months, according to a summary of the bills. That’s a total of $432 a month Gore paid extra for solar or other renewable energy sources. The green power Gore purchased is equivalent to recycling 2.48 million aluminum cans or 286,092 pounds of newspaper, according to comparison figures on NES’s Web site." [19] The figure of 108 blocks of green power per month corresponds[21] to 16,200 kilowatt-hours of electricity per month, Al Gore's average monthly use for 2005.
Keith Olbermann at MSNBC reported that the Gore home includes offices for both Gore and his wife and 'special security measures' making it unrepresentative of what the average US home consumes. Additionally, the green power purchased by the Gores increased the cost of their electricity by "$5,893, more than 50 percent, in order to minimize carbon pollution."[23]
Kreider suggested in TIME that the attacks on Gore's energy use were political in nature and stated:
“ Sometimes when people don't like the message, in this case that global warming is real, it's convenient to attack the messenger. [18] â€
Chris Cillizza and Matthew Mosk in a Washington Post article quoted TCPR president Johnson as stating: "The energy he receives into his house is no different than what I receive into my house." They also noted that, "Kreider added that a renovation of the Gores' house is underway to make it more energy efficient, an update that will include the addition of solar panels." [24]
An article in USA Today stated, "Zoning rules in Al Gore's upscale neighborhood kept the former vice president and environmental activist from installing solar panels on his roof...New rules going into effect on April 1 will allow homeowners to install solar panels on their roofs. But there's a caveat: 'Solar panels may be installed upon the roof of a building so long as they are not visible from the street or from any adjoining property,' according to the ordinance. Gore's roof does have flat areas where the panels could be placed, Franklin said. The builders at Gore's home plan to make the application for solar panels once the new ordinance goes into effect." [25]
According to Fred Lucas of Cybercast News Service, "one explanation offered by [Gore]'s defenders" for the high energy usage in his mansion "was that he pays for carbon offsets." Lucas wrote that this explanation resulted in accusations from "other media outlets" alleging that because Gore's company, Generation Investment Management (GIM), invests in projects to reduce energy consumption around the world, Gore is essentially making a profit from global warming by paying himself for the "offsets." GIM spokesman Richard Campbell stated, "That's a serious accusation of illegal activity...We do not invest in any activity of carbon offset. That's nonsense. We are a fund management business that does sustainability research."[3]"

And his 33 solar panels are finally UP.

and still to come are:

* install a geothermal system that will, among other things, drastically reduce the cost of heating his pool.
* upgrade windows and ductwork.
* install more energy-efficient light bulbs.
* create a rainwater collection system for irrigation and water management.

These are all retrofits, which are harder to do than building from the ground up. His house is 2.5 times the size of Bush's ranch, his primary residence and because he is an ex-vice president and has his offices at home the USE of the two houses is also different. Compare an orange to an orange. Who walks the talk?

He practices what he preaches.

Bush is all hot air and getting hotter.

Now....WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 31 2007, 09:14 PM) [snapback]505234[/snapback]</div>

If he practiced what he preached he would move to where he didn't use so much energy. Guess that's too much to ask of a rich white liberal using GW fearmongering to further his own career.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Aug 31 2007, 12:55 PM) [snapback]504921[/snapback]</div>

A logical step in your thinking (IMO) is that those who are following religion blindly or intentionally using religion for ill purposes are doing it as part of their nature. Religion becomes a tool to use, whether it be for something to believe in without thinking about or something to further their own ends.

It really is a human issue and not a religious issue, as without religion as their crutch, they would just turn to something else. This could be science, a philosophy, or what Joe down the street says. While we may not agree on the power of religion and it's utility, I think we do agree that blindly following or misuse of religion causes lots of problems.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 31 2007, 09:14 PM) [snapback]505234[/snapback]</div>

I must admit. I did give the Gore bashing blogs the benefit of the doubt. I'll be careful not to be so gullible in the future.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 31 2007, 06:46 PM) [snapback]505195[/snapback]</div>

I hold contempt to holier than thou religious righttards.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Sep 1 2007, 12:06 AM) [snapback]505304[/snapback]</div>

What about holier than thou athiest leftshits?