I am halfway through reading Al Gore's recent book, The Assault on Reason, and you know what? It may well make a flag-wavin' American out of me yet. I'm glad to see someone with money and some degree of power and influence who thinks there is something fundamentally wrong with things, but that our society can be saved, and, in fact, is worthy of more than continuing to live in Backwards Land.
But besides making me feel smarmy and hopeful, he really lays out the egregious ass-fucking we've been receiving since, oh, January of 2001. That was the first presidential election I could vote in, and I was so, so excited to be involved. Then, when Bush became president, I adopted a "duck-and-cover" mentality when it came to news--I was like the paranoid depressive who knows everything is so bad, you might as well not leave the house so you can avoid seeing the specific ways in which everything is screwed up, and instead pulls the curtains and sits on the couch, clutching her knees and rocking back and forth under a ratty afghan. So I missed an awful lot of the Bush Legacy, apparently. The McCain Amendment, anyone? The fact that there are more than 100 prisoners at Gitmo that we actually tell people we don't want going free, but we have no intention of ever charging with a crime? I think I'm gearing up here for an extra-fancy blog post, complete with all sorts of hyperlinks and stuff, but I'm not going there right this second.
4 comments:
I'm not an Al Gore fan, never been one really, mostly because of his environmental stance. Not that what he says is wrong so much, but he tells "the rest of us" to limit our use and conserve, smaller houses etc. while he lives in a 7 bathroom, uber-consuming one?
I just read an article about conservation and green living that was not particularly kind to him. I was thinking about a similar post... but with a slightly different slant on our conservation super hero.
This happens a lot... and I am often left wondering, should I post or not...
I intended to do it before someone else (in this case you) put theirs up. Does the right to blog go to the first to broach the subject rendering all subsequent posts on the topic as nothing more than snarky rebuttals? What does blog etiquette demand here?
I really hope you are getting the somewhat tongue and cheek tone of all this. I don't want to sound mean. And that's kind of the crux really. I so often have a different opinion than the others posting in our little community, and sometimes when I post it after someone else has posted theirs, I worry that they might think I am attacking their views or purposefully being difficult.
I would like to see your extra-fancy post and all the links.
The book isn't about environmentalism Elaine. And my guess is that the article you read was not entirely without slant. I don't recall him "telling" anyone to move into a smaller house, for example. Just because he doesn't live as green as some people, doesn't in any way negate what he says. Your dislike of him is an ad hominem argument. A person's choice of living doesn't necessarily reflet the logic of their positions. I mean, GW's ranch in Crawford is one of the greenest human dwellings on the planet; it doesn't mean he knows or gives a shit about the environment.
I suggest you read the book Erin's referring to. It is very enlightening; despite the controversy some feel about the author, the logic is impeccable.
No you're right, living style does not necessarily reflect the logic of what is said. I just find it hard to take him seriously with regard to the environment. I'd rather listen to someone with enough conviction to live what they claim is of such vital importance for everyone else to do.
I know the book Erin recommended is not about the environment. I just find the man to be irksome, in the same way many people find a lot Christians bothersome when they tell everyone else about moral behavior while their own is questionable. And yes, I know, we are ALL of us hypocrites to some degree. Some are just more annoying than others.
I may read the book. I am certain the book has many insights, just like his points about the environment. I only hesitate because I don't want to get all stirred up mad, again, about the current state of affairs. Hopefully, it will all be over in six months. Well, everything but the decades of clean up it will take to fix this mess.
I never have enough time to read all the books I want to read or should read.
Besides, I was really kind of waiting for Erin's fancy post with all the links and commentary...
Post a Comment