Hypocrisy and Truth

She 'exposes some Hollyweird hypocrisy'? Not really.

...so it's not a stretch to think he's a self-absorbed righteous hypocrite, too.

Please, make up your mind. On one hand, you say she didn't really expose any hypocrisy, but then you immediately turn around and concede that Maher is a hypocrite. So which is it?

But those details do not alter facts, although lame writers such as Schlussel really appreciate their readers thinking so.

Depends on the facts you are talking about. Schlussel's article was aimed at exposing the hypocrisy of Maher directly, and the rest of Hollywood's enviro-elite indirectly. We haven't gotten you to definitively hold forth on whether you agree with her assessment of Maher or not, but objectively speaking, she accomplished her thesis: Maher and his ilk are hypocrites who don't practice what they preach. She even offered evidence. What more do you want from her? Your assessment of her as lame is simply based on the fact that she was flaying a member of a class of people you hold (for unfathomable reasons) in high regard. Furthermore, you are threatened by the fact that in exposing the hypocrisy of the icons of celebrity environmentalism, that some of the underlying "truths" of what they preach will be exposed as false, or at least placed in grave doubt.

Schlussel using Maher as a straw man to stealthily dismiss the truths of Earth's dwindling oil supply is lame, lame, lame.

And there it is. Maher is no straw-man for that purpose in this article. In fact, Schlussel doesn't directly attempt to attack or even refute a single established environmental position. She simply points out that Maher and his cronies know no bounds of truth when they spout the drivel they intend us to live by but have no intention of doing so themselves. In fact, what she does repeatedly in the article is to demolish the straw-men Maher himself throws up in promoting his "cause."

Finally, in the interest of truth, there are no "truths of Earth's dwindling oil supply." There is a substantial body of good science recently (as opposed to the junk science enviro-radicals are fond of quoting) that indicates the supply of fossil fuels does replenish at less-than-geological rates and that it is now greater than at any other time in history.

You can't refute the truth by simply attacking someone who believes it, no matter how whiny, irritating, or hypocritical they may be.

And therein lies the "truth" of what Schlussel writes about celebrity environmentalism. These people aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer. Additionally, they are all about appearance and none about content. The little enviro-platitudes they spit are intended to let the fans think they have a grasp of the issues. Environmental science is hard stuff. Uncle Bill and his pals are here to make it easy for you, Joe Sixpack. Sit back and we'll explain it all for you in short words and we'll even throw in a laugh track so you'll know when we're being funny.

Schlussel isn't attacking anyone. She takes to task someone who believes nothing but the people who tell him how wonderful he is. She is pointing out that regardless of what may or may not be fact, Maher's hypocrisy excludes him from any sort of authority, moral or otherwise, on the subject. In fact, it could be argued that Schlussel does environmentalism a favor by exposing Maher in the context of popular culture. It helps to prevent him from rising to a level at which more people might actually listen to him, to the inevitable embarassment of environmentalists everywhere.

This brings up a point that disturbs me greatly about Americans and our popular culture. One Sunday, Tim Russert had Bill Bennett on his program and he played a sound bite from Alec "Wife-beater" Baldwin. This was from the period of time when Baldwin was thinking about running for political office. Baldwin spouted some kind of nonsensical tripe and Russert pounced on Bennett with something like, "What do you think of that?!" Almost as if to say, "Aha! Baldwin has you now." Bennett looked at him for a moment and then said, "I am continuously amazed at the tendency of the press to think anything profound might find its way out of Hollywood." He then proceeded to demolish every stupid thing Baldwin had said. Russert was speechless and had to finish the segment simply looking as if he ate something he found in a litter box. I fail to understand how so many people think that these idiots who appear on the tube or in the multiplex are endowed with supernal wisdom simply because they look pretty or have a facility with the language of popular culture. They aren't even as good as Hayek's "intellectuals." (You did do your homework, didn't you?) At least those intellectuals have a surface understanding of the information they peddle. Maher and his ilk don't even have that. And it shows in the hypocritical behavior they exhibit. If they had an understanding of what they are vomiting up, they would know that their hypocrisy strips them of all credibility.