Conservation-oblivious capitalists
“If anybody should be trying to conserve our natural resources and preserve the environment for future generations, it should be the people calling themselves 'conservative.' Personally, I think many folks mistakenly call themselves conservatives instead of what they really are — conservation-oblivious capitalists.”
Can’t we call everybody (liberals included) “conservation-oblivious capitalists”??? With regard to conservation, I recommend things that I do, but it would be hypocritical of me to recommend to people to get hybrid cars and such when I drive a Lincoln LS V8. In other words, I try to match my rhetoric with things I actually do. I can’t in good conscience complain how we’re draining our resources and such when I’m taking part in the draining. That’s why if one is a committed environmentalist, I expect them to be living that type of lifestyle where they are conserving to the max. A good example is Willie Nelson: He’s big into promoting bio-diesal, and he actually uses it. I salute him and he has credibility with me. Hypocrites like Bill Maher do not…
“And to reinterate, guys like Maher are total hypocrites if they only talk the talk. It certainly seems that he does. But that doesn't mean that a lot of what he is saying is true. 'Conservative' writers like Schlussel know that, so in order to belittle a cause not in the best interest of the narrow purpose she serves, she instead attacks an easy and hypocritical target.”
I went back to re-read that Schlussel article, and the whole article was to point out the hypocrisy of Maher and other Hollywood environmentalists who don’t practice what they preach, nothing more and nothing less. I think this goes back to a debate we’ve had on here before about “good intentions”. In this example, I sense you’re saying that as long as Maher has “good intentions” on speaking out about the environment, then who cares that he doesn’t actually “walk the walk”, whereas somebody like myself wants to see actions that back up the words of his. Just my opinion. :-)
Can’t we call everybody (liberals included) “conservation-oblivious capitalists”??? With regard to conservation, I recommend things that I do, but it would be hypocritical of me to recommend to people to get hybrid cars and such when I drive a Lincoln LS V8. In other words, I try to match my rhetoric with things I actually do. I can’t in good conscience complain how we’re draining our resources and such when I’m taking part in the draining. That’s why if one is a committed environmentalist, I expect them to be living that type of lifestyle where they are conserving to the max. A good example is Willie Nelson: He’s big into promoting bio-diesal, and he actually uses it. I salute him and he has credibility with me. Hypocrites like Bill Maher do not…
“And to reinterate, guys like Maher are total hypocrites if they only talk the talk. It certainly seems that he does. But that doesn't mean that a lot of what he is saying is true. 'Conservative' writers like Schlussel know that, so in order to belittle a cause not in the best interest of the narrow purpose she serves, she instead attacks an easy and hypocritical target.”
I went back to re-read that Schlussel article, and the whole article was to point out the hypocrisy of Maher and other Hollywood environmentalists who don’t practice what they preach, nothing more and nothing less. I think this goes back to a debate we’ve had on here before about “good intentions”. In this example, I sense you’re saying that as long as Maher has “good intentions” on speaking out about the environment, then who cares that he doesn’t actually “walk the walk”, whereas somebody like myself wants to see actions that back up the words of his. Just my opinion. :-)
posted by Andy W. Rogers | 11:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home