What Green Words Are Obama and McCain Really Saying? Ask SpeechWars
by Karin Kloosterman, Tel Aviv 
on 09. 8.08
This one’s fun for the whole family –– who’s talking the green talk? Obama or McCain? And since when? SpeechWars, a nifty research tool developed by Jerusalemite Ben Reis, can help you find out what green words presidential candidates are really using in their speeches, and since when.
Just visit the site, type in your word, hit go and compare. The analyses are based on over 125 speeches downloaded for each candidate from their respective campaign and senatorial websites. And it’s such an interesting tool that the US States Library of Congress has selected SpeechWars for inclusion in its official historic collection of Internet materials related to 2008’s election.
Before we get to the green stuff, some of the terms that McCain mentions more often than Obama include freedom, values, peace, democracy, human, international, security, leader. Click through for the vocab that dominates Obama's tongue, and to see how our hopefuls fare with “greener” words, like solar, climate, or energy.
Some of the terms that Obama mentions more often than McCain are hope, change, together, college, politics, moment, time, Washington, war.
Solar
Climate
Energy
Renewable
But don’t just take our word, try it out for yourself. Warning: it’s addictive.
::Speech Wars
More Obama/McCain on TreeHugger
Obama on Cities: The Solution, Not the Problem
McCain Blows Hot Air On Tire Inflation
This Week In HuffPo:McCain, Biden and Politics
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Forget Going Green Because It's the Right Thing to Do—Go Green to Make Your Neighbors Jealous
- Focus Earth: June 13, 2009: Everglades Nevermore and Snake Invaders
- 7 Great Weekend Solar Power Projects
- 5 Reuses for Altoid Tins
- Obama's Posse Says: Paint Your Roof White
- How to Use a Solar Cooker: What Works and What Doesn't
Neither are perfect as I think those of us who would follow the green movement are years ahead of the general public on this regard (no offense meant). What appears to the public as radical ideas, are pretty much common thought among the treehugger community.
I think Obama has the right ideas, and also he has the right mandate. Considering that his party has the majority at the moment, it would be better to have someone similar who can push through things.
Consider that a Democrat majority will probably be gone by 2010, and Republicans are anything but stewards of the environment.
Talk is cheap, and no way to evaluate how a candidate will act once elected. The League of Conservation Voters ranks all congressional members based on their votes on environmental legislation. Obama's ranking is 98%. McCain's is 26%. I think that just about says it all (higher is better).
...and McCain is about the best the Republicans can put out there, in terms of crossover appeal.
Before he picked that Alaska lady I was willing to say kind things about him, but obviously environmental concerns are less important to him than anything else.
I am all for going/being green and helping the environment. But if I say Climate 300 times and Solar 500 times are you going to vote for me? It's about the big picture and unfortunately the answer won't happen over night and fossil fuel usage won't stop over night either. In order to control what we are doing we must first have control over our resources and right now most of our resources are controlled by foreign influences. Al Gore can preach Green all he wants but he still flies around in his jet and drives SUV's. So I think voting according to how many times someone says a word is ridiculous.
***
Karin's comment: L.S. -- it's a gimmick and a game. Yet, I think it has some merit. Words mean a lot in this world, and I'd be hoping the next US president would be choosing his wisely.
As much as I'm surprised that McCain picked Palin as his candidate for VP, I'm even more surprised at the Democratic voters' picks for President. Of all of the Democratic candidates, why it the world did Democratic voters focus on their two least experienced candidates?
Ideology aside, I'd have a much easier time considering a ticket with an inexperienced VP than one with an inexperienced President, as I suspect many other voters will as well. If the Democrats lose this election, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Well, experience isn't everything. Just look at the content of McCain, it's dismal. And yet most consider McCain highly experienced.
When it comes to making change, experience with the old doesn't help much. In fact it appears to be a strong negative in inducing change.