Thank you Al Gore for doing what's right instead of what's easy. Thank you for helping, with this message, to defeat this Prop. Blessings to you and your family.
Get some real Balls America Tell China Saudi and others no. We can do this for the unemployed say no more cash. Also talk is cheap.Get our jobs moving now not next year. Help me help us with some many Alternative Jobs.Congress may have just got voted in but they could lose there jobs as easy as they take away money to feed our Children. Tax Wealthy they when they were in Power have and probaly won't do nothing. Take food away from Americans Tax them 42%
Everybody google "chinese rare earth metals for windmills", and you will find out exactly what china has to gain from the green scam. If we push for hybrid cars, more turbines, e.t.c, then china has already got the western world by the balls, and your energy dependency will rely on china if you phase out gas, coal, and oil now.
The fraud this SOB has perpetrated on this country is absolutely incredible. He is a hypocrite, and has stuffed his pockets with cash as he flies around the world in his private jet or lounges at his massive estate. His pathetic "Chicken Little" act is so old. Hot summers, cold winters, floods and earthquakes have been around since the beginning of time. The arrogance of suggesting man creates these things...
Love the comments on this video. It gives me hope that we can eventually expose this charlatan and indeed, turn back the clock to a time when people has some sense.
The only people writing in favor of Gore here are probably either (1) Gore himself, or (2) the people Gore has invested with at Kleiner Perkins. Nothing would make me happier than to see them lose money on this selfish, repulsive fraud.
@neeblert How about neither on subsidies, because Oil companies don't pay royalties to the province and/or state they operate in, and can do without. On the wind farm side, the UK has heavily subsidized wind farms, and all it did was create a huge, expensive mess over there by placing wind turbines like drunk chimps. And you support those oil spilling, mountain blowing "demons" without even realizing it, because the fuel for the backups have to come from somewhere when the wind isn't blowing :)
@blackwar12 Oh, and as for your worry about somebody else beating America to clean energy,don't worry about. It's not like they won't share the technology. hell, if that were the case, then all the wind farms should be in the UK, or Spain, or denmark. And as for my sources, I get them from various sites, which some sites like climate change depot, daily bayonet e.t.c have already compiled. And your link is not working.
@blackwar12:energy has always been heavily subsidized, otherwise gas would be $11/gal, & ur elec. bill would be $1k/mo. BP's liability in the Gulf was limited to $75M instead of actual damages. Imagine the red tape a solar company would have to go thru to blow up a mtn or frack for nat gas. it would take 10 yrs for the permits, but coal & gas co's have exemptions. The only reason the US is involved in the Mid East AT ALL is b/c oil. That's trillions in subsidies, & just the tip o the iceberg!
@neeblert I don't know about the united states, but right here in Alberta Canada, Oil companies pay billions in royalties, even to the point where we don't have a PST, lower tax rates, cheaper gasoline(one of the lowest in the country). So if they can shell out royalties no problem, spend an alleged 400 million(or 154 million) on lobbying, then it just fistfucks your own arguement into dust. Wind energy on the other hand, look no further than Ontario.
@blackwar12: the profits r shared thru royalties, but that's b/c they get the land 4 free, loan guarantees, & losses r absorbed by the govt. Those r all subsidies, & they've been receiving them for over 100 yrs. This topic is too complex to fit in 500 char, but bottom line: u have no vision 4 the future & think we r destined to fail, as there is not enough oil, coal, or nat gas for billions more humans to live at r current consumption levels w/o 'fistfucking' the enviro. Ur on the wrong side.
@neeblert If it's government land, your technically correct, but private land, like a farmer's field, the Oil company will pay the land owner for the right to extract oil from their property. I know that some farmers get between 2500 to 5 grand per month, which is actually pretty decent money, and if they put oil batteries on there, they can get upwards to 2 grand per battery. so if you got 5 batteries on your property, you are getting a potential 10 grand per month!
@blackwar12 And, in spite of what you believe on what I believe, I just think it's an absolutely stupid idea to push something out of sheer panic. Yes, we will run out of oil, but if you spend money like a drunken sailor on a technology that's just going to set us back to the stone age, especially when there are cheaper technologies springing up every day, then you're a fool!
@blackwar12: the bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
@blackwar12: the bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
@blackwar12: The bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
@blackwar12: the bottom line is energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, many people will get rich. the only question is: would you rather it be those who blow up mtns in W.Virginia, spill oil in the Gulf, and cause wars in the Middle East, or would you bet on the best scientists the world has ever known to transition us to a clean energy infrastructure & economy? And what is the risk of letting someone else beat us to it?
third of all, it's 154 million they spent on lobbying COMBINED!, not 400 million. and it's 3 billion that china is spending, not 37 billion. And most important of all, where does Al's 300 million come from?
@blackwar12: here are my sources: nytimes.com/gwire/2009/06/10/10greenwire-green-jobs-sector-poised-for-explosive-growth-63481.html, guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/25/pew-report-china-us-clean-tech. where are yours?
Second of all, IPCC started off with 2400 scientists, 700 left and went skeptic, and the 2007 that they "worked" so hard on,
not even peer reviewed.
there were others like throwing in stuff that a grad student wrote, Greenpeace articles, and other non-peer reviewed papers in. Also, the 1500 scientists that are left are just there to throw "scientific ideas to the 54 beaurocrats.
I see that I got you spinning arounds like the rabid enviro-nut, but it's time to pull you back down to reality. First off, most "green jobs" are temporary, and out of that 125 000, only a small percentage will be permenant full time. and if it follows the trend spain has followed, there will be a net loss of 250 000 jobs. Economic growth you can count in!
@blackwar12 That's spain that happened in, and Neeblert is technically correct that it will create manufacturing jobs, but it will be in china where they are sent. To be fair, though, you need somebody to put up the wind turbines and stuff, but once they're all up, running, and shredding birds with gas generators as a back up.you have the feel good of greenism and costing you 800$ per year more. That's greenism for you. spend money with no results.
Your go-green work is extremely important and according to my opinion, there is still not enough people like you Mr. Gore or Leonardo Di Caprio. Thank you both for all you have done and are doing for all of us regarding our humanly caused climate change issue. We all better act now before it is too late. Please for all who are reading this, vote no on Prop 23! Peter / globchan
Several of the primary donors to the "No" campaign are Al Gore's venture-capital investment partners at Kleiner Perkins, including one of their wives. (Just google "Election Track, Contributions to No on Prop 23"). Based on how much they're donating, I guess if we vote "Yes" they'll lose millions.
Doctors and researchers who say that smoking causes cancer do so just so they can keep their cushy grants and increase their stature. The tobacco companies are innocent! It's all a hoax!
@neeblert Al's 300 million comes from his green enterprise, and will stop flowing, as long as greenism isn't legislated into law. To answer the Scientist bit, if those 1500 scientists all stood up and said "Global warming isn't human made or C02's fault", then we got 1500 scientific reputations ruined, scientific grants dry up in a hurry, green firms loose tonnes of money, and less red tape for oil companies. Also, there were grants by governments and lobbyists to kill smoking companies. :)
@blackwar12: The oil, coal & utility industries have collectively spent $500M just since Jan 2009 to lobby against legislation to address climate change...why would they do this if they weren't scared new, clean technology would make them obsolete? You seriously think that the 1,500 scientists from 120 different countries who worked for 15 years on the IPCC report are really part of a conspiracy? It's obvious that it's Oil & Coal, who receive billions in subsidies are the ones doing the hoax!
The lies have been exposed. Look up climate gate. The only thing the AGW scam is doing is making the rich richer. No money is actually going to help the environment.
@AGWtruth1: Here are the facts: in 2009 (a bad year for investments), investors invested $18B in clean energy tech in the US. In '07 there were 777,000 jobs in clean energy in the US, 125,000 of which were in CA (I don't have 2009 numbers, but I'm sure they are higher). In '09, China invested $37B in clean energy. Would you prefer we let them create the jobs & buy technology they invent, or the other way around? Regardless of climate change (why roll the dice anyway), clean energy is the future
@AGWtruth1: Here are the facts: in 2009 (a bad year for investments), investors invested $18B in clean energy tech in the US. In '07 there were 777,000 jobs in clean energy in the US, 125,000 of which were in CA (I don't have 2009 numbers, but I'm sure they are higher). In '09, China invested $37B in clean energy. Would you prefer we let them create the jobs & buy technology they invent, or the other way around? Regardless of climate change (why roll the dice anyway), clean energy is the future
i see many who commented aren't even taking this seriously, get the fuck out of here if you're claiming no one is listening! I care about this and I am definitely voting NO!
Al Gore is a hypocrite of the first order. His personal carbon footprint is as big as Brazil, yet he councils average Joes to reduce theirs. He has made millions from preaching catastrophic global warming and is poised to make much more if cap and trade is introduced. Gore's preaching is as self-interested as any oil company machinations.
Great video -- keep it up! We need to invest more in Green industries but in California, but prop 23 is a threat to those investments. Prop 23 is down in the polls, but the Yes on 23 campaign just got a new influx of hot, anonymous cash, so we'll need to fend them off in the home stretch to Election Day.
Hit me back if you'd like to talk Prop 23. We're coming out with a bunch of great No on Prop 23 videos soon!
All we seem to do is re-hash the past debates at the moment. A breakthrough is needed and requires resilience of purpose. Al Gore is showing resilience of purpose over decades. That's good even for those who disagree with him.
Our economy is driven by powerful entrenched interests. That's any economy. Power seeks perpetual influence. It ultimately corrupts and blinds to the truth. however inconvenient. Our energy policy is corrupted. If it were not corrupted we would all be seeking cleaner, less harmful ways of living. We don't do that enough in any area of the economy and least of all in regards to energy. We must continue to lead for continuous improvement and re-invention.
@Rickardio54321: Of course, b/c who's more trustworthy, Big Oil and King Coal, or almost all the scientists and thermometers in the world? Let's see, Oil and Coal have literally Trillions of dollars at stake, so they wouldn't have any reason to manipulate data and influence public opinion, but those scientists--scientists are pure evil!
Thank you Al Gore for doing what's right instead of what's easy. Thank you for helping, with this message, to defeat this Prop. Blessings to you and your family.
adisaavedra 1 year ago
Get some real Balls America Tell China Saudi and others no. We can do this for the unemployed say no more cash. Also talk is cheap.Get our jobs moving now not next year. Help me help us with some many Alternative Jobs.Congress may have just got voted in but they could lose there jobs as easy as they take away money to feed our Children. Tax Wealthy they when they were in Power have and probaly won't do nothing. Take food away from Americans Tax them 42%
jimjonas1 1 year ago
Everybody google "chinese rare earth metals for windmills", and you will find out exactly what china has to gain from the green scam. If we push for hybrid cars, more turbines, e.t.c, then china has already got the western world by the balls, and your energy dependency will rely on china if you phase out gas, coal, and oil now.
blackwar12 1 year ago
The fraud this SOB has perpetrated on this country is absolutely incredible. He is a hypocrite, and has stuffed his pockets with cash as he flies around the world in his private jet or lounges at his massive estate. His pathetic "Chicken Little" act is so old. Hot summers, cold winters, floods and earthquakes have been around since the beginning of time. The arrogance of suggesting man creates these things...
spamwagon 1 year ago
did the chemtrails run out of steam?
ludwiggy69 1 year ago
Didn't this guy just get caught trying to rape a hotel massage therapist? Scumbag NWO control freak.
agent057 1 year ago
What a Fraud...
agent057 1 year ago
If 23 passes our Children's children will hate us
juanalvy 1 year ago
@juanalvy: Only the children (i.e., heirs) of Al Gore and the children of his investment buddies at Kleiner Perkins will hate us if Prop 23 passes.
SuperThisIsMe1 1 year ago
Clean air isn't important?
CHAOSoriginal 1 year ago
Love the comments on this video. It gives me hope that we can eventually expose this charlatan and indeed, turn back the clock to a time when people has some sense.
MrTheNugget 1 year ago
Vote YES on Prop 23! Cut this snake oil salesmans money supply!
Dave.
DrDave953 1 year ago
The only people writing in favor of Gore here are probably either (1) Gore himself, or (2) the people Gore has invested with at Kleiner Perkins. Nothing would make me happier than to see them lose money on this selfish, repulsive fraud.
SuperThisIsMe1 1 year ago
The name of this channel is REPO wer america.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 1 year ago
Repoweramerica is deleting comments. I still want to know about Al's 300 million
blackwar12 1 year ago
Comment removed
neeblert 1 year ago
@neeblert How about neither on subsidies, because Oil companies don't pay royalties to the province and/or state they operate in, and can do without. On the wind farm side, the UK has heavily subsidized wind farms, and all it did was create a huge, expensive mess over there by placing wind turbines like drunk chimps. And you support those oil spilling, mountain blowing "demons" without even realizing it, because the fuel for the backups have to come from somewhere when the wind isn't blowing :)
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 Oh, and as for your worry about somebody else beating America to clean energy,don't worry about. It's not like they won't share the technology. hell, if that were the case, then all the wind farms should be in the UK, or Spain, or denmark. And as for my sources, I get them from various sites, which some sites like climate change depot, daily bayonet e.t.c have already compiled. And your link is not working.
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 sorry, they DO pay royalties.
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12:energy has always been heavily subsidized, otherwise gas would be $11/gal, & ur elec. bill would be $1k/mo. BP's liability in the Gulf was limited to $75M instead of actual damages. Imagine the red tape a solar company would have to go thru to blow up a mtn or frack for nat gas. it would take 10 yrs for the permits, but coal & gas co's have exemptions. The only reason the US is involved in the Mid East AT ALL is b/c oil. That's trillions in subsidies, & just the tip o the iceberg!
neeblert 1 year ago
@neeblert I don't know about the united states, but right here in Alberta Canada, Oil companies pay billions in royalties, even to the point where we don't have a PST, lower tax rates, cheaper gasoline(one of the lowest in the country). So if they can shell out royalties no problem, spend an alleged 400 million(or 154 million) on lobbying, then it just fistfucks your own arguement into dust. Wind energy on the other hand, look no further than Ontario.
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 or the UK, where their electricity bills have increased to 880 euros per year, with heavily subsidized wind.
telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8068402/Renewables-will-add-880-a-year-to-bills.html
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 oh and don't forget about the germans
thegwpf.org/energy-news/1715-green-subsidies-price-shock-for-german-electricity-customers.html
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12: the profits r shared thru royalties, but that's b/c they get the land 4 free, loan guarantees, & losses r absorbed by the govt. Those r all subsidies, & they've been receiving them for over 100 yrs. This topic is too complex to fit in 500 char, but bottom line: u have no vision 4 the future & think we r destined to fail, as there is not enough oil, coal, or nat gas for billions more humans to live at r current consumption levels w/o 'fistfucking' the enviro. Ur on the wrong side.
neeblert 1 year ago
@neeblert If it's government land, your technically correct, but private land, like a farmer's field, the Oil company will pay the land owner for the right to extract oil from their property. I know that some farmers get between 2500 to 5 grand per month, which is actually pretty decent money, and if they put oil batteries on there, they can get upwards to 2 grand per battery. so if you got 5 batteries on your property, you are getting a potential 10 grand per month!
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 And, in spite of what you believe on what I believe, I just think it's an absolutely stupid idea to push something out of sheer panic. Yes, we will run out of oil, but if you spend money like a drunken sailor on a technology that's just going to set us back to the stone age, especially when there are cheaper technologies springing up every day, then you're a fool!
blackwar12 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blackwar12: the bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
neeblert 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blackwar12: the bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
neeblert 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blackwar12: The bottom line is that energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, lots of people will be getting rich. the only question is: would you rather subsidize those who blow up mtns in WV and those who spill oil in The Gulf (and cause wars in the Middle East), or would you bet on the best scientists in the history of the world to transition our infrastructure & economy to run on clean energy? What risk do you run if someone else beats us to it?
neeblert 1 year ago
@blackwar12: the bottom line is energy is a trillion $ mkt, & no matter what, many people will get rich. the only question is: would you rather it be those who blow up mtns in W.Virginia, spill oil in the Gulf, and cause wars in the Middle East, or would you bet on the best scientists the world has ever known to transition us to a clean energy infrastructure & economy? And what is the risk of letting someone else beat us to it?
neeblert 1 year ago
third of all, it's 154 million they spent on lobbying COMBINED!, not 400 million. and it's 3 billion that china is spending, not 37 billion. And most important of all, where does Al's 300 million come from?
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12: here are my sources: nytimes.com/gwire/2009/06/10/10greenwire-green-jobs-sector-poised-for-explosive-growth-63481.html, guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/25/pew-report-china-us-clean-tech. where are yours?
neeblert 1 year ago
Second of all, IPCC started off with 2400 scientists, 700 left and went skeptic, and the 2007 that they "worked" so hard on,
not even peer reviewed.
there were others like throwing in stuff that a grad student wrote, Greenpeace articles, and other non-peer reviewed papers in. Also, the 1500 scientists that are left are just there to throw "scientific ideas to the 54 beaurocrats.
blackwar12 1 year ago
I see that I got you spinning arounds like the rabid enviro-nut, but it's time to pull you back down to reality. First off, most "green jobs" are temporary, and out of that 125 000, only a small percentage will be permenant full time. and if it follows the trend spain has followed, there will be a net loss of 250 000 jobs. Economic growth you can count in!
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12 That's spain that happened in, and Neeblert is technically correct that it will create manufacturing jobs, but it will be in china where they are sent. To be fair, though, you need somebody to put up the wind turbines and stuff, but once they're all up, running, and shredding birds with gas generators as a back up.you have the feel good of greenism and costing you 800$ per year more. That's greenism for you. spend money with no results.
thedickheadartist 1 year ago
Your go-green work is extremely important and according to my opinion, there is still not enough people like you Mr. Gore or Leonardo Di Caprio. Thank you both for all you have done and are doing for all of us regarding our humanly caused climate change issue. We all better act now before it is too late. Please for all who are reading this, vote no on Prop 23! Peter / globchan
eeeverything 1 year ago
Several of the primary donors to the "No" campaign are Al Gore's venture-capital investment partners at Kleiner Perkins, including one of their wives. (Just google "Election Track, Contributions to No on Prop 23"). Based on how much they're donating, I guess if we vote "Yes" they'll lose millions.
SuperThisIsMe1 1 year ago
Doctors and researchers who say that smoking causes cancer do so just so they can keep their cushy grants and increase their stature. The tobacco companies are innocent! It's all a hoax!
neeblert 1 year ago
@neeblert Al's 300 million comes from his green enterprise, and will stop flowing, as long as greenism isn't legislated into law. To answer the Scientist bit, if those 1500 scientists all stood up and said "Global warming isn't human made or C02's fault", then we got 1500 scientific reputations ruined, scientific grants dry up in a hurry, green firms loose tonnes of money, and less red tape for oil companies. Also, there were grants by governments and lobbyists to kill smoking companies. :)
thedickheadartist 1 year ago
Comment removed
blackwar12 1 year ago
@blackwar12: The oil, coal & utility industries have collectively spent $500M just since Jan 2009 to lobby against legislation to address climate change...why would they do this if they weren't scared new, clean technology would make them obsolete? You seriously think that the 1,500 scientists from 120 different countries who worked for 15 years on the IPCC report are really part of a conspiracy? It's obvious that it's Oil & Coal, who receive billions in subsidies are the ones doing the hoax!
neeblert 1 year ago
A lot of people are just making jokes. This is serious. Vote yes on prop 23 if you want any chance of getting CA out of bankruptcy.
robertg222 1 year ago
The lies have been exposed. Look up climate gate. The only thing the AGW scam is doing is making the rich richer. No money is actually going to help the environment.
AGWtruth1 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
neeblert 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AGWtruth1: Here are the facts: in 2009 (a bad year for investments), investors invested $18B in clean energy tech in the US. In '07 there were 777,000 jobs in clean energy in the US, 125,000 of which were in CA (I don't have 2009 numbers, but I'm sure they are higher). In '09, China invested $37B in clean energy. Would you prefer we let them create the jobs & buy technology they invent, or the other way around? Regardless of climate change (why roll the dice anyway), clean energy is the future
neeblert 1 year ago
@AGWtruth1: Here are the facts: in 2009 (a bad year for investments), investors invested $18B in clean energy tech in the US. In '07 there were 777,000 jobs in clean energy in the US, 125,000 of which were in CA (I don't have 2009 numbers, but I'm sure they are higher). In '09, China invested $37B in clean energy. Would you prefer we let them create the jobs & buy technology they invent, or the other way around? Regardless of climate change (why roll the dice anyway), clean energy is the future
neeblert 1 year ago
Prop needs a yes vote. It's time to send a message that the world is tired of the lies and faked data about AGW.
regould22 1 year ago 2
Vote yes on prop 23
It's time to bring an end to the global warming scam.
nubeldorf 1 year ago 2
i see many who commented aren't even taking this seriously, get the fuck out of here if you're claiming no one is listening! I care about this and I am definitely voting NO!
DelmyBarillas 1 year ago
Go Al--tell it like it is like you have been for 30 years!
greengopost 1 year ago
It's a "critical issue" for his green investments. LOL!
purpleoscar 1 year ago
Al Gore and climate LOL. Like anyone listens.
r00t4rd3d 1 year ago
Al (capone) gore just go away
take the money you have creamed off this scam and just go away and hide back under the rock you came from
motoxmainia 1 year ago
Al Gore is a hypocrite of the first order. His personal carbon footprint is as big as Brazil, yet he councils average Joes to reduce theirs. He has made millions from preaching catastrophic global warming and is poised to make much more if cap and trade is introduced. Gore's preaching is as self-interested as any oil company machinations.
wayall1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Love it!!
Great video -- keep it up! We need to invest more in Green industries but in California, but prop 23 is a threat to those investments. Prop 23 is down in the polls, but the Yes on 23 campaign just got a new influx of hot, anonymous cash, so we'll need to fend them off in the home stretch to Election Day.
Hit me back if you'd like to talk Prop 23. We're coming out with a bunch of great No on Prop 23 videos soon!
- prop23FAIL
prop23FAIL 1 year ago
As usual, a reasoned message with irrefutable logic.
theett 1 year ago
All we seem to do is re-hash the past debates at the moment. A breakthrough is needed and requires resilience of purpose. Al Gore is showing resilience of purpose over decades. That's good even for those who disagree with him.
flyreelbike 1 year ago
Our economy is driven by powerful entrenched interests. That's any economy. Power seeks perpetual influence. It ultimately corrupts and blinds to the truth. however inconvenient. Our energy policy is corrupted. If it were not corrupted we would all be seeking cleaner, less harmful ways of living. We don't do that enough in any area of the economy and least of all in regards to energy. We must continue to lead for continuous improvement and re-invention.
flyreelbike 1 year ago
The passage of 23 would certainly be an inconvenient truth.
mreyno02 1 year ago
I'm voting YES!!
3ddan24 1 year ago
More power to you, Al. You're helping to prevent the continued fossil fuel corporate dominance of our energy system.
randyihara 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Gore: you are a greedy, shameless fraud. You should be imprisoned.
Rickardio54321 1 year ago
@Rickardio54321 is there oxygen on your planet?
skog77 1 year ago
@Rickardio54321: Of course, b/c who's more trustworthy, Big Oil and King Coal, or almost all the scientists and thermometers in the world? Let's see, Oil and Coal have literally Trillions of dollars at stake, so they wouldn't have any reason to manipulate data and influence public opinion, but those scientists--scientists are pure evil!
neeblert 1 year ago
Comment removed
blackwar12 1 year ago