Fox News' Garrett and others mischaracterized or omitted Gore's response to Inhofe on his energy use
SUMMARY: During a report on Al Gore's testimony before
the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Fox News' Major
Garrett reported that, in response to Sen. James Inhofe's question,
"Are you ready to change the way you live?" a reference to
Gore's documentary, Gore replied that "he didn't have to
because he purchases a variety of environmental credits." In fact, Gore
indicated in his response that he had changed his lifestyle and is continuing
to do so.
On the March 21 edition of Fox News' Special Report, Fox News congressional correspondent Major Garrett mischaracterized an exchange between Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-OK) and former Vice President Al Gore during Gore's testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Garrett reported that Inhofe "posed a question to Gore that Gore himself poses at the end of his documentary [An Inconvenient Truth], quote, 'Are you ready to change the way you live?' a reference to Gore's Tennessee compound." According to Garrett, Gore replied that "he didn't have to because he purchases a variety of environmental credits, meaning, though his compound consumes a lot more energy than the average home in America, it's global warming neutral, he said." In fact, Gore said that he and his family "purchase wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide," that his personal life and his two businesses are already "carbon neutral," and that he is "in the midst of installing solar panels" at his home.
Contrary to Garrett's claim that Gore said "he didn't have to" change his lifestyle, Gore actually indicated in his response that he had changed his lifestyle and is continuing to do so. Responding to Inhofe, Gore added that, in addition to living a "carbon neutral life" and purchasing "green energy," he was "in the midst of installing solar panels" at his house. Gore suggested he was prohibited from doing so at an earlier time because his community "prevent[ed]" him from installing the panels. Gore stated that he "never made that public, by the way. The community where I live, it's a city within a city," which evidently had regulations prohibiting the installation of solar panels, but "I asked them to change it and they said, 'We will. It just takes time.' "
Inhofe asked Gore to "agree to consume no more energy in your residence than the average American household by one year from today." In response, Gore noted that he and his wife "purchase wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide." Gore continued, asserting, "[T]hat does cost a little more, now, and that is one of the reasons why" his home's utility bills "cost[] a little more." In a recent release that received widespread attention, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research made misleading and unsubstantiated claims about Gore's home energy bills.
Numerous other print media reports noted the challenge Inhofe posed to Gore -- to "agree[] to consume no more energy in your residence than the average American household by one year from today" -- but failed to note Gore's response. For instance:
- On March 22, The Washington Post reported that "Inhofe ... criticized Gore for using too much energy in his Tennessee home," but did not include Gore's response that he purchases "green energy" and is renovating his home to incorporate more alternative sources of energy, like solar panels.
- In a March 21 wire report, McClatchy Newspapers also reported Inhofe's question about Gore's home energy consumption and noted only that, in his response, "Gore sought to give a more detailed answer[]," but "Inhofe cut him off or talked over him."
- Similarly, the Associated Press reported on March 21: "Inhofe then grilled Gore about his personal energy use at his Tennessee mansion and showed the final frame of Gore's film that read, 'Are you ready to change the way you live?' But the article only allowed that "[w]hen Gore tried to respond at length, Inhofe cut him off."
From the March 21 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
GARRETT: Later in the day, Gore offered similar testimony to a Senate committee, encountering stiffer GOP skepticism about climate change science.
INHOFE: Now, if you put up chart number three, there are literally hundreds of scientists on this chart. All of these scientists disagree with you.
GARRETT: Inhofe used to chair the very committee that sought Gore's testimony, and he grilled Gore on the amount of energy his Tennessee home consumes, said to be many times higher than the national average. The clash led to a dust-up with the new chairman, California's Barbara Boxer.
INHOFE: Why don't we do this?
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-CA): You are asking him questions --
INHOFE: Why don't we do this? At the end, you can have as much time as you want to answer all of the questions.
BOXER: No, that isn't the rule of -- you're not making the rules. You used to when you did this. You don't do this anymore. Elections have consequences.
GARRETT: Senator Inhofe also posed a question to Gore that Gore himself poses at the end of his documentary, quote, "Are you ready to change the way you live?" a reference to Gore's Tennessee compound.
Gore said he didn't have to because he purchases a variety of environmental credits, meaning, though his compound consumes a lot more energy than the average home in America, it's global warming neutral, he said. Brit.
From the March 21 Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on global warming:
INHOFE: All right. Now, I'd like to put up the little pledge thing here. I'm going to ask you if you would like to commit here, today. You know how many hundreds of thousands of fans you have out there that would like to follow your lead? And this pledge merely says -- as you can read it up there -- that you're agreeing to consume no more energy in your residence than the average American household by one year from today, not right now, but you've got a whole year to try to do this.
Now, the one thing I'd like to have you not use in response to this question, which is a yes or no question, is the various gimmicks. Now, I have something I want to submit for the record, Madame Chairman, that talks about the effects -- the offsets and the credits are gimmicks used by the wealthy so they don't have to change their lifestyles. This -- and I have an article that is last Sunday's United Kingdom Times, I'd like to add -- to submit for the record at this time.
BOXER: You may.
INHOFE: All right, what's your answer?
GORE: Well, first of all, Senator, thank you so much for your question. I --
INHOFE: Sure. I noticed Tipper didn't say thank you for the question.
GORE: Oh, I'm sure she would, but -- you know, one of the other recommendations that I would have is that we -- is that you also set standards for green energy produced by utilities. And, one reason I say that, in response to what you're saying here, is that that's what we purchase, and we pay more for it because it's still relatively --
INHOFE: OK.
GORE: -- uncommon. If I may --
INHOFE: Senator Gore --
GORE: If I could just finish my --
INHOFE: Well, you can't --
BOXER: If you could allow -- you've asked the Senator an important question. He's answering it. Give him a minute or so to answer it.
[...]
GORE: We purchase wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide, and that does cost a little more, now, and that is one of the reasons why it costs a little more. We're also in the process of renovating an old home, and I live -- we live not far from where [Sen.] Lamar [R-TN] and [his wife] Honey Alexander do and we --
INHOFE: All right, Senator Gore, you've had so much more time. I'm going to have to have my --
GORE: Can I make one other point because a lot of communities actually have laws preventing the installation of solar photovoltaic cells?
INHOFE: So, I assume the answer's no. Let's go to the next question.
GORE: And, if I could continue --
INHOFE: No, you can't.
GORE: I do believe that there should be a federal provision that overrides any local restrictions.
[...]
INHOFE: But, what I'm going to do in the last time, since my time has expired, I'm going to ask you, on your film -- the last frame on your film -- and it's kind of interesting because yesterday, I ran into a parent of a student at school in Maryland that said that her students were, in an elementary school, were watching your movie, under the instructions once every month.
The last frame in that movie was -- would you put that frame up? You're asking and you've asked people all over America, "Are you ready to change your way of life? Are you ready to change the way you live?" I would have to ask you that same question, because we started my term on "Would you take a pledge to do that?" I think the answer to that is no. But in terms of changing the way you live, I think it's very difficult for you to ask other people to do it, unless you are willing to do it. Are you willing to do it?
GORE: We live a carbon neutral life, Senator, and both of my businesses are carbon neutral. We buy green energy. We do not contribute to the problem that I'm joining with others to try to help solve. We pay more for clean energy, and I think that utilities ought to provide more green energy that doesn't produce CO2, and we are in the midst of installing solar panels.
Again, I think that we ought to have a law that says communities and localities ought not to be able to prevent that. I never made that public, by the way. The community where I live, it's a city within a city, I didn't want to -- because I asked them to change it and they said, "We will. It just takes time." So, these kinds of things are what people are going through all over this country: They're buying the new light bulbs; they're putting in more insulation. People are changing. People are changing.
The American people are ready to help solve this problem, but we have to have legislation that takes away the right to pollute without any accountability or without paying a price for it because when we have cap-and-trade, when we have laws that make it -- that allow us to use the market in our favor, then those of us who are part of the solution rather than part of the problem will be able to leverage what we're doing.
"he didn't have to because he purchases a variety of environmental credits."
How did he get that from: "purchase wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide," that his personal life and his two businesses are already "carbon neutral," and that he is "in the midst of installing solar panels" at his home" ????
because that is what he WANTED Gore to have said. And knowing just how stupid 88% of FAUX viewers are, he was sure most of them did not even bother to watch any of it, and the ones who did were to busy drinking kool-ade to comprehend the actual words.
I wish that Sen. Boxer would live up to her surname and just clout Inhofe back to reality.
Randy
She showed remarkable restraint, what with that hammer right there already in her hand, no more than a "just off the plate" outside swing away from Inhofe's soft melon just begging for for a ride toward the left-field bleachers...
God help me, I'm starting to sound like a right-winger.
I heard some of this on the radio. I especially like the part where Boxer reminded Mr. Troglodyte who's in charge now.
it was funny watching it. boxer was also the only senator to challenge the 2004 election results.
Yep. I don't care what the candy-ass Repubs say, Boxer, Pelosi, we got some tough ol' grannies out here in California.
Give me a locked room, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, Las Hermanas Sanchez, send in Rove, Santorum, any tough-talking GOP poodle-walkers you got,- then declare shillelagh law !
We'd see who the bee-yotches are, I'm sure.
You bogtrotters get so violent when riled up.
Love, Jealous English Bastard
Don't forget Babs Mikulski of MD
Prescient Inhofe opening statement:
"mr. Gore, we allowed you to come speak to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee today so that I could ask you some rhetorical questions on subjects about which I am clueless, and answer them myself. I will try to appear relaxed and in charge with occasional attempts at some humorous banter and chuckles, and will show the country that this is a man's domain and how a woman could never replace me on this committee. Thank you in advance for remaining silent during my monologue and presentation which will dominate the bulk of your time. I should also say in advance that I will understand nothing you do say, as most of this stuff is way over my head."
Heheh.
That was awesome. I'm forwarding that to some friends.
Wow, if I can afford to buy "green energy", it doesn't make any difference how much energy I use. However, there is a limited amount of "green energy", wouldn't it make more sense to cut energy useage and spread that "green energy" across more households. I would hate to see the amount of solar panels that would have to be installed on his land to produce the energy that the Gore family is porported to consume.
Purported by whom, exactly?
Oh, right, a right-wing attack dog front group.
really oscar, "there is a limited amount of green energy". do you know how much energy the sun sends to the earth every day?
There is a lot of potential energy radiated by the sun every day, however, even though we have made strides in capturing this energy, we are far from doing it at an efficient or economical manner today. This, of course, will change over time.
I look off my bedroom deck each eveining at one of the larger wind projects in the Continental US. A great deal of the time, the turbines are still, and the 400 - 500 units running at full capacity (winds of about 30 knots) will not power the largest city in the State, even though the footprint of the project would cover a major part of the footprint of that city, were these machines installed there instead of near here.
If we all need to conserve so that we can stretch the existing "green power" across as many households as possible, then that should apply to everyone. I know a couple of families that are totally "off-line" but they live in 800 - 1200 sq foot homes in areas that have a lot of solar radiation, with 300+ days of sunshine. Can we all say that? I had an analysis run on my house and it did not pencil out at this time. In another 10 years, who knows. In the meantime, I'll do what I can to conserve (about $3.50/day electrical bill, including heating, for January/February period). Can Gore say that? Can you say that?
I think it's a good point - however, the kind of conservation that is needed to affect global climate change is really not going to come from lifestyle changes alone. But, it's much more easy to attack a public figure for supposed hypocrisy than it is to come up with a cogent argument against making changes in our energy policy. So this is probably the level where the debate will stay until we start to see the real consequences of global climate change.
By then, of course, it'll be too late.
gee oscar, and who has fought all that alternate energy development for years and voted to defund it? who has, then and now, tried to deny global warming? that would be the republicans. who has fought for alternate energy? that would be many of the democrats, led by gore. but somehow the guy has become personally responsible for everyhing that has not been done, according to all you people who are skeptics in the first place.
Clinton and Gore's record on Kyoto was what?
You must have missed that day of class.
Gore and Clinton approved Kyoto, and when it was supposed to go into effect, Bush removed the US from the accord.
Give me a break! By consuming more than his share of the available green juice he is making sure that someone else will have to be consuming the polluting stuff. If he is not conserving, he is part of his own problem. I suppose he flies around on a plane that uses green jet fuel too?
We could all go back to the stone age and the weather won't change one iota for all of our efforts as far as we know. Yeah, right, man can control the climate.... How did it cycle through all of the ages without our intervention? Looks like mankind evolved just in time to save the planet from the fearful trend of maybe warming 0.7 degrees in the last 100 years....
"Use up all the green power"? What the heck are you talking about? Capitalism doesn't work that way dude. Increased demand induces increased supply and ultimately lower costs. See it's because the supply is elastic, we can always build more green power generators. Do all wingers have so little faith in capitalism?
In regards to your contention that there is no way that humans could ever influence the global climate... how do you know that? Are you a climatologist? There are a whole bunch of very smart experts in the field of climatology that would argue against this contention. Unless you are a climate expert, your opinion doesn't amount to much. You are just parroting what you hear on Fox news.
again the same argument. there was natural change in the past, so therefore that's all you can attribute it to now. all the new names in the world don't change the same nonsensical argument.
How cute.
Cramming that many straw men and talking points into one brief post must have taken some effort.
Congratulations. Now go play somewhere else. The adults are talkin'...
Mankind "eveolved", cobweb? Now who's talking crazy science mumbo-jumbo?
“I suppose he flies around on a plane that uses green jet fuel too?“
Well if he was like you he would be able to fly around using his own supply of hot air.
And why such a small view of humanity? We have made it to the moon, sent probes out beyond our solar system, cloned animals, cured innumerable diseases, harnessed electricity, created artificial human organs and on the way towards farming them, created instantaneous global communication thru the internet, harnessed enough power in the form of nuclear energy to destroy ourselves and potentially the earth itself, and I could go on, but you think we can’t influence climate. If humanity thought like you we would still be living in caves.
YOU PEOPLE NEED TO READ THIS VERY WELL DONE VIDEO IN BRITAIN.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831&q=Global+Warming+and+swindle&hl=en
It is 1 hour and 16 min.
YOU PEOPLE NEED TO READ THIS VERY WELL DONE VIDEO IN BRITAIN.- ldoren1626
Sorry, LDoren- if I'm going to "read" an overcooked video, I'm going to do it right here in the U.S. of A. !!
Now adjust your helmet strap andwipe your chin.
Some information on Martin Durkin, the director of your lovely film. (I usually don't post from wikipedia, but I must confess that I don't have the time for furhter research)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durkin_(television_director)
That article goes to show that the British are a lot better at checking their facts...
Much of the information about the director is irrelevant, and he's no communist.
Nevertheless, the data is accurate. They have the cofounder of Greenpeace (not like he's some anti-enviro person) in the video and 3 Harvard/ Mit scietists who are part of the IPCC. So listen to them if you dislike the director.
The data is what is important. It is also well done.
Mark twain said there's "Lies , damn lies , and statistics." Hence the need for peer review by experts in the field to ascertain not only if the data is accurate and collected properly, but also to determine if the data was interpreted using scientific rigor.
Let me know when you can publish a link to a scientifically peer reviewed paper that proves human kind has ZERO influence on the climate. While looking that up you might want to read the scientifically peer reviewed papers that suggest human kind has influenced the global climate in the last 100 years.
It's hardly surprising that they covered his testimony that way. They announced earlier in the day that they would only go live to the hearing when the Republicans started their questioning because "that's when the real fireworks will start".
Fairly imbalanced.
To Whom it may Concern,
As a tax paying citizen of the state of Oklahoma I would like to offer my most heart felt appologies to all of America for my states senator Jim Inhofe. The man is truely a disgrace to mankind. His midless spite filled condesending attitude is a circus in it's own right. Mr. Inhofe has a job to do for the right wingers and that is to be the most bought and paid for lobbyist of any corporation with enough money to buy a republican. They use him as a souless attack dog with no real facts just pure right wing propaganda. He plays the part well because he is so entrenched by the Exstreme Right Wingers in this state that he will never loose an election.(he has never lost in this state) With this kind of power and money behind him he is the perfect Hell Spawn for the job. Also the man is a complete DRUNK. Every time I have seen him in a public forum he was smashed. He might have been off of the bottle today and that is why he was so nasty to President Gore. Just look at him, half the time he is slurring his speach, red eyed and completely nasty like an old drunk. I wish Media Matters or somebody would do a story on this to expose the fine senator. That and I have noticed that the vast right wing hate media is all over Gore these days. I guess they don't want him beating them in another election.
God Bless Amerca(what's left of it anyway) in spite of the Bush Regime.
Please read this right wing papers opinion riddled with falsehoods.
http://www.amarillo.com/stories/032307/opi_7112119.shtml
It's not Gore's fault that Ihofe is too bloody stupid to know what "carbon neutral" means.
Has anyone stopped to think about how many people visit the Gore compund? Dude's like this former senator, movie-making magnate. How could he be blamed for using as much energy as he does? He obviously gets a lot of company at his house, justifying, in my opnion, a little more energy consumption than the rest of us. Gore's "lifestyle" is a moot point, not hypocritical AT ALL considering the manpower such public persona "operations" require.
So, All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others?