So I told myself I was not going to do this...

Seeing as how I absolutely love it when all the liberal media elite get together and spend tons of money on themselves (while preaching to us that they are "for the common people"), I really did not want to acknowledge this topic. BUT...the more I sat back and thought about it, the more this one intrigued me....particularly as Al Gorleone was almost our 43rd El Presidente. Now, let me preface this by saying that this is not just another dumb right wing attack. I will willingly point out that there are many huge polluters on the right side of the isle as well (i.e., The Terminator and the Great White hunter)...but at the end of the day you have to ask yourself, who is this man --> The great conservationist or the great hypocrite? Here is the excerpts from the article I saw:

POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD; CONSUMPTION INCREASE AFTER 'TRUTH'

---

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

---

Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

---

---

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

Since I am now expecting a full court press from Mr. Farr (he likes to keep my right lean in check)...I will post the Gore camp response:

1) Gore’s family has taken numerous steps to reduce the carbon footprint of their private residence, including signing up for 100 percent green power through Green Power Switch, installing solar panels, and using compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy saving technology.

2) Gore has had a consistent position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint.

So there you have it...both sides of the story.

In the end, it can be clearly observed that Mr. Gorleone is attempting to reduce his carbon footprint via buying things. I find this interesting. I thought the challenge set forth by his "brilliant film" (a.k.a., An Inconvenient Truth) was for everyone to look for ways to reduce their carbon footprint. Now when I look at this, I am not sure that is what he is actually doing. It seems to me like he is using a LOT of energy and then buying his way out (keep in mind that he still uses 20x the national average AFTER the actions above are factored in!!). Not everyone can afford to do this and would have to do it the old fashioned way...by actually impacting the way they live (i.e., actually using less energy vs. buying solar panels to offset consumption).

So I guess in the end analysis, I would label this "mildly hypocritical". I credit him for taking the above actions to reduce his net-net footprint. But in the end, he is not actually modifying his lifestyle to achieve a minimum footprint as the rest of us less fortunate souls are being asked to do....an inconvenient reality.