![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(faceplanty)
Oct. 13th, 2007 12:37 pmOkay, fine. I know there are a lot of people out there on both sides of the "Global Warming" debate. And some of those are less than happy about Al Gore sharing the Nobel Peace Prize. (And honestly, there were a couple better choices)
But can't people come up with more to attack Gore about than that utterly discredited lies that he claimed to have invented the internet, or that he wrote that Christians are a "blight on the enviroment"? I swear, the second I see those old chestnuts, I discount anything else that person has to say - because it's obvious that the person in question hasn't take any time or effort to get their facts right.
The thing about Gore's house, I'll give partial credit towards - as long as the person also acknowledges that the house is also used as business offices, and that the family has been retrofitting the house for a "greener" footprint. (Bush's ranch does have a smaller footprint, due it being a smaller building and was designed around the need to save water and power in that portion of Texas.)
It's like when someone trots out the lies about the Clintons trashing the White House or Air Force One, or stealing furniture. Those were all proven not to be true BY the US Government and the GAO. All that the people who keep spouting those lies end up doing is undercutting their position.
There's enough to hate politicians, on either side of an issue, without resorting to old lies.
But can't people come up with more to attack Gore about than that utterly discredited lies that he claimed to have invented the internet, or that he wrote that Christians are a "blight on the enviroment"? I swear, the second I see those old chestnuts, I discount anything else that person has to say - because it's obvious that the person in question hasn't take any time or effort to get their facts right.
The thing about Gore's house, I'll give partial credit towards - as long as the person also acknowledges that the house is also used as business offices, and that the family has been retrofitting the house for a "greener" footprint. (Bush's ranch does have a smaller footprint, due it being a smaller building and was designed around the need to save water and power in that portion of Texas.)
It's like when someone trots out the lies about the Clintons trashing the White House or Air Force One, or stealing furniture. Those were all proven not to be true BY the US Government and the GAO. All that the people who keep spouting those lies end up doing is undercutting their position.
There's enough to hate politicians, on either side of an issue, without resorting to old lies.
