Tag Archives: Al Gore

Carbon offsetting

British Airways gave us the option of paying extra for carbon credits to make up for our air travel. We didn’t take them up on the offer.

There are a number of reasons why I feel carbon offsetting is a bad thing. The first is that by removing the guilt, it encourages people to continue a profligate lifestyle, rather than actually changing their behavior.

For example, if Al Gore genuinely gave a crap about the environment, he would stop flying by private jet so much. But no, he’s rich and can simply buy carbon credits to salve his conscience. Similarly, John Edwards will happily lecture to ordinary people that they should give up their SUVs, then get into his own SUV secure in the knowledge that he’s bought carbon credits to make up for his own indulgence.

(In fact, Edwards owns 3 SUVs — a Ford Escape, a Cadillac SRX, and a Chrysler Pacifica — plus a pickup.)

The second reason why I dislike carbon credits is that there are much more effective ways to reduce emissions. For instance, if British Airways really cared, they would stop painting their aircraft. A fully painted 747 weighs 443kg extra, compared to around 100kg for me plus my luggage. That’s before you factor in the increased wind resistance from cracked and peeling paint, the chemicals needed for stripping and repainting aircraft, and the disposal problem of the dissolved paint and chemicals. [Update: BA could also stop flying empty planes across the Atlantic.]

The third reason why carbon credits are a dubious idea is pointed out by spiked online. When you buy carbon credits for your flight from Climate Care, what you’re actually doing is paying a bunch of Indian families to dig in the dirt via back-breaking manual labor, and pump water manually, rather than using modern farm equipment. Now, it might not be a bad idea if I personally spent some time stomping on pedals to pump water, but I don’t see why Indians should be bribed to do it so I can feel less guilty about air travel.

But my favorite argument against carbon credits is the parody site cheatneutral. If the logic behind carbon credits is really valid, why not buy some infidelity credits and cheat on your partner with a clean conscience?

Kerry’s popularity

Guardian today:

A new poll suggested yesterday that Ralph Nader’s independent presidential bid represented a serious threat to the Democratic candidate, Senator John Kerry.

The New York Times and CBS News poll revealed a tight two-man race for the White House between President George Bush and Mr Kerry. Mr Bush had a narrow lead of 46% over Mr Kerry’s 43% — within the poll’s margin of error.

But when Americans were asked about a three-man race including Mr Nader, the 70-year-old consumer activist attracted 7% support, mostly at the expense of the Democrat. In that contest, Mr Bush led Mr Kerry by 46% to 38%.

Mr Nader’s poll ratings are higher than at this point in the 2000 election. […]

Yesterday’s New York Times/CBS poll made bleak reading for the senator for Massachusetts for other reasons. […] Fifty-seven per cent said “most of the time he says what he thinks people want to hear”, while only a third thought he stayed true to his beliefs.

So there we have it. The fact that Kerry is a lying two-faced weasel is so painfully obvious that the voters have already worked it out, and he’s doing even worse than Al Gore. He’s so awful that people would rather vote for Ralph Nader’s pointless ego-trip than support Kerry. The Democrats have chosen self-destruction once again; get ready for four more years of Bush.

Ask not for whom the bone bones, it bones for thee

Well, the disaster is playing out as my black, pessimistic heart knew it would. Kerry the two-faced weasel has won a bunch more primaries, and Dean has yet to win any.

Why is this bad? Because I’m convinced Kerry is less electable than Al Gore. The problem is, Kerry picks up the votes of the DLC faithful, the ones who believe that the path to success is massive quantities of special interest money, preaching liberal values, and voting for whatever the opinion polls tell you to vote for. According to the exit polls, most of the people voting for Dean are first-time voters, or people previously so disgusted by the Democrats that they didn’t bother to vote.

So if Dean were picked, the DLC faithful would vote for him (because they’ll vote for anyone who has the word “Democrat” written next to his name), and he’d also get a chunk of votes from the disgusted majority of the population. If Kerry is picked, yeah, he’ll get the DLC faithful’s vote… but what chance do you think he has of getting any votes from the disgusted majority?

Kerry has had years in the Senate in a totally safe Massachusetts seat (75% majority). What better opportunity to vote with his conscience and try to make a difference? So we look at his actual voting record, and it shows a Clinton/Gore-like disconnect between what he says and what he does:

  • He criticized Ashcroft and the “PATRIOT” act—which he voted for.

  • He spoke out against the Iraq war—but voted for it. He now claims he wasn’t voting for what the act says.

  • He spoke out in favor of making it easier for immigrants to become citizens—but voted for the infamous 1996 Immigration Act.

  • He says he’s against the death penalty—but twice voted to expand it (1994 and 1995).

  • He says that NAFTA is a problem that needs fixing it—but he voted for NAFTA, he voted for GATT, and he voted to permanently give China “Most Favored Nation” status.

  • After 9/11 he complained about the CIA being underfunded—but he campaigned to cut its funding in 1997.

  • He criticizes the Bush education bill—which he voted for.

  • He votes for and against increasing spending on Medicare.

Don’t think I’m the only person to have noticed this either. The right-wing bloggers are already all over Kerry’s lying past, and you can be sure FOX News and the other media mouthpieces of the Republican Party will pick it up if he’s chosen.

Of course, Clinton too would shamelessly U-turn whenever the opinion polls told him the other position might be more popular. But Clinton had charisma, something Kerry definitely lacks.

To get back to actual policy, though, Kerry is “liberal” in all the wrong places. He votes in a liberal way on economic issues including the environment, and is conservative on issues like war and surveillance. In contrast, Dean is an economic conservative and liberal on social issues. The problem is, America doesn’t give a shit about the environment, and hates liberal welfare programs; and everyone left of Bush was against the war.

Kerry voted for the “Communications Decency Act” and Internet censorship. He voted for pumping tax money into churches. He voted for mandatory national ID cards. He voted for wiretapping with no court order required. He voted for the DMCA. He’s an unpalatable choice for everyone except the DLC sheep. If he’s picked, I predict we’ll get four more years of Bush.

That said, I’ve decided that if Kerry is the next Democratic candidate, I’m just going to do my best to observe a self-imposed silence on the whole election. Because after all, no matter how much he sucks, he can’t be any worse than Bush. But it’s gonna be really hard not to scream liar, liar, pants on fire…

I have some more general theory which explains why Kerry is popular, but it’ll have to wait, I really have to work now…