One of the more, uh, interesting moments from Friday’s climate hearings in the House was this exchange between Al Gore and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who suggested that Gore would profit from a cap-and-trade bill.
Here’s the video, via TPM, and a transcription follows:
Blackburn: I think it’s really important that no suspicion or shadow fall on the foremost advocates of climate-change legislation, so I wanted to give you the opportunity to kind of clear the air about your motives and maybe set the record straight for some of your former constituents. And I’ve got an article from Oct. 8 New York Times Magazine about a firm called Kleiner Perkins, a capital firm called Kleiner Perkins. Are you aware of that company?
Gore: Well, yes, I’m a partner at Kleiner Perkins.
Blackburn: So you’re a partner in Kleiner Perkins. OK. Now, they have invested about a billion dollars in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation, so is the legislation that we are discussing here today, is that something that you are gong to personally benefit from?
Gore: I believe that the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us. And I have invested in it, but every penny that I have made, I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge. And Congresswoman, if you’re, if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don’t know me.
Blackburn: No sir, I’m not making accusations. I’m asking questions that have been asked of me. And individual constituents who were asking a point of clarity. so I am asking you for that point of clarity ...
Gore: I understand exactly what you’re doing, Congresswoman. Everybody here does.
Blackburn: Are you willing to divest yourself of any profit? Does all of it go to a not-for-profit that is an educational ... ?
Gore: Every penny that I have made has gone to it. Every penny from the movie, from the book, from any investments in renewable energy. I’ve been willing to put my money where my mouth is. Do you think there’s something wrong with being active in business in this country?
Blackburn: I am simply asking for clarification of the relationship.
Gore: I’m proud of it. I’m proud of it.
Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success
What to make of the new climate poll
Comments
View as Flat
Delay And Deny Posted 8:42 am
25 Apr 2009
The man has ascended to the ultimate heights of public visibility and honors, yet when asked simple questions, he bristles at having to answer.
But then this is the Gore polemic...all who oppose are evil...all who submit are good.
Last night I watched "Inherit the Wind" on KCLS. While watching Fredick March play Matthew Harrison Brady (read: William Jennings Bryant), I thought of Gore...a man who made his own populist following...but was not electable. Only this time the tables are turned...it is the model building rationalists who have to defend an ill defined "religion". Challenges cannot be met logically, so sneers and IPCC Assessment thumping are returned.I wish that all sides could be heard. Yes, Gore as a businessman has every right to spend his money as he sees fit. That is the American Way. However, I fail to see why people cannot also appreciate the 1 Billion per year that George Bush funded for hydrogen and other technologies that will truly reduce CO2 pollution and bring us to a greener future.
Permalink
Christopher S. Johnson Posted 4:36 pm
25 Apr 2009
Permalink
vbstenswick Posted 1:51 am
27 Apr 2009
There are those who claim that rising temperatures cause the oceans to release CO2. While gases are less soluble in warmer liquids, from what I have read, the oceans are becoming more acidic due to absorbing CO2, so that appears to dispel option 2.
I am assuming that Mr. Johnson is aware of the fact that CO2 absorbs the wavelength of radiation that is re-radiated into space by the earth, thus causing the increase in temperature that we are observing. That is the basis for the science.I have not heard of any outside factors that have not been explained by the climate scientists.In case Mr. Johnson does not believe that we are warming, I can partially understand that. I did a bit of research on my own a few years ago. My premise was that people who lived in warm climates do not notice any difference in temperature. I live in a Minneapolis suburb, and summers do not appear to be any different than 40 years ago, however winters have changed drastically. I researched temperatures at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport, from 1960-1967 versus 2000-2007. July highs are 1.x degrees warmer than 40 years ago. Hardly noticable. July overnight lows are 4.x degrees warmer than 40 years ago. Who notices overnight lows in the summer? January highs are 6.x degrees warmer than 40 years ago. This is noticable. January overnight lows are 9.x degrees warmer than 40 years ago. Very noticeable. Mr. Johnson is not going to have to deal with the most serious consequences of global flooding, but Mr. Johnson's grandchildren may have to put up with million of refugees in this country who have to relocate because Miami, or Houston, or NYC has flooded.
Permalink
Christopher S. Johnson Posted 12:09 pm
27 Apr 2009
Permalink
greeniemeanie Posted 5:02 pm
25 Apr 2009
Permalink
Christopher S. Johnson Posted 6:03 pm
25 Apr 2009
I know you can read. Google Phil Cooney + White House Council on Environmental Quality. Here is a great picture of a very elusive fellow, with James Hansen at a hearing, who has now gone back to work for the oil lobby.http://www.flickr.com/photos/erickaekstrom/2441474656/sizes/l/
Permalink
rwhiten1 Posted 11:55 am
26 Apr 2009
Permalink
GreenHearted Posted 11:50 am
27 Apr 2009
Permalink