NY Times Surprisingly Asks ‘Is the Carbon-Neutral Movement Just a Gimmick?’

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

The reader is formally cautioned to prepare his or herself for an alternate reality. You have been warned.

I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked to find the New York Times asking the following question on a Sunday morning:

But is the carbon-neutral movement just a gimmick?

Is this possibly a sea change in media coverage on this issue, or just an olive branch cynically tossed to create the illusion of balance?

Regardless of the answer, although Andrew C. Revkin’s “Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?” fell short of exposing all the hypocrisies concerning this matter, it was nonetheless surprising to see a Times writer offer the following opinions about such a controversial and polarizing subject (emphasis added throughout, h/t Glenn Reynolds):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Some believe it helps build support, but others argue that these purchases don’t accomplish anything meaningful — other than giving someone a slightly better feeling (or greener reputation) after buying a 6,000-square-foot house or passing the million-mile mark in a frequent-flier program. In fact, to many environmentalists, the carbon-neutral campaign is a sign of the times — easy on the sacrifice and big on the consumerism.

Shocking, wouldn’t you agree? Marvelously, Revkin was just getting warmed up. Pay particular attention to his continued use of environmentalists as his sources. This made the piece even stronger given the audience:

At this rate, environmentalists say, buying someone else’s squelched emissions is all but insignificant.

The worst of the carbon-offset programs resemble the Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences back before the Reformation,” said Denis Hayes, the president of the Bullitt Foundation, an environmental grant-making group. “Instead of reducing their carbon footprints, people take private jets and stretch limos, and then think they can buy an indulgence to forgive their sins.”

“This whole game is badly in need of a modern Martin Luther,” Mr. Hayes added.

Of course, this wonderful analogy has been made before. However, it is all the stronger coming from such a green source, wouldn’t you agree?

Also of note was a bit of a slap at some of the more visible global warming alarmists even though none was named:

Michael R. Solomon, the author of “Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having and Being” and a professor at Auburn University, said he was not surprised by the allure of the carbon-offsetting market.

Consumers are always going to gravitate toward a more parsimonious solution that requires less behavioral change,” he said. “We know that new products or ideas are more likely to be adopted if they don’t require us to alter our routines very much.”

Couldn’t you substitute the name Al Gore – or any number of famous alarmists – for the word “consumers” in the preceding quote? After all, when Gore spoke to Congress last month, he was asked to sign a pledge to bring his energy usage in his own home down to the level of the average American’s, and he refused.

But Gore isn’t the only alarmist being asked to sign such a pledge as the Washington Times reported last week (emphasis added):

A leading skeptic of global-warming science is challenging celebrity activists such as Al Gore and Sheryl Crow to lower their "carbon footprint" to the same level as the average American by Earth Day in April 2008. "I simply believe that former Vice President Al Gore and his Hollywood friends who demand we change the way we live to avert this over-hyped 'crisis' not only talk the talk, but walk the walk," said Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican. 

"How hard is it for these elitists to become as frugal in their energy consumption as the average American? I think the American public has a right to know they are being had."

A so-called "Gore Pledge" was introduced last month when the former vice president appeared before a Senate committee to discuss his views on climate change. Mr. Inhofe asked Mr. Gore to sign the pledge to reduce his use of products that produce greenhouse gases, but he declined, instead citing alternative carbon trade-offs.

Mr. Gore says he pays a self-imposed "carbon tax" to offset the environmental impact of his large home and global travels.

With that in mind, the “consumers” being spoken of in this Times piece aren’t John and Jane Q. Public. They are indeed the hypocritical, wealthy media elites and Hollywoodans that are asking Americans to make personal sacrifices in order to solve a problem that we’re not sure actually exists while they burn significantly greater amounts of fossil fuels stating that it’s okay because they purchase carbon credits that are purely symbolic.

Sadly, the Times piece didn’t address this hypocrisy, nor did it discuss specifics about how such schemes are failing in Europe as recently reported by NewsBusters here and here.

Regardless, Revkin and the Times are to be applauded for the honesty in this piece unless it is indeed just a token of balance in a seemingly endless cache of alarmism.

As always, we will know in the fullness of time.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Has anyone evaluated Carbon

Has anyone evaluated Carbon Offsets to even work? I mean take the 'plant a tree' Carbon Offset. Yes the tree pulls Carbon out of the air to build itself.

But the tree won't live forever. If it dies a natural death, bacteria, insects, and other animals will release its carbon back to the atmosphere. The other alternative would be to burn in a forest fire which will return the Carbon in mostly in C02 even quicker.

Even if it dies at the hand of man, it will release its carbon back to the atmosphere eventually by fire or decay as well.

So do they plan on burying these trees in some air-proof landfill? Because that's the only way it can truely remove Carbon from the atmosphere. And how much oil, man effort, and environment impact would that require?

Something to Crow about

Another solution other than "burying trees in an air-proof landfill" to prevent them from releasing carbon in some form into the atmoshphere is havesting the trees and preserving the wood (removing two parts Hydrodgen, one part Oxygen) from the trees and using that dried wood for useful purposes such as....say.....musical instruments (paying attention Sheryl).  Of course, that solution may not be interpreted by tree-huggers as being "hip", but at least it's not being hyp(ocritical).

More to Noel's point - Could the NY Times be publishing this article to assuage their green guilt?  It would be extremely hard on the eyes of the the reader if the Times were to print daily copy on just one "square"; however, this non-subscriber thinks that is certainly something to "Crow" about.

"“Carbon-Neutral Is

"“Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?”"

Oh, it's green alright. Green as in $$$ for those who are selling this nonsense.

http://www.physorg.com/news96

http://www.physorg.com/news96732819.html

That is not the only TRUE way to remove carbon from the atmosphere.  There are other methods, it just goes back to asking is CO2 responsible for warming?  Is CO2 a result of the warming? This device might be the future of carbon offsets.  It is the result of the money flying around and scrubbing air is nothing new.   Industry may well turn to this feel good approach for removing CO2, but an oxygen rich environment is not the best environment for our plant life.  Burying trees in a sanitary landfill will effectively stop much of the decomposition- leaving the carbon trapped in the soil while the water will leach out.

Great post, Noel.As to the ar

Great post, Noel.

As to the article, it sounds like Andrew Revkin is expressing the genuine concern by environmentalists that carbon offsets do little to reduce manmade greenhouse gases.  The analogy to medieval indulgences is very good.  How does paying money help?  You still committed the sin.

That there may be no sin to begin with because human activity may be a negligible factor in global warming has not yet occurred to them.

Since Tumbler is on vacation

Since Tumbler is on vacation to France, allow me to fill in for him today by calling the indulgence quote bigoted/racist.

Ooo! And--and if you argue with me, I'll give you the obligatory "heretic" label. M'kay?

=D

. . .

Damn, I miss Tumbler. >:(

-PJ

... umm, trach, indulgences

... umm, trach, indulgences have nothing to do with race.

Sorry, I guess I'm not very g

Sorry, I guess I'm not very good at making irrational correlations here.

. . .or am I? >;)

-PJ

Sorry, but you just don't hav

Sorry, but you just don't have the flair or cohesiveness.  Tumbler does a better job of it.  I think what you are missing is the faith based belief system, you know the circular reasoning necessary to pull of the arguement.  Actually, he has gotten better of late, we must be rubbing off on him.

I hope he doesn't get his car burned on a Saturday, you know how those French youth are with all that time on their hands being unemployed.  The joys of socialism.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

In an earlier thread, I had a

In an earlier thread, I had asked how the scenario would play out if I was a popular musician and wanted to buy some offsets and how that would work.  

Still no links.  I heard about one company that offered Carbon Offsets on talk radio, but forgot the name.  Really-really curious here. I'd like to see more articles that follow the money on this.

-PJ

traech,You could just send me

traech,

You could just send me the money....or really nicely compacted chunks of carbon (diamonds).

Either way...I'll send you a beautifully caligriaphed certificate absolving you of all types of conspicuous consumption.

No prob.

really nicely compacted chunk

really nicely compacted chunks of carbon (diamonds)

Diamonds are locked up carbons.  Carbons which would otherwise be contributing to global warming.  So ... diamonds are environmentally friendly, which means collecting them is, too.

Blonde!  You're a genius!

Thanks, dahlia.I'll share my

Thanks, dahlia.

I'll share my lovely compacted carbon with all my friends here....no prob.

We'll save the world, and look terrific while we're doing it!

As Fernando says, "You l

As Fernando says, "You look marvelous!"

spell check:  rook  marbolu

spell check:  rook  marbolus

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  my litmous test for President.      BT(adapted)

lol

lol

You'd have to get on your pri

You'd have to get on your private jet and fly out to where the carbon offset store is and then do a "benefit" concert to raise the money to buy the offsets. (So you won't have to use your own hardly earned money)

This is how entertainers promote themselves while getting their fans to cover their costs.  It may not help the environment one iota, but it's great PR and it costs them nothing but a little time...which is what they have the most of anyway....

Two companies selling "carbon offsets"

Here you go:

DriveNeutral and Terra Pass are two quick buck artists. . . ummm, err, companies selling "carbon offsets".

D


A day without NewsBusters is like a day without sunshine.

See my comments if you scroll

See my comments if you scroll down. Check out  www.carbonfootprint.com .

Does this now mean they will

Does this now mean they will call Kyoto a spade too since it is based on much of the same fallacious thinking?

Good point.

Good point.

Make sure to check out the online-only companion story

There's a more detailed sidebar (Web only) deconstructing the carbon offsets market here.


Andy R.

thanks, carbon offsets seem r

thanks, carbon offsets seem rather bogus, what of the whole "consensus" thing?

What's your view of AGW, Mr.

What's your view of AGW, Mr. Revkin?

On another thread, RJ points

On another thread, RJ points out an interesting comment Al Gore made in 2006:

"Did we think Kyoto would [reduce global warming] when we signed it? . . . Hell no!"

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110009804

Now, to interpret this statement in the most advantageous way, prossibly Mr. Gore meant that all other countries would have to sign on to Kyoto for it to impact AGW.   But inasmuch as China and Russia and other greenhouse gas emitting countries are nowhere near signing Kyoto and there is no guarantee that they would even if we did, why is he still advocating this course?  And why hasn't the msm more widely circulated his statement?

 Ddid you check anrevk two p

 D

did you check anrevk two posts up for profile?

Whoa.  Thanks, botg.  Now I

Whoa.  Thanks, botg.  Now I'll check on the link he posted.

check his other link the Andy

check his other link the Andy R one it will answer your question to him.  I was trying to take small steps first there are credible scientists opposed THEN the evidence.

You lost me, botg.  Who or w

You lost me, botg.  Who or what is this roll-out of reason directed at?

you had asked Andy (above) ab

you had asked Andy (above) about AGW, i was commenting that i had asked about 'concensus' earlier. 

does it make sense D?  i wou

does it make sense D?  i would have PM'd you but you have that turned off

Yes, that makes sense, botg.

Yes, that makes sense, botg. 

Setting aside for the moment

Setting aside for the moment the question of whether temp follows CO2 or vice versa and other items, what strikes me about the case for AGW, botg, is that it is built on slivers from two enormous chunks of data.

Firstly, man's contribution to atmospheric carbon is hypothesized to be the tipping point, even though man makes by far the smallest contribution  -  0.28% (less than one third of one percent), if water vapor is taken into account, 5.53%, if not:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Secondly, while there has been climate for 550,000,000 years, we have temperature measurements for only 150.  And the fraction of a degree increase per year in temperature for part of that 150 years is pointed to as the cause for dire concern.

Look, I'm not sure which scientists to believe when it comes to some of this evidence - whether CO2 precedes or follows temp rise, for example.  The ice core sampling sounds pretty convincing - why are AGW scientists disputing it and do they have a valid basis  to do so?  But stepping back and looking at the big picture of time scale and carbon contributors makes me, yes, sceptical of the theory of AGW.

Carbon offset

If you want to measure your carbon footprint and see for yourself  that this carbon offset activity is such a scam go to www.carbonfootprint.com. There you can calculate your carbon foot print and how much you need to send to this website for your certified offset. First of all they say that you need to reduce your emissions to 2500 KG. Then you fill in the blanks in an online calculator regarding your electricity, gas for house, train trips, air flights, milage on your car etc. Then they add 5950 KG for items you can't calculate, for food, clothes, car manufacture, bldg costs, furniture, appliances, recreation, finance services and share of public services. Note with that allocation you already are above the maximum of 2500kg. Anyway, I calculated my footprint, and it came to 18,830 Kg. They then told me that I can reduce my emissions to the desired level if I send them a check for 119 pounds (approximately $240) for trees in Kenya, or 124 pounds for hydropower in Brazil or 136 pounds to improve energy efficiency in hotels in India or 134 pounds to switch fuels from fossel to agricultural waste in Kenya. They further said that I should send them a check everytime I take an airline flight.  (I can calculate the amount using their online calculator.). Someone told me that over 20,000 suckers have sent money to this British company. PT Barum was right on the money. "There is a sucker born every min."

BTW, they will personalize the offset with your name for a few pounds more. If this doesn't show you what a scam this is, I don't know what else to say.

Professor,Post of the Week.Ab

Professor,

Post of the Week.

Absolutely perfect.

THanks Blonde for your commen

THanks Blonde for your comment. You are a hell of a poster on here and I appreciate it as it is my first post. BTW I am a fellow Floridian

A double welcome, Professor,P

A double welcome, Professor,

Please, please, please tell me you are not a professor at that Garnet & Gold School!  (It's okay if you are, though, after all, my Gators wouldn't be half as much fun without such a rival).  Perhaps you're just up the road at F.A.U.?

Your post, above, was great!  I'd love to feed it to Al Gore for breakfast.

Again, welcome.

Signing off now, Tony Soprano, you know.

the prof

Prof, your post reminds me of something

Prof, your post reminds me of something I found for sale on ebay yesterday. 

It's a t-shirt that says "Will trade carbon credits for sex."  This means that instead of getting scr*wed for carbon credits, you can get scr*wed for carbon credits. 

Welcome aboard.   ;^> 

LOL...and I Second that RJ!

LOL...and I Second that RJ!

Have a great time here Prof.

It is addictive...you are forewarned.

Blonde......No way jose; i am

Blonde......No way jose; i am from that place that says "GO CANES".  Congrats for ur winning the national championship but you didn't play us and we seem to have the edge in recent years. Looking forward to another time to beat the Gaters.

Well, Professor,Next time I'm

Well, Professor,

Next time I'm in the Gables, maybe I'll stop by and say hi!

I, too, am sorry we've given up the UF/UM games.  But, with the conference play, it seems it's no longer practicable.  Alas.

So what's your subject, Prof?  I'm hoping Finance.

I am sorry to say that it is

I am sorry to say that it is Marketing...I have taught 10 different courses during my time at UM...BTW I was on the coaching staff on the football team when we beat you at the Sugar bowl and at ur place two years ago

Oh, Professor,I loved my Mark

Oh, Professor,

I loved my Marketing class.  But I majored in Finance.

So what did you think about the Larry Coker debacle?  I thought it was a travesty.  55-9 just wasn't quite enough.  That man had a great record, but you Canes are such whiners! 

 I thought I was going to die the last time I went to the O'Bowl.  98 degrees, and no ladies rooms.  Some things never change.  :-D

Gators have the title(s), so I get to gloat....well, this year.

I'd rather be in Florida than in Cal (sorry Noel!).

Professor,I believe we played

Professor,

I believe we played the Peach Bowl in Atlanta a couple of years ago...

I tend to try to forget the second tier Bowl Games.

Selective memory is a wonderful thing.

Oh, this was rich, I put Al G

Oh, this was rich, I put Al Gore's electric consumption into the carbon foot print calculator.  LMAO  Based on the 18,400 kwhrs/month consumption he produces 94 metric tons of carbon every year.  LOL  So he would have to plant at least 94 acres of trees (1 ton carbon per acre) to absorb his annual consumption!

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

The combination of the articl

The combination of the article and the cartoon rings true for me. I live down the road from a friend who happens to be an ex-sheriff of the county I live in. I saw him earlier this week and he told me a story about how he and his family, along with many others, had walked out on a preacher in the middle of last Sundays service. Their Church had allowed a visiting preacher to do the service. Everyone got mad when the visiting preacher started to combine Jesus and Global Warming in his preaching. Needless to say, he won't be invited back.

The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.

Enron was a big part of the c

Enron was a big part of the creation of the concept of "Carbon Credits"  They lobbied hard and long to get this into the Kyoto treaty, and then lobbied hard and long to get it ratified.

I would say that the fact that Enron was a part of it is probably all you need to know about carbon credits.

Move Over, Osama!

Move Over, Osama!

There’s a new kid on the block
By Mark Harris, NationalPoliticalDigest.com

It is very disappointing that even President Bush is tiptoeing over the line with his recent pronouncements about “global warming”, which by implication suggest a man made cause.
When you couple this with the recent ruling by the Supreme Court on co2 gas, the “ new
religion” is becoming more problematic for the nation and the world. With the majority
opinion written by the never surprising Justice Stevens, it suggests the intellectual bottle in which
five-ninths of this august group prefer to cork their minds. It cries for a mass resignation on their
part followed probably by forming their own little club to save disenfranchised whales.

Through the centuries, there have been countless wars. The untold deaths, destruction and
cruelty are marked in history. The assault on the civilized world by Osama bin Laden is the most notable of late. His followers and clones seem to enjoy the infliction of pain and death all in the name of Allah. Even though his victims are relatively small in number, the brutality of each event, especially on the innocent, will in time bring its comparative fury to the upper ranks of the wartime pantheon. As an aside, dear readers, this religious debauchery will last for decades to come. There might be a cure out there, but it is not anywhere in the near future. You smooth the feathers of 9/11 at
your very peril, and your children’s children.
On a different front, through the past number of years, another type of enemy has been rearing its ugly head. This enemy is cunning, lacking in conscience and determined. The titular mouthpiece has been self-anointed. I call him “Al Gorebal”. Sounds a little like Goebbels, doesn’t it? Joseph was the
Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi Third Reich before and during World War II. In his own way
Al is just as sinister. The “Gorebal Warning” spewed by him and his like minded minions is
gaining steam. Pardon the “cool” pun, but these feckless and unsubstantiated claims are beginning
to snowball.

The faithful are preaching that the earth’s temperature is rising. The fact you can’t actually measure
an average temp for today, one hundred years ago, even ten years ago, doesn’t seem to dissuade
the echo of the blind leading the blind. Leaving out the "Hockey Stick graph" separates the transmission from the engine in all of their models of false predictions. This omission leaves out a large and very important segment of the planet’s history. By the way, ever check next week’s weather prediction with reality.

Migration of roaches in Australia is blamed on global warming. Big deal! Ever tried renting an
apartment in New Orleans, say, in the last one hundred years or so? You’ll see how the little buggers
migrate. Unless, maybe Katrina drowned them out. And by the way, the storm was blamed on global
warming.

One of the most extremist “Gorebal Warnings” is that sea levels will rise dramatically. Actually, they
have been rising since the last ice age. But never mind that inconvenient fact. I wonder how many
coal-fired electric plants were operating in the year 100,000 B.C.? Probably not a great number of
suv’s either.

Polar bears are having a problem, too. It is being suggested that they be put on the “Endangered Species List”. Funny that of the 13 conglomerates of bears in Canada, 11 are absolutely thriving.
There is so much confusion and misinformation that it boggles the mind. It is time to introduce a new
word in today’s lexicon; libthink.

lib’-think: the perversion of the Constitution; the mockery of democracy; the combination of 1 part
socialism and 1 part communism; the controlling of the vast majority by a small elite through
destructive government policies; the manipulation and distortion of the truth; the using of half
truths to ensnare, gain sympathy and evoke guilt; to be a member of most of the Democrat
leadership; to lie for the sheer benefit of power without regard for what is best for the nation

David Geffen recently uttered his opinion of the Clinton’s veracity, but he fell short of the millions
around the world he should have been describing, including Al Gore. You know, “ole invent the
internet Al”. Some of you must remember his tear jerking story about his dying sister. He told it
at his and Bill’s first convention. His sister had died from lung cancer. He swore to spend the rest
of his life to work toward stopping smoking for us infidels. He “conveniently” left out the part
about his leasing land to tobacco growers at the same time. Just a slip. Then, of course, there’s that
pesky little zinc mine on the farm in Tennessee. It’s the one that lifts tons of polluting material
up into what used to be safe sky. Don’t really need to mention the fuel use in the mansion in
Nashville, do we? Oh, that’s right! He buys carbon offsets. Doesn’t matter that he owns the company
they come from. Nothing fishy here. They don’t make a shoe that will fit his “footprint”. But he’s got
a mouth that will take it; the foot, anyway. Al is certainly the flower of the environmentalists. Hey, he’s
got an Oscar! He’s nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize! Very simply put, folks, this is not a half
full nor a half empty crock. It’s just a crock!

Gore is not the only libthinker in this “new religion”. He is joined by the so-called mainstream media,
scientists who are paid by the environmentalist lobby, scientists and individual citizens who are afraid
of being called “deniers”, and of course, the libthinkers in the U.S. Congress. The last group can
hardly wait to get their staffs working on legislation ad infinitum.

“Global Warming” is but another example of the many other whore daughters of liberalism. The “War
on Poverty”, food stamps, the United Nations, the Publika Skool System (sounds a little socialistic
or maybe communistic, doesn’t it) , etc., are just others of the sisterhood. Remember, it is not the
program or institution that matters. The substance is inconsequential, so long as it takes from the haves
and distributes to the have nots, with the power lying in the hands of the libthinkers. This house of
prostitution is simply the rack on which to hang their “white priestly collars” while they blast sermons of
falsities to create fear, guilt and enslavement.

Try the, what I call, “Google Test”. You need to go surfing. Each time you hear or read one of the
latest, (they show up almost every moment), manmade “global warming” scares, Google it. See how far
down the page or pages you have to go to find anything that might contradict the proposition. We do
have one man who rates a five star on any Google Test. His name is Jim Inhofe, Senator, Republican,
Oklahoma. He sits as a giant next to Babbling Boxer on the Environmental Committee. He is to be
highly lauded for his unswerving commitment and tenacity in debunking every “global warming crock”
that comes along.

I warn conservative Republicans and the few Democrats, if you don’t join in lock step with the
aforementioned senator and battle this insipid libthink conspiracy at this stage, you will be fighting both Osama and the “antichrist of global warning” in true earnest before the Titanic runs into the melting iceberg!

Excellent writing!

Excellent writing!

"while they blast sermons of falsities to create fear, guilt and enslavement."

Inhofe is the most informed "non-scientist" in this country. His analysis of Gore et al while he was the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works was honest and intelligent. It exposed Gore et al as hoaxsters. That is as gentle a name as I can apply.

Mark, Another area that I have tried to arouse interest concerning its movement is the SPP and North America Union. It doesn't seem to stir much interest here. It scares me to death!  I see it as the next GREAT step in ending America as a true republic.

 Your thoughts????

Reply to MisterBill

First, thank you for the read.

I have an upcoming column giving my thoughts on immigration, etc. with reference to Mexico and Canada. This is, in my judgement, a problem that needs solved simultaneously with the War on Terror. I think President Bush's answer will lead to extreme porosity in our borders. I'm somewhere between Pat Buchanan and the Berlin Wall!

You have every right to be apprehensive of SPP. I think it will simply give documentation to activities that will certainly become corrupt. Consider 2/3's of the agreement. Mexico and Canada. Corruption?

Again, thanks for the read. Catch me on www.nationalpolitica...

Mark

Wow!I'm somewhere between Pat

Wow!

I'm somewhere between Pat Buchanan and the Berlin Wall!

That's kind of an interesting place, I'd imagine.

I'll keep reading what you post. 

Hey - guess what? Now when

Hey - guess what?

Now when the Democrats say they are going to "reduce CO2 emissions" - they are going to have come up with the real McCoy - regulate fuel - no games!!!

Now that this carbon-neutral thing has been "exposed" as a "fraud" - they can't play shell games any more

Mr Gore? Are you listening Mr Gore? They're saying this carbon neutral gig is a fraud! Fraud! Can you imagine that Mr Gore? Can you imagine anyone calling your "lifestyle" a FRAUD???

Now, I hope you don't take all this too personally, and assume they are calling YOU a fraud. No. They won't do that to you.

They're too kind and soft. They like you

Yes, but it's all a little aw

Yes, but it's all a little awkward now.  At cocktail parties and AGW events?  Oh dear ...

Now, before we get all hyster

Now, before we get all hysterical about this, and jump to all sorts of conclusions, let's consider the source of this so-called "information". 

These "allegations" are coming from the far-far right media, the ones who have been calling Mr Gore, and every Democrat since Adlai Stevenson a "communist" and "traitor" - the same ones who see the John Birch Society as pink as Labor Unions.  I thought these people left the country, like they said they would, when Clinton was elected. 

So when this exposed as nothing more than a political gimmick designed to take Hillary down by association, everything will calm down, and we'll go back to the lifestyle that we should be living