http://www.climatechangefraud.com/en...ores-new-house

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a
Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the
Montecito Journal.

The couple spent $8,875,000 on an ocean-view villa on 1.5 acres with a
swimming pool, spa and fountains, a real estate source familiar with the
deal confirms. The Italian-style house has six fireplaces, five bedrooms
and nine bathrooms.

"Steve W." wrote:

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a
Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the
Montecito Journal.

Al Gore isn't a Paul Wellstone. The latter was a true liberal the former is a shyster, a
shuckster, a fraud. The left is easily sucked in by frauds.


Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Wes wrote:
"Steve W." wrote:

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a
Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the
Montecito Journal.

Al Gore isn't a Paul Wellstone. The latter was a true liberal the
former is a shyster, a shuckster, a fraud. The left is easily sucked
in by frauds.


Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

They sure are . I hold up Hawke(ptooey!) as a prime example .

--
Snag
"90 FLHTCU "Strider"
'39 WLDD "PopCycle"
BS 132/SENS/DOF

On 5/5/2010 6:59 PM, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
"Steve wrote:

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a
Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the
Montecito Journal.

Al Gore isn't a Paul Wellstone. The latter was a true liberal the
former is a shyster, a shuckster, a fraud. The left is easily sucked
in by frauds.


Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

They sure are . I hold up Hawke(ptooey!) as a prime example .



Ha, ha, ha, that's a good one. Especially coming from a guy who believes
every word a politician says as long as it's a republican. Like Dickhead
Cheney, he never said a word you didn't believe was true.

Hawke

"Hawke" wrote in message
...
snip

So, did "Big Al" invite you to the housewarming party? Did you tell him how
much water you carry for him? I have tickets that I could sell you, send me
your credit card number.

Wes wrote:
They sure are . I hold up Hawke(ptooey!) as a prime example .

Ha, ha, ha, that's a good one.
Like Dickhead Cheney

Hawke

Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" is the "Refer Madness" of our
generation.

100 years from now they will try to make history interesting to
students with the story of Al Gore the huckster pushing the bogus
global warming scam.
Al will be the clown with big houses and a big private jet, that makes
history less dry.

The global warming suckers will be laughable and on the same page as
Heaven's Gate Comet rendezvous and old videos of President Clinton
saying, "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."

On 5/6/2010 6:27 PM, Buerste wrote:
wrote in message
...
snip

So, did "Big Al" invite you to the housewarming party? Did you tell him how
much water you carry for him? I have tickets that I could sell you, send me
your credit card number.


What I want to know is why you wingers make such a fuss because Al Gore
buys another house? The guy is very rich. Here's a big piece of news for
you, he's always been rich. When he was growing up he lived in a big
fancy hotel. His father had big holdings in Occidental Petroleum. He
inherited big money. He bought another house. What's the big deal? Every
time some businessman or right winger makes a lot of money and spends it
lavishly you all defend it and applaud it. But when a Democrat does it
you act like it's class war and you're on the side of the little guy,
which you aren't. Are you just all hypocrites?

Hawke

" wrote:

Wes wrote:
They sure are . I hold up Hawke(ptooey!) as a prime example .

Ha, ha, ha, that's a good one.
Like Dickhead Cheney

Hawke

Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" is the "Refer Madness" of our
generation.

100 years from now they will try to make history interesting to
students with the story of Al Gore the huckster pushing the bogus
global warming scam.
Al will be the clown with big houses and a big private jet, that makes
history less dry.

The global warming suckers will be laughable and on the same page as
Heaven's Gate Comet rendezvous and old videos of President Clinton
saying, "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."


You forgot 'Jim Jones'.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

"Hawke" wrote in message
...
On 5/6/2010 6:27 PM, Buerste wrote:
wrote in message
...
snip

So, did "Big Al" invite you to the housewarming party? Did you tell him
how
much water you carry for him? I have tickets that I could sell you, send
me
your credit card number.


What I want to know is why you wingers make such a fuss because Al Gore
buys another house? The guy is very rich. Here's a big piece of news for
you, he's always been rich. When he was growing up he lived in a big fancy
hotel. His father had big holdings in Occidental Petroleum. He inherited
big money. He bought another house. What's the big deal? Every time some
businessman or right winger makes a lot of money and spends it lavishly
you all defend it and applaud it. But when a Democrat does it you act like
it's class war and you're on the side of the little guy, which you aren't.
Are you just all hypocrites?

Hawke


He didn't EARN his wealth, he stole it!

Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Ignoramus9556 wrote:

Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100507/...e_taylor_swift
is impressive. How much did Obama donate?


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

Buerste wrote:
"Hawke" wrote in message
...
On 5/6/2010 6:27 PM, Buerste wrote:
wrote in message
...
snip

So, did "Big Al" invite you to the housewarming party? Did you tell him
how
much water you carry for him? I have tickets that I could sell you, send
me
your credit card number.

What I want to know is why you wingers make such a fuss because Al Gore
buys another house? The guy is very rich. Here's a big piece of news for
you, he's always been rich. When he was growing up he lived in a big fancy
hotel. His father had big holdings in Occidental Petroleum. He inherited
big money. He bought another house. What's the big deal? Every time some
businessman or right winger makes a lot of money and spends it lavishly
you all defend it and applaud it. But when a Democrat does it you act like
it's class war and you're on the side of the little guy, which you aren't.
Are you just all hypocrites?

Hawke


He didn't EARN his wealth, he stole it!



I don't care HOW he got the money.
What I have a problem with is Gore telling everyone about how they are
causing global warming and killing the planet because of the greenhouse
gases they emit. Then this same liar turns around and does the EXACT
same thing he is whining about others doing. That is what a hypocrite is.


--
Steve W.
(\___/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On Sat, 08 May 2010 10:16:45 -0500, Ignoramus9556
wrote the following:

Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

Do you have _any_ esteem for Algore? If so, WTF for, Ig?


One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

Tres cool.

But I'm sure that Algore feels that he needs a big, expensive house to
impress the people he wants to scam. AFAIC, he's just an ex-VP
grifter who is out to screw the entire world. You can tell by nearly
-all- of his actions that he doesn't believe a single word he spews
about AGWK.

--
Live forever or die in the attempt.
-- Joseph Heller, Catch 22

Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.

--
Steve W.
(\___/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Ignoramus9556 wrote:

Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

Al Gore who ply's the trade of an environmentalist should talk the talk and walk the walk.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

Not that I'm a big fan of carbon footprints and such but do you think Mr. Buffet and his
choice of dwellings might just a bit more ecological than Al Gores?

I also love the high pay WB provides for his board of directors. Similarly modest.
Actually very modest, 1 dollar a year iirc. The board is comprised of investors in BH.

Wes

On Sat, 08 May 2010 13:32:51 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2010 10:16:45 -0500, Ignoramus9556
wrote the following:

Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

Do you have _any_ esteem for Algore? If so, WTF for, Ig?


One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

Tres cool.

But I'm sure that Algore feels that he needs a big, expensive house to
impress the people he wants to scam. AFAIC, he's just an ex-VP
grifter who is out to screw the entire world. You can tell by nearly
-all- of his actions that he doesn't believe a single word he spews
about AGWK.


True or False? Al Gore's House Uses 20 Times More Electricity than
Average

Is it true that Al Gore's mansion uses significantly more energy than
the typical home?

Is this true?

Tale of Two Houses

House #1

A 20 room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas.
Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house, all heated
by gas. In one month this residence consumes more energy than the
average American household does in a year. The average bill for
electricity and natural gas runs over $2400 per month. In natural gas
alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the national average
for an American home. This house is not situated in a Northern or
Midwestern 'snow belt' area. It's in the South.

House #2

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national
university. This house incorporates every 'green' feature current home
construction can provide. The house is 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms)
and is nestled on a high prairie in the American southwest. A central
closet in the house holds geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water
through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground.

The water (usually 67 degrees F) heats the house in the winter and
cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or
natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a
conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is
collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern.
Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground
purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then
irrigates the land surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs
native to the area enable the property to blend into the surrounding
rural landscape.

HOUSE #1 is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of the
'Environmentalist' Al Gore.

HOUSE #2 is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. It is the residence of
the Ex-President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you
WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, or read about in the New York
Times or the Washington Post. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it is truly an
"Inconvenient Truth."

A:
The main claim in a chain e-mail was true when the original message
began making the rounds in 2007. Since then, the Gores have made several
changes to their home.

This e-mail has been circulating since 2007, the year former Vice
President Al Gore's documentary on global warming, "An Inconvenient
Truth," won an Oscar. It was basically accurate then. Gore's Nashville
mansion consumed a large amount of energy compared with the national
average, and President George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, had
several environmentally friendly features.

The Internet myth-busting site Snopes.com wrote about this e-mail and a
similar one two years ago, finding that the main messages were true. The
Associated Press reviewed the Gores' energy bills and reported that the
family consumed 191,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006. This was considerably
more than the amount of electricity used by the typical house in
Nashville, about 15,600 kilowatt-hours a year.

--


"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

On 5/8/2010 1:36 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.



Why don't you tell us about Oprah's house? Is it environmentally a model
for everything? What hypocrites. Go to any damn person who has a mansion
and see how much it takes to run the property. It's going to be a lot.
Gore has lots of property. But I guess since he's been leading the
charge on environmental issues that means all his houses have to be
special environmental properties. He can't just buy a house he wants
because he likes it because he's an environmentalist. Oh, if only he
could be anti environment like Dick Cheney. Then he could buy anything
and none of you would say a word about it. Oh wait, you'd find something
negative to say about Gore no matter what he did. I forgot. You're so
biased against Gore that even when he does something good you still have
something bad to say about him. Which says a lot about the kind of
people you are. No class.


Hawke

On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:21:50 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

On 5/8/2010 1:36 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.



Why don't you tell us about Oprah's house? Is it environmentally a model
for everything? What hypocrites. Go to any damn person who has a mansion
and see how much it takes to run the property. It's going to be a lot.
Gore has lots of property. But I guess since he's been leading the
charge on environmental issues that means all his houses have to be
special environmental properties. He can't just buy a house he wants
because he likes it because he's an environmentalist. Oh, if only he
could be anti environment like Dick Cheney. Then he could buy anything
and none of you would say a word about it. Oh wait, you'd find something
negative to say about Gore no matter what he did. I forgot. You're so
biased against Gore that even when he does something good you still have
something bad to say about him. Which says a lot about the kind of
people you are. No class.


Hawke

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:21:50 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

On 5/8/2010 1:36 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.



Why don't you tell us about Oprah's house? Is it environmentally a model
for everything? What hypocrites. Go to any damn person who has a mansion
and see how much it takes to run the property. It's going to be a lot.
Gore has lots of property. But I guess since he's been leading the
charge on environmental issues that means all his houses have to be
special environmental properties. He can't just buy a house he wants
because he likes it because he's an environmentalist. Oh, if only he
could be anti environment like Dick Cheney. Then he could buy anything
and none of you would say a word about it. Oh wait, you'd find something
negative to say about Gore no matter what he did. I forgot. You're so
biased against Gore that even when he does something good you still have
something bad to say about him. Which says a lot about the kind of
people you are. No class.


Hawke

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.

"We have broken from reality–a psychotic Nation” - Ron Paul

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-new...ation_01152010

Wayne

On Sun, 09 May 2010 06:41:51 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:21:50 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

On 5/8/2010 1:36 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.



Why don't you tell us about Oprah's house? Is it environmentally a model
for everything? What hypocrites. Go to any damn person who has a mansion
and see how much it takes to run the property. It's going to be a lot.
Gore has lots of property. But I guess since he's been leading the
charge on environmental issues that means all his houses have to be
special environmental properties. He can't just buy a house he wants
because he likes it because he's an environmentalist. Oh, if only he
could be anti environment like Dick Cheney. Then he could buy anything
and none of you would say a word about it. Oh wait, you'd find something
negative to say about Gore no matter what he did. I forgot. You're so
biased against Gore that even when he does something good you still have
something bad to say about him. Which says a lot about the kind of
people you are. No class.


Hawke

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.


Wayne

So you support and admire his flagrantly consumptive behavior while he
exhorts the rest of us to get green, walk gently on the Earth.

No problem, we respect your freedom of worship.

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:14:03 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 06:41:51 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.


Wayne

So you support and admire his flagrantly consumptive behavior while he
exhorts the rest of us to get green, walk gently on the Earth.

I live in a 2 bedroom home. But then I don't entertain movers and
shakers in the hopes of getting them to change policies that affect
millions. So I wouldn't think of claiming that Gore should live as I
do, or that his guests would be willing to sleep on a sofa bed as mine
must. And if Gore lived on the moon it wouldn't change the fact that
he's right about things, or that nitwits will find excuses to dismiss
his views. Remember when Jimmy Carter preached conservationism? What
was your excuse then? Do you think that as a nation we'd be better off
if we'd listened to him, or are we better off for buying into Reagan's
denial? And can you point us to some posts where you insisted that
Bush should spend some time on the front lines on account of his
starting a war? Of course not, so your beefs about Gore are little
more than an advertisement of your double standards and shallow
thinking.

No problem, we respect your freedom of worship.

LOL You've become as transparently phony as gummy. Remember writing
"I've killfiled Wayne" less than a month ago?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...206b39c43fc70b
No doubt you've read every word I've written since then. So what
gummeresque nonsense excuse will you pen to rationalize your reply? Or
will you man-up and simply admit that the killfile statement was more
of the BS that you've become increasingly comfortable writing?

Wayne

On Mon, 10 May 2010 07:08:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:14:03 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 06:41:51 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.


Wayne

So you support and admire his flagrantly consumptive behavior while he
exhorts the rest of us to get green, walk gently on the Earth.

I live in a 2 bedroom home. But then I don't entertain movers and
shakers in the hopes of getting them to change policies that affect
millions. So I wouldn't think of claiming that Gore should live as I
do, or that his guests would be willing to sleep on a sofa bed as mine
must. And if Gore lived on the moon it wouldn't change the fact that
he's right about things, or that nitwits will find excuses to dismiss
his views. Remember when Jimmy Carter preached conservationism? What
was your excuse then? Do you think that as a nation we'd be better off
if we'd listened to him, or are we better off for buying into Reagan's
denial? And can you point us to some posts where you insisted that
Bush should spend some time on the front lines on account of his
starting a war? Of course not, so your beefs about Gore are little
more than an advertisement of your double standards and shallow
thinking.

In other words, you support and admire his flagrently consumptive
behavior. Gottit!

On Mon, 10 May 2010 12:21:19 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 07:08:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:14:03 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 06:41:51 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.


Wayne

So you support and admire his flagrantly consumptive behavior while he
exhorts the rest of us to get green, walk gently on the Earth.

I live in a 2 bedroom home. But then I don't entertain movers and
shakers in the hopes of getting them to change policies that affect
millions. So I wouldn't think of claiming that Gore should live as I
do, or that his guests would be willing to sleep on a sofa bed as mine
must. And if Gore lived on the moon it wouldn't change the fact that
he's right about things, or that nitwits will find excuses to dismiss
his views. Remember when Jimmy Carter preached conservationism? What
was your excuse then? Do you think that as a nation we'd be better off
if we'd listened to him, or are we better off for buying into Reagan's
denial? And can you point us to some posts where you insisted that
Bush should spend some time on the front lines on account of his
starting a war? Of course not, so your beefs about Gore are little
more than an advertisement of your double standards and shallow
thinking.

In other words, you support and admire his flagrently consumptive
behavior. Gottit!

Seriously, is that the best you can do? Put words in my mouth, and
refuse to explain how you can be reading and responding to someone you
claim to have killfiled? Gosh, what a mystery that I don't think much
of you, eh?

Wayne

On Mon, 10 May 2010 12:21:19 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 07:08:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:14:03 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 06:41:51 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Gore will be remembered as one who was ahead of his time, and who
devoted his free time to making a difference. You on the other hand
will go down as one of the slow-witted partisans who thought that
other dim bulbs like Bush and Palin were wise enough to run a country,
who believed that going broke for unnecessary war was a good deal, and
who spent many spare hours enabling the gummers of the world and
cranking out cheap shots. History books won't blame Gore for what
happened in this period, they'll blame people exactly like you.


Wayne

So you support and admire his flagrantly consumptive behavior while he
exhorts the rest of us to get green, walk gently on the Earth.

I live in a 2 bedroom home. But then I don't entertain movers and
shakers in the hopes of getting them to change policies that affect
millions. So I wouldn't think of claiming that Gore should live as I
do, or that his guests would be willing to sleep on a sofa bed as mine
must. And if Gore lived on the moon it wouldn't change the fact that
he's right about things, or that nitwits will find excuses to dismiss
his views. Remember when Jimmy Carter preached conservationism? What
was your excuse then? Do you think that as a nation we'd be better off
if we'd listened to him, or are we better off for buying into Reagan's
denial? And can you point us to some posts where you insisted that
Bush should spend some time on the front lines on account of his
starting a war? Of course not, so your beefs about Gore are little
more than an advertisement of your double standards and shallow
thinking.

In other words, you support and admire his flagrently consumptive
behavior. Gottit!


On that..you and I..and most everyone here..agree.

VBG

Poor Whine...tsk tsk....what a windbag and buffoon.



Gunner

--


"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:15:02 -0700, wrote:



Seriously, is that the best you can do? Put words in my mouth, and
refuse to explain how you can be reading and responding to someone you
claim to have killfiled? Gosh, what a mystery that I don't think much
of you, eh?

Wayne

Focus, Wayne. Do you now deny that you've supported and defended
Gore's flagrantly consumptive behavior?

On Sun, 09 May 2010 02:01:24 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2010 21:21:50 -0700, Hawke
wrote:

On 5/8/2010 1:36 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Ignoramus9556 wrote:
Al Gore is, of course, free to buy any house that he can afford, as
would be anyone else. But that purchase would not really increase my
esteem for Al Gore.

One of the reasons why I admire Warren Buffett, is that the house
where he lives, is very modest and is appraised at $700k, if I recall
correctly. He has another house in Laguna Beach, CA, but even that one
is only worth 2-3 million or so. Considering that he could own any
house in the world, his modesty is impressive. He says that he simply
does not need a bigger house, which is probably true.

i

Al Gore is a LIAR of the top rank.

I don't care if he buys a huge house. Great for him.
Where I have a problem is how he and his ilk cry and whine about global
warming. How it is caused by people buying huge homes and not being
"green" about the vehicles and energy they use.

Then what does this paragon of green do? Buys a huge home so he is near
his pals in California as well as a huge home in Tennessee. Neither of
them are "green" homes and when you look at how he travels around it
just makes him look even more like the ass he is.



Why don't you tell us about Oprah's house? Is it environmentally a model
for everything? What hypocrites. Go to any damn person who has a mansion
and see how much it takes to run the property. It's going to be a lot.
Gore has lots of property. But I guess since he's been leading the
charge on environmental issues that means all his houses have to be
special environmental properties. He can't just buy a house he wants
because he likes it because he's an environmentalist. Oh, if only he
could be anti environment like Dick Cheney. Then he could buy anything
and none of you would say a word about it. Oh wait, you'd find something
negative to say about Gore no matter what he did. I forgot. You're so
biased against Gore that even when he does something good you still have
something bad to say about him. Which says a lot about the kind of
people you are. No class.


Hawke

There is a big difference between leading from in front and by example
vs contriving to persuade others to behave less consumptively while he
continues to be flagrantly consumptive.

Conserve, ye peons, while I consume in a manner I'd like reserved for
the likes of me.

Some nerves seem to have been scraped by this inconvenient truth.

On Mon, 10 May 2010 23:35:22 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:15:02 -0700, wrote:



Seriously, is that the best you can do? Put words in my mouth, and
refuse to explain how you can be reading and responding to someone you
claim to have killfiled? Gosh, what a mystery that I don't think much
of you, eh?

Wayne

Focus, Wayne. Do you now deny that you've supported and defended
Gore's flagrantly consumptive behavior?

Lame. But easier than critical thinking I suppose. Here, let me try.
Have you stopped beating your wife?

Now, do yourself a favor and read these articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

Let me guess, you imagine that neither applies to you, right? OK then,
do you remember writing this? "I'm far from innocent of banal bicker
banter but I think I'm ready to be done with that in favor of new
priorities" Apparently you thought wrong. But then, the whole idea was
as phony as your killfile.

Wayne

On Tue, 11 May 2010 07:01:32 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 23:35:22 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:15:02 -0700, wrote:



Seriously, is that the best you can do? Put words in my mouth, and
refuse to explain how you can be reading and responding to someone you
claim to have killfiled? Gosh, what a mystery that I don't think much
of you, eh?

Wayne

Focus, Wayne. Do you now deny that you've supported and defended
Gore's flagrantly consumptive behavior?

Lame. But easier than critical thinking I suppose. Here, let me try.
Have you stopped beating your wife?

Now, do yourself a favor and read these articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

Let me guess, you imagine that neither applies to you, right? OK then,
do you remember writing this? "I'm far from innocent of banal bicker
banter but I think I'm ready to be done with that in favor of new
priorities" Apparently you thought wrong. But then, the whole idea was
as phony as your killfile.

Wayne

Follow your own advice: read and try to understand the training-wheels
articles on logic and critical thinking that you cited. I studied and
practiced critical thinking, critical reading and logic in depth at
university level and professionally long before Al Gore created the
internet with a little help from DARPA and U.C. Berkeley.

I've presented no fallacious syllogisms because I've presented no
syllogisms at all. Try that for your first Venn diagram. Venn
diagrams are certainly not limited to syllogisms. Multivariate
multidimensional Venn diagrams are possible. There are other tools
better suited to more complex logic, like Karnaugh maps and techniques
presented by Huffman, Mealy and Moore.

My question that you keep dodging and trying to deflect by irrelevant
defamation of several is not a loaded question. It's quite clearly a
simple direct question. Your continued avoidance of that question
clearly demonstrates that you can not be critical of your political
hero or even tolerate criticism of him as a differing opinion even
when his personal conduct is quite inconsistent with the message he
proclaims ... and quite contrary to the conservative (Earth, not
political) standard you have set for yourself and live every day.

You walk the talk. Do you assert that he does, or not? I don't need
an answer to that but you might.

Unlike your red-herring wife-beater loaded question, a yes or no
answer would correctly convey your opinion while making no
implication about whether or not you believe that the man has made
significant accomplishments and contributions. But you don't even
offer an eqivocal response to the question. It's like a zealous
Democrat being unwilling to decry Clinton's sexual misadventures, a
zealous Republican denying Nixon's duplicity, and devout Catholics
denying pedophilia among their clergy.

Your example wife-beater loaded question is only loaded if response is
limited to yes or no. That's a contrived situation, an elementary
example to provoke thought in freshman level neophytes to critical
thinking. The trick question can easily be dealt with: "I have
never beaten my wife".

You seem obsessed with my killfile, keep pounding on that nail to
deflect attention from my simple question. Can you show a post where I
declared intent to killfile or plonk? I doubt if anyone cares who I
plonk so I don't bother to mention it.

I did plonk you for a while and probably will again, not that it
matters.

Oh, and I think it might be a lot of fun to go shooting with Gunner in
the California desert. Don't know if that'll come to pass or not,
we'll see. If it does, I'll give him a hug for you.

Meanwhile, happy hunting for illegal immigrants in Arizona.

On Wed, 12 May 2010 01:27:14 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2010 07:01:32 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 23:35:22 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:15:02 -0700, wrote:



Seriously, is that the best you can do? Put words in my mouth, and
refuse to explain how you can be reading and responding to someone you
claim to have killfiled? Gosh, what a mystery that I don't think much
of you, eh?

Wayne

Focus, Wayne. Do you now deny that you've supported and defended
Gore's flagrantly consumptive behavior?

Lame. But easier than critical thinking I suppose. Here, let me try.
Have you stopped beating your wife?

Now, do yourself a favor and read these articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

Let me guess, you imagine that neither applies to you, right? OK then,
do you remember writing this? "I'm far from innocent of banal bicker
banter but I think I'm ready to be done with that in favor of new
priorities" Apparently you thought wrong. But then, the whole idea was
as phony as your killfile.

Wayne

I studied and
practiced critical thinking, critical reading and logic in depth at
university level and professionally

LOL Well, either you didn't absorb much, or maybe the blood flow to
your brain has decreased since then.

long before Al Gore created the
internet with a little help from DARPA and U.C. Berkeley.

Here, do a little reading on that as well.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7746308/

That's really old news yet here you are still lobbing the lame cheap
shots. No doubt you'll continue.

I've presented no fallacious syllogisms

Baloney.

Can you show a post where I
declared intent to killfile or plonk?

I already did that earlier in the thread, weasel, and you responded to
that post. Here it is again - "I've killfiled Wayne"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...206b39c43fc70b

I doubt if anyone cares who I
plonk so I don't bother to mention it.

And yet you did in fact mention it, and then avoided any explanation.
As if it wasn't transparent enough. Here's the thing - nobody cares
who you plonk, but some like me question the veracity of people who
announce plonkings but then obviously continue to read and respond.

I did plonk you for a while and probably will again, not that it
matters.

Then why did you just ask me to show that you did?

Oh, and I think it might be a lot of fun to go shooting with Gunner in
the California desert.

You know full well that he ought to be concentrating on his
responsibilities rather than farting around. Will you be paying for
the ammo, or encouraging him to burn up money that's owed to his
creditors? Got any morals at all? Then find some spine. Tell gummer to
pay his bills and that you won't be a party to his deadbeatitis. If
everybody did that then maybe he'd have learned by now, which would be
better for society and gummer.

Wayne

On Wed, 12 May 2010 07:37:32 -0700, wrote:



long before Al Gore created the
internet with a little help from DARPA and U.C. Berkeley.

Here, do a little reading on that as well.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7746308/

Again, read your own cites. In your Snopes cite, Gore is quoted as
follows:
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
initiative in creating the Internet."

From the msnbc cite:
"Gore, who boasted in a CNN interview he "took the initiative in
creating the Internet," was only 21 when the Internet was born out of
a Pentagon project."

Now read this factual history:
http://freesoft.org/CIE/Topics/57.htm


Here it is again - "I've killfiled Wayne"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...206b39c43fc70b

Ya got me! I recalled killfiling you for a while but didn't recall
mentioning it.

Will you be paying for
the ammo,

Yes, sportsmen usually bring ammo to a shoot and share freely.

Then find some spine.

I think it takes considerably more spine to stay civil under attack
than it does to sling abusive namecalling rhetoric at others on
newsgroups while hiding behind a pseudonym and an anonymous location.

On Wed, 12 May 2010 14:06:23 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Speaking of which, Wayne LaPierre sent me an e-mail a couple of days ago,
saying that Glenn Beck wants to meet me. Do you think I should go? d8-)

Sure. Do you need a banana cream pie recipe?

--
Ned Simmons

On Wed, 12 May 2010 12:35:50 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Wed, 12 May 2010 07:37:32 -0700, wrote:

long before Al Gore created the
internet with a little help from DARPA and U.C. Berkeley.

Here, do a little reading on that as well.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7746308/

Again, read your own cites. In your Snopes cite, Gore is quoted as
follows:
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the
initiative in creating the Internet."
From the msnbc cite:
"Gore, who boasted in a CNN interview he "took the initiative in
creating the Internet," was only 21 when the Internet was born out of
a Pentagon project."

Now read this factual history:
http://freesoft.org/CIE/Topics/57.htm

Lame. Clearly both of my cites debunk your cheap shot about Gore
"inventing" the Internet. The second one makes it clear that Gore
deserves substantial credit for the Internet, and that people in the
know are aggravated about the endless empty rhetoric pumped out by
partisans like you. Show some guts and admit the obvious - that you
prefer cheap shots over facts, and deadbeats over accomplished dems.

Here it is again - "I've killfiled Wayne"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...206b39c43fc70b

Ya got me!

No, you "got" yourself.

I recalled killfiling you for a while but didn't recall

Sheesh, it was only a month ago. I don't believe for a second that you
forgot.

mentioning it.

So what? Where's your explanation for why you'd make a show of
plonking, yet be responding less than a month later? Next time you
announce that you're plonking someone, why should anyone believe you?

Will you be paying for
the ammo,

Yes, sportsmen usually bring ammo to a shoot and share freely.

Please do the right thing and stop being an enabler. If you have money
to spend on gummer, then send it directly to one of his creditors.

BTW, people who yak about culling and scapegoating aren't "sportsmen",
they're just idiots. So don't pretend that it's two sportsmen meeting
up, because it's actually just one lame-o and one nutbag leech. Who
will likely spend a bunch of time hypocritically blasting the poor
*******s who'll be slaving in a field or a factory while the two of
you are goofing off and pretending that 30 years of deadbeatitis is
just ducky.

Then find some spine.

I think it takes considerably more spine to stay civil

Bloody hell. Since when have you stayed civil? To name just one
example, you've accused me of being anti-vet without a shred of proof.
When challenged you simply repeated the same BS. What would take spine
is for you to admit that you were wrong, and apologize. Fat chance. I
don't see how you're any better than the swift-boaters or the bunch
who circulated rumors about McCain having a secret kid.

Wayne

"Ned Simmons" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 May 2010 14:06:23 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Speaking of which, Wayne LaPierre sent me an e-mail a couple of days ago,
saying that Glenn Beck wants to meet me. Do you think I should go? d8-)

Sure. Do you need a banana cream pie recipe?

--
Ned Simmons

I want something that will freeze his silly smile -- forever.

--
Ed Huntress

Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

"John Husvar" wrote in message
...
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

Nonsense.

--
Ed Huntress

On 2010-05-12, John Husvar wrote:
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

This is the standard Republican answer when caught lying. But it is
just as untrue as the original lies.

i

In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

"John Husvar" wrote in message
...
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

Nonsense.

Show me.

I have yet to meet an honest one in either party, or at least one that
stayed honest more than six months into a term.

In article ,
Ignoramus11203 wrote:

On 2010-05-12, John Husvar wrote:
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

This is the standard Republican answer when caught lying. But it is
just as untrue as the original lies.

i

Funny, I'm a registered Democrat. Check voter registrations in Portage
County, OH. Then apologize.

On 2010-05-12, John Husvar wrote:
In article ,
Ignoramus11203 wrote:

On 2010-05-12, John Husvar wrote:
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and _both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

This is the standard Republican answer when caught lying. But it is
just as untrue as the original lies.

Funny, I'm a registered Democrat. Check voter registrations in Portage
County, OH. Then apologize.

Well, if you are a Democrat, then I apologize for implying that you
are a Republican.

However, my remark about this being a standard Republican answer, is
true. They like to use word "politicians" in a completely misleading
context.

i

"John Husvar" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

"John Husvar" wrote in message
...
Now, why don't all of you grow up and realize most politician and
_both_
parties are damnable liars whose only real interest is power?

They may mean to rule well, but they mean to rule.

That's all they want. It's what they do.

Nonsense.

Show me.

Go out in the world and take a look for yourself, John. That kind of
throw-away cynicism is not worth arguing with.


I have yet to meet an honest one in either party, or at least one that
stayed honest more than six months into a term.

You must live in a bad place. I've known a couple, and they were serious
people. You need a strong ego and a strong desire for that work, but that
doesn't mean their only interest is power.

The thing that bugs me these days is the cheap-shot politics practiced by
some of the more reprehensible members. That doesn't indict all of them.

--
Ed Huntress