Say Anything Blog

The Color of Money

Tennessee blogger Bill Hobbs picks up the story of Al Gore’s voracious household energy use, which we noted Tuesday:

The Tennessean reported that Gore buys “carbon offsets” to compensate for his home’s use of energy from carbon-based fuels. As Wikipedia explains, a carbon offset “is a service that tries to reduce the net carbon emissions of individuals or organizations indirectly, through proxies who reduce their emissions and/or increase their absorption of greenhouse gases.” . . .

But how Gore buys his “carbon offsets,” as revealed by The Tennessean raises serious questions. According to the newspaper’s report, Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management:

Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe . . .

Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he “buys” his “carbon offsets” from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn’t buy “carbon offsets” through Generation Investment Management--he buys stocks. . . .

Meanwhile, Gore runs around the country and the world trumpeting “climate crisis” and blaming man’s use of carbon-based energy--burning thousands of gallons of jet fuel as he goes. His efforts have served to put climate change at the top of the national and even global agenda, driving up the value of the stocks and companies viewed as “green” or environmentally friendly. Companies like those his investment management firm invest his own and other peoples’ [sic] money in. (You can see a list of Generation Investment Management’s holdings here, courtesy of the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission.)

Another Volunteer State blogger, Bob Krumm, looks at Gore’s demands for the suppression of dissent. Yesterday’s Tennessean reported on a speech the erstwhile veep gave in Murfreesboro:

“I believe that is one of the principal reasons why political leaders around the world have not yet taken action,” Gore said. “There are many reasons, but one of the principal reasons in my view is more than half of the mainstream media have rejected the scientific consensus implicitly--and I say ‘rejected,’ perhaps it’s the wrong word. They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen . . . balance as bias.

“I don’t think that any of the editors or reporters responsible for one of these stories saying, ‘It may be real, it may not be real,’ is unethical. But I think they made the wrong choice, and I think the consequences are severe.

“I think if it is important to look at the pressures that made it more likely than not that mainstream journalists in the United States would convey a wholly inaccurate conclusion about the most important moral, ethical, spiritual and political issue humankind has ever faced.”

Gore would not answer any questions from the media after the event.

Krumm notes that Gore was complaining as early as 1992 about excessive balance in the media. Yet in a speech at the October 2005 We Media Conference, Gore seemed to urge government-mandated balance, at least on other topics:

As early as the 1920s, when the predecessor of television, radio, first debuted in the United States, there was immediate apprehension about its potential impact on democracy. One early American student of the medium wrote that if control of radio were concentrated in the hands of a few, “no nation can be free.”

As a result of these fears, safeguards were enacted in the U.S.--including the Public Interest Standard, the Equal Time Provision, and the Fairness Doctrine--though a half century later, in 1987, they were effectively repealed. And then immediately afterwards, Rush Limbaugh and other hate-mongers began to fill the airwaves.

Gore is mistaken on two out of three points: Although the Federal Communications Commission abolished the Fairness Doctrine (which regulated the presentation of “controversial issues of public importance") in 1987, the Public Interest Standard (which is part of the law that created the FCC) and the Equal Time Provision (which applies to political candidates) remain in force.

So, let’s sum this up: Here we have a major American politician who is calling for policies that would impose huge costs on society but appears to be profiting handsomely himself; who is leading an extravagant lifestyle while demanding sacrifices from ordinary people; and who is calling on the media to suppress the views of those with whom he disagrees, while at the same time urging more government regulation in the name of “fairness” to his partisan and ideological allies.

Why is it left to think tanks and bloggers to investigate and expose all this? Why aren’t the mainstream media all over the story? Could it be . . . bias? By James Taranto- Best of the Web

If Gore is buying "carbon credits" from himself, then this is a bigger shell game than previously thought! Plus, how much of his "global warming" shtick is merely advertising and promotion of his own self interests?

Pictures of Gore's House (via Pajamas Media)

Carville Says Gore might Run. I say Bring Him on.

Democratic political strategist James Carville says Al Gore will run for president in 2008, but he fell short of offering his endorsement of that possible campaign.

Carville, appearing Tuesday as a guest on MSNBC’s ‘Imus in the Morning’ program, said Gore’s desire to run for political office might come, not from his Oscar win, but rather from something more primitive.

"Running for president is like having sex,” Carville said. "You don’t do it once and forget about it. You want to do it again. He’s run for president in ‘88, he ran for president in 2000. We know he wants to be president and the stars could line up. I suspect he will get into this race.”

The CNN analyst, author and former Clinton administration operative, will likely support Sen. Hillary Clinton in the 2008 race, but Carville said he is not formally on board with her team.

The Reason Carville hasn't endorsed Gore is because he doesn't want to wake up dead because the Clinton watch dogs will be after him.

It just keeps getting better all of the time. I figured this would happen if they started the campaign season this early. Every time she opens her mouth she pisses someone off. More Hillary gaffes.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign barred reporters with prominent Chinese-language news organizations from a fundraiser last week, angering some journalists who serve San Francisco’s sizable Asian-American community.
Reporters from at least two Chinese-language newspapers and a crew from a Chinese-language TV station were denied admission to the event Friday when they arrived after a Secret Service-imposed cutoff time, according to the journalists and the New York senator’s campaign.
The Chinese-language newspapers and some other media had not been included on the e-mail list from the campaign telling journalists to check in by 11:45 a.m. Friday, Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee said Tuesday. Elleithee said the campaign was sorry for the misunderstanding and would take steps to avoid a recurrence.

More left wing sillyness. News Max Story
What part of your illegal do they not understand. It gets worse by the day, they have states that want to give tuition breaks to illegal aliens, some want them to be allowed to get drivers licenses. It just makes you want to fricken scream. Illegal Aliens are sucking the life out of this country.

A state legislator in Florida wants to put a stop to illegal aliens – no, not undocumented immigrants, but the use of the term “illegal alien” in official state documents.

Sen. Frederica Wilson, a Democrat whose district is home to thousands of Caribbean immigrants, said: “I personally find the word ‘alien’ offensive when applied to individuals, especially to children. An alien to me is someone from out of [sic] space.”

She has introduced a bill that would bar a state agency or official from using the term, Florida’s News-Press.com reports.

“There are students in our schools whose parents are trying to become citizens and we shouldn’t label them,” she said. “They are immigrants, through no fault of their own, not aliens.”

Less forgivable is John Edwards, the Democratic presidential candidate. He put on quite a performance in New Hampshire the other day (as you can see in this article).

Let’s review a little history: Back in the Carter days, a lot of people said that the presidency had gotten too big and powerful, and that it was too big a job for one man. Maybe we should split up its responsibilities? This was a quite common view, or concern. Then Reagan came along — and, when he ran for reelection in 1984, his men ran an ad that said (something close to), “Remember when they asked whether the presidency was too big a job for one man? They’re not asking that anymore.” Glorious shot of Reagan, waving while riding in an open car, I believe.

Anyway, a lady in New Hampshire says to Edwards, “Would you be willing to say [the presidency] is too much power for one person?” And Edwards responds, “I would absolutely say that.” Not just yes, but absolutely yes. In this case, Edwards perhaps should not be running for the job.

But there is considerably worse. I will quote the AP:

“(Bush) was not given authority to police a civil war, which is what he is doing now,” Edwards said.

He borrowed an analogy from his wife, Elizabeth — sitting nearby on the floor, leaning against a couch — and said the U.S. approach is like a parent scolding a child for not making his bed and then making the bed for him repeatedly.

“We’re continuing to enable this bad behavior,” Edwards said.

Is that not disgusting? Iraqi politicians, and ordinary Iraqi citizens, are putting themselves on the line every day. They’ve made mistakes, sure, but most of us would. And they’re getting shot at — murdered. Blown up. They are facing a vicious terrorist campaign, as they go about trying to reconstitute their country, and this is a problem that John Edwards and the rest of us comfortable Americans will never have to face. And he likens these people to children who won’t make their bed?

What a disgusting way of thinking. Edwards is a man running for president of the United States. If this is what our country has become, then maybe America is as bad as the colleges say, but for different reasons.

One final note from the report on Edwards: A woman at his campaign event said “she sees a bit of her political hero in Edwards. ‘He’s a Jimmy Carter-kind of guy’ . . .”

Yup, he’s a Jimmy Carter kind of guy — my point exactly. -Jay Nordlinger

Jay Nordlinger on Impromptus

This normally uninterestng article shows the value of a steel bumper vs. the fancy plastic crap that you get on cars nowadays:

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that most bumpers on midsize cars do little to prevent costly damage to vehicles ... only three midsize vehicles ... sustained less than $1,500 in repairs from each of the four crash tests.

In one test of the front-end at 6 mph, four vehicles ... had damages of more than $4,000.

By comparison, the Institute conducted similar tests on a 1981 Ford Escort and found the front-end test only caused $86 in damages.

What they don’t mention is that the $86 repair cost makes the Escort a total loss.

As if Hillary needed any more bad news:

The recent brouhaha over Hollywood mogul David Geffen’s support for the candidacy of Barack Obama and his disparaging remarks about Bill and Hillary Clinton, money, presidential pardons, and the cost of being a “friend of Bill,” has focused attention on another unsavory aspect of Hillary’s run for the White House… her brothers.

Two days ago, a federal bankruptcy judge froze the bank account of Hillary’s brother, Anthony “Tony” Rodham.  A court-appointed bankruptcy trustee is demanding that Hillary’s brother repay over $100,000 in “loans” he received from United Shows of America, Inc., a Nashville carnival company.

The money was apparently from the company’s owners, Edgar Allen Gregory, Jr. and his wife Vonna Jo, and was “loaned” to Rodham in exchange for his help in obtaining a Presidential pardon from Rodham’s brother-in-law, then-President Bill Clinton.  The couple had been convicted of bank fraud in 1982 plea agreement for making illicit loans (irony alert).

At the time of the pardon, the Department of Justice said it opposed the pardon.  Rodham denied this.  He also denied in an interview with CNN’s Larry King that he had been compensated in any way for his role in obtaining the pardon for Mr. and Mrs. Gregory.

Of course, Tony Rodham isn’t the only one of Hillary’s brothers to get in on the lucrative presidential pardon business during her tenure as First Lady.  Her other brother, Hugh Rodham, was paid more than $400,000 for his assistance in obtaining presidential pardons for two convicted felons, one a cocaine dealer and the other sentenced to 18 months for fraud in connection with millions of dollars in unpaid federal taxes.

Brother Hugh has said that he later returned the money.

With all the other albatrosses from her husband’s administration (FBI files, White House Travel Office scandal, Marc Rich pardon, etc.) and her own fund-raising scandals to deal with, Hillary can ill-afford to have her brothers’ sleazy behavior weighing down her chances any further.

The next 12 to 18 months promise to be very entertaining if nothing else.  Personally, I don’t think she will get the nomination… much less the presidency.

Wonder if this is how the media in America will characterize this story.

UK to withdraw troops from Bosnia
British jeep in Skopje
British troops had been supporting the Dayton Peace Accord
Most of the UK’s remaining troops in Bosnia-Hercegovina are to be withdrawn, defence minister Adam Ingram has said.

More than 600 troops, mostly Welsh Guards, will come home due to the improved security situation, he said.

A small number of staff officers will remain in Sarajevo, and Britain will contribute to the pan-Balkans Operational Reserve Force.

The troop withdrawal is part of a larger reduction of international forces from 6,000 to 2,500 troops.

In a statement to the House of Commons, Mr Ingram admitted there were high levels of small arms and light weapons in the country, but there were international initiatives to reduce these.

‘Approaching normality’

He added: “It is clear that the Bosnia-Hercegovina is becoming increasingly safe. In recent years there have been increasing indications of a security situation approaching normality.”

But he said military operations had not been without significant loss.

A series of commemorative events are to be held to honour the 55 British personnel who died and the thousands who served there.

If Bosnia are incapable of taking more control of their own affairs at a political level, how confident are you that they can do it on a military level?
Liam Fox
Shadow defence secretary

End of a long road in Bosnia

Although the EU peacekeeping force Eufor is being reduced, the international community overseeing the 1995 Dayton Peace Accord said it was retaining the office of the High Representative until June 2008.

It said the reforms it wanted had not yet been fully implemented.

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said: “If Bosnia are incapable of taking more control of their own affairs at a political level, how confident are you that they can do it on a military level?”

‘Job well done’

He said neighbouring Serbia was still unstable and that there was a suspicion that more troops were being freed up for Afghanistan.

But Mr Ingram said that charge did “not add up” and said he was surprised Dr Fox had not recognised that there had been “marked progress”.

For the Liberal Democrats, Nick Harvey added: “The House should be celebrating the statement today as a sign of success and a job well done.”

Around 250,000 people died in the inter-ethnic war of 1992-95.

Initially British troops served with the United Nations, and then under Nato command until Eufor took responsibility for safeguarding peace in 2004.

The chairman of Bosnia’s tripartite presidency, Nebojsa Radmanovic, said the country could now ensure stability and reform by itself.

On Wednesday the EU said Eufor would be reduced but a “robust military presence” would remain and troop levels would be increased “if needed” over the next six months.

Conservative MP Tory Tobias, who served in Bosnia, welcomed the statement but there were “lessons to be learned”.

He said in Bosnia, there was one Nato soldier for every square kilometre while in Afghanistan, there was one for every 600 sq km.

That was why the UK faced “so many challenges” in the country, he said.

h/t BBC.  And here is a link to see where Brits are operating.

A reader at economist Don Luskin’s blog points to a TCS article detailing how some Seattle schoolchildren are being taught the joys of collectivism and the evil of private ownership.

Some Seattle school children are being told to be skeptical of private property rights. This lesson is being taught by banning Legos.

According to an article in the winter 2006-07 issue of “Rethinking Schools” magazine, the teachers at the private school wanted their students to learn that private property ownership is evil.

…The teachers decided (this) was an opportunity to explore “the inequities of private ownership.” According to the teachers, “Our intention was to promote a contrasting set of values: collectivity, collaboration, resource-sharing, and full democratic participation.”

The children were allegedly incorporating into Legotown “their assumptions about ownership and the social power it conveys.” These assumptions “mirrored those of a class-based, capitalist society—a society that we teachers believe to be unjust and oppressive.”

They claimed as their role shaping the children’s “social and political understandings of ownership and economic equity ... from a perspective of social justice.”

…Legos returned to the classroom after the children agreed to several guiding principles framed by the teachers, including that “All structures are public structures” and “All structures will be standard sizes.” The teachers quote the children:

“A house is good because it is a community house.”

“We should have equal houses. They should be standard sizes.”

“It’s important to have the same amount of power as other people over your building.”

The Legos in question, incidentally, were not the property of the school, but were brought from home by the children and their parents.

As out children’s academic standing versus the rest of the world continues to deteriorate, teachers (?) inculcate our children with far left collectivist values instead of literacy, math skills and an appreciation for the uniquely American heritage.

Of course, the fact that these teachers (?) earn their livelihood at a private enterprise seems to have escaped their collectivist attention.  I wonder if their paychecks are all deposited into one big joint checking account?

Ann Coulter:

Once again, AC puts it in the center of the black:

Even right-wingers who know that “global warming” is a crock do not seem to grasp what the tree-huggers are demanding. Liberals want mass starvation and human devastation.

Forget the lunacy of people claiming to tell us the precise temperature of planet Earth in 1918 based on tree rings. Or the fact that in the ‘70s liberals were issuing similarly dire warnings about “global cooling.”

Simply consider what noted climatologists Al Gore and Melissa Etheridge are demanding that we do to combat their nutty conjectures about “global warming.” They want us to starve the productive sector of fossil fuel and allow the world’s factories to grind to a halt. This means an end to material growth and a cataclysmic reduction in wealth.

There are more reputable scientists defending astrology than defending “global warming,” but liberals simply announce that the debate has been resolved in their favor and demand that we shut down all production.

They think they can live in a world of only Malibu and East Hampton — with no Trentons or Detroits. It does not occur to them that someone has to manufacture the tiles and steel and glass and solar panels that go into those “eco-friendly” mansions, and someone has to truck it all to their beachfront properties, and someone else has to transport all the workers there to build it. (And then someone has to drive the fleets of trucks delivering the pachysandra and bottled water every day.)

[...]

It seems not to have occurred to the jet set that when California is as poor as Mexico, they might have trouble finding a maid. Without trucking, packaging, manufacturing, shipping and refrigeration in their Bel-Air fantasy world, they’ll be chasing the rear-end of an animal every time their stomachs growl and killing small animals for pelts to keep their genitals warm.

Read the whole thing.

The lefties want those of us they allow to live to do that living in the Stone Age.

Everybody get out your crying towels! John Kerry is near a microphone again… or, as James Taranto puts it: The Politics of Self Pity

WASHINGTON --A Senate hearing that began with glowing tributes to a St. Louis businessman and his qualifications to become ambassador to Belgium turned bitterly divisive Tuesday after he was criticized for supporting a controversial conservative group.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., grilled nominee Sam Fox about why he donated $50,000 to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth during the 2004 presidential race. The group of Vietnam veterans made unsubstantiated allegations against Kerry—then the Democratic presidential nominee—and charged that Kerry did not deserve the medals he won in the Vietnam War.
“Might I ask you what your opinion is with respect to the state of American politics as regards the politics of personal destruction?” Kerry asked near the end of the hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Kerry grills nominee over Swift boat

What would you think of someone who was “agnostic” about the heliocentric concept of the universe. (Planets revolve around the sun.)

Are you like me? Have you assumed that Alan Colmes is an essentially harmless, if misguided, liberal? If so, we might all have to rethink things in light of Colmes’ apparent statement on tonight’s Hannity & Colmes that he is ‘agnostic’ as to who is responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center.  -Mark Finkelstein

Colmes ‘Agnostic’ as to Whether Bush Brought Down WTC?

Okay, THAT got your attention!  Since some people are having trouble seeing the problem with Mr. Gore’s profligate and increasing use of energy while at the same time urging everyone else to use less, I thought I’d change the metaphor…

Dateline Nashville: Former Vice President Al Gore, the author of Celibacy: An Inconvenient Truth defended his call for worldwide celibacy despite revelations that in addition to the 4000 wives he had last year, Gore married an additional 520 women after his book came out. Gore’s defense consisted of the fact that he primarily marries women from third world countries where “overpopulation is a problem.”

“Plus,” Gore said, “I purchase celibacy vouchers from Catholic priests. They weren’t using theirs anyway!”

I saw this listing of top 10 worst point drops for the Dow and thought it was interesting when compared vs. president.  GW Bush and Clinton are at 5 and 4, respectively, with 2 of Bush’s worst days being a direct result of 9/11:

Fast Facts: Top 10 Worst Point Drops for Dow Jones Industrial Average
The following are the top ten worst day of losses for the Dow Jones industrial average. From left to right are rank, date, points down and percentage down:
1 — 9/17/01: -684.81 points, -7.13 percent Bush 43
2 — 4/14/00: -617.78, -5.66 Clinton
3 — 10/27/97: -554.26, -7.18 Clinton
4 — 8/31/98: -512.61, -6.37 Clinton
5 — 10/19/87: -508.00, -22.61 Reagan
6 — 3/12/01: -436.37, -4.10 Bush 43
7 — 2/27/07: -416.02, -3.30 Bush 43
8 — 7/19/02: -390.23, -4.64 Bush 43
9 — 9/20/01: -382.92, -4.37 Bush 43
10 — 10/12/00: -379.21, -3.63 Clinton

The most interesting thing to me is that Bush 41 “it’s the economy, stupid” had no days in the top 10.  On top of that, the recovering economy that Clinton interited didn’t have any days during his first term in the top 10.  Infact, 3 of the 10 worst days occurred after Y2k, but before 9/11 (the 2000 recession which extended into 2001).

Noel Sheppard

Economist Counters Al Gore:

Dr. Global Warming, aka Al Gore, in his 1992 book “Earth in the Balance,” proclaimed that the internal combustion engine was “a mortal threat . . . more deadly than that of any military enemy.”

An op-ed written by an economics professor at the University of Georgia counters Gore’s dire assertions, and fervently stated that this invention is actually saving the planet.

In his piece published Tuesday in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Dwight R. Lee wrote (h/t JunkScience.com, emphasis mine throughout): “The motto of all environmentalists should be “Thank goodness for the internal combustion engine.”

Got your attention? Good, for Lee was armed for Gore, err, I mean bear:

The abuse heaped on the internal combustion engine by environmentalists was never justified. But a recent story on cow flatulence in the British newspaper, The Independent, makes the environmental benefits from gasoline-powered engines even more obvious. Based on a recent study by the Food and Agricultural Organization, The Independent reports that “livestock are responsible for 18 percent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.”

Long before global warming became an environmental concern, however, the move from the power provided by animals to that provided by gasoline had greatly improved the environment. The emissions that came out of the tailpipes of horses were much more lethal pollutants that those now coming out of the tailpipes of cars. Horse emissions did more than make our town and cities stink; they spread fly-borne diseases and polluted water supplies that killed people at a far greater rate than the pollution from cars and trucks ever have.

[...]

Sounds good to me. I’m off for an unnecessary drive to nowhere in particular to do my part in cleaning the environment.

Read the whole thing.

The lefties get it wrong, once again.
Leave it to an economist to arrive at the obvious truth.