No, it is improper corporate interference in journalism
19% (810 votes)
No, it is an improper political statement
12% (528 votes)
Both of the above
63% (2708 votes)
Yes, there is nothing wrong with helping the environment
4% (178 votes)
Other (leave comment)
2% (105 votes)
Total votes: 4329
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I voted "other": It's
November 19, 2008 - 12:36 ET by lnthompI voted "other": It's just plain silly.
This too shall pass.
Lee T. USN(ret)
Going Green is not silly, it is Bullshit
November 19, 2008 - 20:58 ET by PopularTechBullshit! - Being Green (Google Video) (29min)
Censored Global Warming Videos
Going Green is not silly, it is Hard
November 19, 2008 - 23:34 ET byHard! - Being Green
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
You may consider it silly, or insignificant
November 19, 2008 - 12:46 ET by MearlinePersonally i think its significance lies in the test. If it's accepted willing by the public, it will mean the beginning of more 'programs' like this....maybe even a one world religion. laugh if you want. Nothing is impossible any longer.
It's clearly advocacy.
November 19, 2008 - 12:46 ET by superconIt is no different than if Fox News promoted Traditional Marriage week or Right to Life week.I said it before.The MSM is dead as a source of journalism. All they are now are just advocacy groups that use their t.v. networks as a political platform to shape our views.They wrap their opinions in a newsy cloak but it is nothing more than blatant advocacy.This past election is a harbinger of things to come.They don't report the news as much as they try to shape it in their own opinion.
Significantly different, in my opinion
November 19, 2008 - 13:05 ET by MearlineBecause it's obvious that there is no distinction between Obama, democrats, left wing whackos and the whacko media. And they are clearly agreeable to being used by the hallowed ones.
Hey... don't forget...
November 19, 2008 - 13:32 ET by AJBThey take polls with slanted questions and then report the results of their slanted polls as 'news'. Takes a lot of work, that.
hypocrites
November 19, 2008 - 12:53 ET by jiminjerseyWasn't NBC's outdoor set at the Beijing Olympics air conditioned?
It's a useful indicator in
November 19, 2008 - 12:55 ET by HockeyKidIt's a useful indicator in evaluating NBC as a reliable news source. Watch out, Katie--the peacock's looking to keep you company!
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Stupid is as stupid does.
November 19, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Dan The Man 2Stupid is as stupid does. The talking heads probably couldnt explain why they believe if they do anything about AGW. The meme is that humans are bad for the earth and we should eleiminate them
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Just exactly, how large was the "Carbon footprint"
November 19, 2008 - 13:27 ET by FastEdof all the staff being flown around the world, so that we can hear that we must make sacrifices to save the earth?? How much extra fuel was used to lift those "celb" rear ends off the ground? Couldn't they just save the earth in some other way??
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
A (possibly not so) small
November 19, 2008 - 13:33 ET by katainkentA (possibly not so) small eco-rant...
This movement/agenda is already very heavy duty in the schools here in Wa State. All my children required thorough re-education and basically a calming down! When my oldest was 12 or so she came home in tears believing that we were all going to be under water in a few years if we didn't stop driving and start recycling.
I find it almost akin to teaching a Public religion. You're going to a watery hell if'n ya don't change your ways!
Point is - we already recycled, car pooled, had 100% CFLs, mulch our grass & composted our gardens.
But here in the Green State recycling & yard waste are 1 price no matter what the amount. Trash is extra so we have a tiny little can. All our other 'green' choices reduce the money we spend. Even the nickle per reusable grocery sack credit we get makes sense -especially since they decided to toss on this incredibly lame plastic bag tax here in my county.
So, of course I am curious what NBC sells with their Green Campaign. Nearly all of their tips are things everyone has heard since near-birth. Short showers & turn off the lights when you leave the room.
Other tips?
etc etc. organic = EXPENSIVE!
until these things become affordable to those of us who shop the off-brands and clip coupons the rest of this 're-education' campaign is simply, in a word, stupid. So who is this all directed to? It seems like nothing more than a bunch of elite movie and media people trying to sell a lifestyle the common folk can only feel (guilty? empty? uncool?) about.
I wont even start with the idea that it seems inappropriate for a network to be Agendizing the eco-faith. How many carbon credits is this campaign costing us?
/rant off
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
Your commment has been noted
November 19, 2008 - 13:38 ET by Dan The Man 2Your commment has been noted and categorized and will be sent to the OTS (Obama Truth Squad) for processing. Comrade we know who you are and will make every effort to educate you in the truth. Hiel Obama! Sieg Hiel
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
The Obama "truth machine"
November 19, 2008 - 13:49 ET by semolina_filcherThe Obama "truth machine" will process said comments into a database for further analysis. The National Security Force will go into full "search and arrest" mode soon...bwa hahaha!
there is a reason for this
November 19, 2008 - 13:57 ET by katainkentthere is a reason for this tagline :)
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
Have You Seen The Price Of Aragula?
November 20, 2008 - 14:00 ET by BigSpoon65Obamunism = Communism with a twist, if you don't agree with the government running everything you must be racist.
Winston Churchill ~ "Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy."
"buy organic wine, beer"
November 19, 2008 - 13:47 ET by danboGotta point out. All beer and wine is organic.
Alcohol is produced by an organic entity called yeast. Which consumes sugars. The yeast then converts the sugars to two substances. Alcohol and CO2.
Have the states of Wasghington, Oregon and California demanded that they stop making wine. That evil wine and beer is destroying the environment.
As I know AGW is BS. Please feel free to send me your beer and wine. I'll dispose of this environment killing toxin.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
LOL.. well we don't drink
November 19, 2008 - 13:57 ET by katainkentLOL.. well we don't drink so I am afraid we have already made the green choice here by default.
sorry to dissapoint!
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
Cotton Rules!
November 19, 2008 - 14:29 ET by CobraMan"shop for clothes made with renewable or recycled fiber"
I call that Cotton, and I've been wearing cotton fiber clothing all of my life. Who knew that, for over the last 47 years, I've been so Green?
BTW, what happens to recycled cotton? Answer: A lot of it gets made in money, literally! 30 percent of the cotton fibers used in the production of currency "paper" comes from recycled cotton. So, recycle your clothing and you'll REALLY make money.
Obama: My job is above my pay grade
Don't waste your time recycling either
November 19, 2008 - 21:01 ET by PopularTechBullshit! - Recycling (Google Video) (29min)
Recycling is Garbage (The New York Times)
If you want to protect the environment, just don't litter.
Censored Global Warming Videos
Is NBC not a commercial
November 19, 2008 - 13:43 ET by CWellsIs NBC not a commercial enterprise? Other than the fact that they are placing much of these items in 'news' programs (which probably does confuse some viewers into thinking they're actual news items) should they not be free to be as stupid as possible? And given the loss of audience the networks are experiencing, I hope they keep it up!!
Let's not impose a reverse 'fairness doctrine' on these idiots. They're doing a great job shooting their own feet off!!
CJW
Does that mean we can't
November 19, 2008 - 14:09 ET by Ruths husband BenDoes that mean we can't have an opinion? I don't think NB was proposing legislation, just participation in a poll.
I voted OTHER...
November 19, 2008 - 14:09 ET by VT Con ManChoices have consequences...
NBC Green
November 19, 2008 - 14:22 ET by merlin61Think of all the energy saved by changing the
channel or shutting off the tv when they rant
and rave about being green. We could save
millions by not needing them to tell us how
to live. Wouldn't that be great?
Yeah Merlin
November 19, 2008 - 14:33 ET by VT Con ManThose consequences!!!
NBC is owned by General
November 19, 2008 - 14:32 ET by semolina_filcherNBC is owned by General Electric. If NBC wants to go universal green, it needs to be careful from the hand that feeds it. Hypocrites!
Orbis non Suffici
save the planet by turning off the TV
November 19, 2008 - 14:44 ET by jackie3I can't agree more! The amount of money, energy and time wasted on TV is mind boggling. The main stream news is nothing more than cheerleaders for Obama now. They have not reported the conflicting reports on GW. Just predictions of doom and gloom if we don't buy the expensive recycled and organic products.
Grandma and Grandpa knew how to recycle. Use old glass jars instead of tossing them. Grew their own food. Victory gardens anyone? All "organic" btw. If you want to know how to recycle look back to the past.
Grandma and Grandpa didn't have garbage disposal curb side pick up. They took care of their own garbage. They reused packaging products. Took tin and metals to the scrap yard for money. Actually sewed their own clothes. Repaired their shoes instead of buying more cheap crap from wal-mart. Had nice things. Had better public transportation with trolley cars and trains. No TV's just a radio. Used old newspapers around the house. Had compost piles for gardens. They were very good at recycling. And saving money in the process.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
look..i am not a
November 19, 2008 - 18:07 ET by patmac49look..i am not a scientist...i do not know actually how bad this pollution is...but i drive up the jersey turnpike everyday to my job in nyc and i know damn well that it is not very good for us to breathe that air especially when you hit the carteret area...it is a shame that both sides have hijacked it as a political football,when it can only make our life better if we could do something about it..only i don t have the answers that i wish i did
Air Pollution has nothing to do with Global Warming
November 19, 2008 - 21:21 ET by PopularTechCarbon Dioxide (CO2) is not the problem you are talking about and has absolutely NOTHING to do with pollution or smog.
This is much worse then I thought if so many people are completely clueless like this.
Censored Global Warming Videos
PT, patmac49 is a
November 19, 2008 - 23:26 ET by Dan The Man 2PT, patmac49 is a troll
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
look..i am not a
November 19, 2008 - 18:07 ET by patmac49look..i am not a scientist...i do not know actually how bad this pollution is...but i drive up the jersey turnpike everyday to my job in nyc and i know damn well that it is not very good for us to breathe that air especially when you hit the carteret area...it is a shame that both sides have hijacked it as a political football,when it can only make our life better if we could do something about it..only i don t have the answers that i wish i did
Would you like a crap sandwich instead!?
November 19, 2008 - 18:20 ET by CrashCome on folks get real. Even though the left is dead wrong on AGW there is nothing wrong with wanting a clean and green environment. I certainly don't want a return of the smog I grew up with during the 1960's & 1970's.
yes..i am not sure about
November 19, 2008 - 18:33 ET by patmac49yes..i am not sure about global warming...i am thinking it is not quite the threat some people say it is...but as i said,drive up the jersey turnpike between exit 11 and 14 and you cannot tell me that that is not quite harmful for us to breathe in..actually makes one of my car pool buddies sick to his stomache
What are you breathing in?
November 19, 2008 - 21:18 ET by PopularTechThe pollution you speak of is NOT CO2.
Censored Global Warming Videos
Global Warming has NOTHING to do with Pollution!
November 19, 2008 - 21:17 ET by PopularTechI have no idea why people cannot understand this?
"CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? - it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality." - Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science, MIT
"Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but a naturally occurring, beneficial trace gas in the atmosphere. For the past few million years, the Earth has existed in a state of relative carbon dioxide starvation compared with earlier periods. There is no empirical evidence that levels double or even triple those of today will be harmful, climatically or otherwise. As a vital element in plant photosynthesis, carbon dioxide is the basis of the planetary food chain - literally the staff of life. Its increase in the atmosphere leads mainly to the greening of the planet. To label carbon dioxide a "pollutant" is an abuse of language, logic and science." - Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Palaeontology
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is a natural part of Earth's Atmosphere (NASA)
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen from 0.028% to 0.038% (380ppm) over the past 100 years (IPCC)
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not toxic until 5% (50,000ppm) concentration (Source)
- Any detrimental effects of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) including chronic exposure to 3% (30,000ppm) are reversible (Source)
- OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% (5,000 ppm) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) (Source)
The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty to regulate 'Greenhouse Gases' only:
- Carbon dioxide (CO2)
- Methane (CH4)
- Nitrous oxide (N2O) (Laughing Gas, Nitrous, NOS)
- Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
- Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
- Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
Car Exhaust consists of:
Harmless:
- Carbon dioxide (CO2)
- Nitrogen (N2)
- Water vapor (H2O)
Some Pollutants:
- Carbon monoxide (CO) *
- Hydrocarbons or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) *
- Nitric oxide (NO) *
- Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) *
- Particulate matter (PM-10) *
- Sulfur dioxide (SO2) *
* Your car's Catalytic Converter removes about 95% of these pollutants by converting them to Water and Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Smog consists of:
- Ozone (O3) * (formed from the photochemical reaction of Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) + Hydrocarbons)
- Particulate matter (PM-10) *
- Sulfur dioxide (SO2) *
* Air Pollution is already regulated in the: 1970 Clean Air Act (Amended: 1977, 1990)
Air Quality in America (PDF) (AEI)
- The United States has sharply reduced air pollution levels, despite large increases in nominally "polluting" activities (Source)
- Areas in the United States with the highest pollution levels have improved the most (Source)
- Air quality in the United States will continue to improve (Source)
- Regulators and environmental activists exaggerate air pollution levels and obscure positive trends in the United States (Source)
- Air pollution affects far fewer people, far less often, and with far less severity than is commonly believed. (Source)
So please explain what any of this has to do with returning to the days before the catalytic converter? Did some law get passed wanting to do away with them? Please explain.
Censored Global Warming Videos
"Global Warming has NOTHING
November 19, 2008 - 21:27 ET by Crash"Global Warming has NOTHING to do with Pollution!"
No shit Sherlock. The AGW crowd blames "greenhouse gasses", CO2 just happens to be their poster child. Of course they don't understand how convection really works. If the earth was like an oven with a closed door, we'd be on fire. Thank YHWH for ozone holes.
The fact of the matter is, real conservatives believe in conservation and protection of natural lands. It's good to be a greenie ... not a weenie.
So why are you spreading "green" propaganda statements?
November 19, 2008 - 21:30 ET by PopularTechNBC's green is universal campaign is to push the Man-Made Global Warming agenda, which is to regulate CO2. You come back with some propaganda statement regarding going back to smog from the 70s.
Are they planning to repeal the U.S. Clean Air laws? Are they planning to do away with catalytic converters? If not then please don't spread this propaganda.
I am so happy you bought into the "real conservative" BS as if anyone wants more pollution. Being "green" is mentally insane.
Bullshit! - Being Green (Google Video) (29min)
Censored Global Warming Videos
I own that season of BS.
November 19, 2008 - 22:19 ET by CrashI own that season of BS. If you want to lump me in with militants and radicals be my guest; though, I'm nothing of the sort.
Initially the EPA was a great idea as signed off on by President Nixon. However, the EPA has been pirated by dunces, as has the word "green", conservationist and (apparently) conservative.
Perhaps I miss the hidden message in NBC's pimping the green strategy. I thought that they were just trying to sell expensive light bulbs, with 5% mercury and various proprietary patented products in an attempt to make a buck. Hey, it happened with freon.
BTW, I can't think of one show I've watched on NBC and if they're still peddling AGW snake oil they missed their mark. On the plus side, less kids are watching television these days.
Clean Air vs. Global Warming
November 19, 2008 - 22:21 ET by PopularTechWith Obama set to destroy the U.S. economy we cannot have people confused that clean air has anything to do with global warming. They have nothing to do with each other. The current eco-hype has to do with buying overpriced eco-crap, expensive organic food and feeling guilty for being part of a capitalistic country. But it really comes down to reducing CO2 to "save the planet" either through reduced energy usage or mandated government regulation.
I am positive GE is trying to make a buck but all the NBC talking heads REALLY believe they are "saving the planet".
When you say you don't want to go back to the 70s, I find that absurd because no one does and that has nothing to do with the current green propaganda being spread by NBC.Which is going to lead to this...
Obama to Declare Carbon Dioxide Dangerous Pollutant (Bloomberg)
How far are we from this?
Big Brother to control thermostats in homes? (WorldNetDaily)
Censored Global Warming Videos
Libs never got past the
November 19, 2008 - 23:21 ET by danboLibs never got past the 60's and 70's.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
Oh, because everyone else
November 19, 2008 - 22:42 ET by fitzfongOh, because everyone else wants a smog and pollution-filled environment, right? Grow up and quit being a drone! We all want to live in a healthy environment...it's just that some of us put more trust in the free marketplace to provide for this demand. I don't want a bunch of Marxist parasites using the "environment" as the vehicle to slam their brand of failure down our throats...but that's what this "Green is Universal" campaign is all about. If you're dumb enough to allow your stated desire for a clean environment to cause you to accept being led around by a bunch of socialists, that's your problem. Don't make it mine.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
How is the free market going
November 19, 2008 - 22:55 ET by balboaHow is the free market going to create this?
Don't know yet, bal.
November 19, 2008 - 23:12 ET by R D HelmBut however the free market does it, I can promise you that it will be 100 times more efficient and 1000 times less expensive than whatever "solution" the incompetent government boobs come up with.
-Dave
Did this country just elect Obama/Biden, or was it Soros/Ayers?
Probably, but it doesn't
November 19, 2008 - 23:46 ET by balboaProbably, but it doesn't hurt at all for NBC to highlight living green.
It does if GE is seeking a
November 20, 2008 - 00:08 ET by fitzfongIt does if GE is seeking a government handout...which it is...and the quid pro quo is the hyping of a phony political issue so they can sell you a bunch of mercury-laden lightbulbs that you don't need. That's a Ponzi Scheme.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
Living "Green" is Bullshit.
November 20, 2008 - 01:01 ET by PopularTechSo yes it does hurt for them to highlight it. All the pillars of living "green" are Bullshit.
Bullshit! - Being Green (Google Video) (29min)
Bullshit! - Recycling (Google Video) (29min)
Censored Global Warming Videos
balboa...
November 19, 2008 - 23:45 ET by MightyMouth...the free market (left alone) always prevails. Problems arise when gooberment tries to "level" the playing field. First off, the gooberment never has the best interest of the public in mind, they seek only re-election. You see it's a power struggle. I make the laws and appoint judges with my mind set. Screw you conservative Aholes. But I digress,you are probably one of those clear minded liberals who voted for the Messiah on his merits, right?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
How is the free market
November 19, 2008 - 23:46 ET by Dan The Man 2How is the free market going to create this? - The free market acts on a profit motive. So if there is a profit in it there will be some schmoe looking to make a buck at it. Look at the automobile, around 1900 it was an oddity and teh horse and buggy were more practical. then the cars got better and cheaper and the horse went away.
Now hen gas was 4+ dolalrs a gallon Boone Picken hatched a scheme to make renewable energy and save teh enviroment. He was free market. It will not happen overnight no matter how we do it; but if it is profitable then it will happen.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Duh! Need creates
November 20, 2008 - 00:13 ET by fitzfongDuh! Need creates demand. Demand creates opportunity. Met demand creates profit. A self-interested entity will see that there is a need and will set out to meet that demand. If the demand is met, said entity will realize a profit.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
But doesn't NBC highlighting
November 20, 2008 - 00:53 ET by balboaBut doesn't NBC highlighting "green living" help create a need?
No. Either the need
November 20, 2008 - 00:59 ET by fitzfongNo. Either the need exists or it doesn't. No amount of hype will create a need. The "Green is Universal" campaign creates the impression that there's a need.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
Not sure I believe that. But
November 20, 2008 - 01:02 ET by balboaNot sure I believe that. But I do agree that a campaign such as this creates the impression that there's a need. Which is the only way to explain why anyone buys Crocs shoes, because no one can tell me that people were dying for ugly rubber shoes.
Ah, therin lies the
November 20, 2008 - 01:38 ET by fitzfongAh, therin lies the difference...no one needs a pair of Crocs. They may need a pair of shoes. However, Crocs have appealed to a desire over and above the need for a pair of shoes. That's where competition enters the equation.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
boa... ....a need for
November 20, 2008 - 01:05 ET by bigtimerboa...
....a need for WHAT?
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
For green products. People
November 20, 2008 - 12:39 ET by balboaFor green products. People see them highlighted on NBC, think "I'd like to do something to help keep the environment clean," and then they seek out those products.
Free Market Enviromentalism
November 20, 2008 - 00:49 ET by PopularTech"Government is best which governs least" - Henry David Thoreau
A Free-Market Environmental Vision (Cato Institute)
Free-Market Environmentalism (Richard L. Stroup, Ph.D. Economics)
FAQs about Free-Market Environmentalism (The Thoreau Institute)
Papers:
Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution (PDF) (Murray N. Rothbard, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Economics)
Organizations:
Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment (FREE)
Property and Environment Research Center (PERC)
The Thoreau Institute
Censored Global Warming Videos
Enjoy.
November 19, 2008 - 19:47 ET by danboI found this over at www.climate-skeptic.com and thought you might enjoy it.
There are some familiar faces and names there.
It' almost as good as the trash test.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
General Electric
November 19, 2008 - 21:10 ET by brerolNBC is owned ny GE. GE has invested tremendous amount of $$ in alternative energy. Does this answer the question why NBC has devoted so much air time to the "the sky is falling due to global warming" question?
I voted Other, as I am beyond caring what NBC does.
November 19, 2008 - 22:18 ET by R D Helm-Dave
Did this country just elect Obama/Biden, or was it Soros/Ayers?
I don't particularly like
November 20, 2008 - 07:14 ET by BlindSightI don't particularly like it, but it's a free market; they get to choose how to brand themselves.
Some of it is obviously shallow, but if it pulls in advertisers and and viewers, it will, in a business sense, be a success.