Donald Trump Is Turning into David Cameron. This Is Bad.

Donald Trump is turning into David Cameron – and I don’t mean this as a compliment.

David Cameron had some pretty stiff competition in the field of Most Awful British Prime Minister of the Last 20 Years. But at least his rivals – the dour, incompetent Socialist Gordon Brown and the venal and slippery warmonger Tony Blair – campaigned on a Labour party ticket. Cameron, on the other hand, campaigned as a Conservative. And there’s really nothing more despicable than a politician who betrays his own voter base in order to position himself as a mainstream centrist.

This is what David Cameron did, throughout his two terms as Prime Minister. To anyone of a genuinely conservative disposition he was a massive disappointment: on his watch, the police and justice system grew more politically correct, the minimum wage rose, Keynesian deficit spending continued to flourish, green policies proliferated, defence spending was cut while foreign aid was increased – delighting the kind of people who believe that conservatism is heartless and evil, but infuriating those who understand that it’s about hard but fair decisions taken for the long term benefit of all.

Cameron’s fundamental problem was that he wasn’t ideological. He believed – like Bismarck, like Tony Blair, unlike Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan – that politics is the art of the possible. He wanted to be liked much more than he wanted to do the right thing. He was more interested in what his hero Tony Blair called “eye-catching initiatives” – i.e., meaningless gestures like his doomed schemes to create a “Big Society” and to lead “the Greenest Government Ever” – than doing hard stuff that needed to be done like reducing government spending or reforming the National Health Service.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Al Gore – Global Warming Is Real Because…Production Values

Paramount/Participant Media

Al Gore has issued a devastating riposte to President Trump’s Executive Order on Energy: he has unleashed the trailer for An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth To Power.

Unlike its creaky predecessor – basically an extended Powerpoint lecture featuring crap animations of drowning polar bears and a fat, sweating, failed presidential candidate in a suit clambering up onto a hydraulic elevator to make some tendentious, whiney point about a graph – this sequel uses shock, awe and spectacular footage to bludgeon its audience into submission.

A maelstrom of brown, boiling floodwaters, calving glaciers, burning mountainsides and lashing tornadoes, Gore’s production team have pulled out the stops to create a propaganda movie so lavishly convincing it makes Triumph Of The Will look like Snakes On A Plane.

At the heart of the movie is Gore himself – whose caring, nurturing, brow-furrowed sensitivity as he travels the world’s weather disaster zones to marvel at the damage done by man’s selfishness, greed and refusal-to-amend-his-lifestyle (TM) is contrasted with the smirking evil of the movie’s arch-villain, Donald J. Trump. Trump, of course, represents the “Power” to whom the heroic Gore figure is speaking “Truth.”

What is clear, though, even from the two-and-a-half-minute trailer, is that among the things left behind on the cutting room floor are science, integrity, and credibility.

There is, for example, absolutely no evidence that man-made carbon dioxide has produced an increase in extreme weather events. In fact tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, bitter winters and extreme precipitation have all either remained much the same or reduced since “global warming” began.

So what Gore is doing here, in other words, is misleading his audience with weather horror porn of extreme events which have nothing at all to do with climate change.

As for the prominently featured wind turbines and solar arrays – these are a blatant attempt to push the expensive, environmentally damaging, inefficient renewables to which green shysters like Gore are ideologically committed but which will make no difference to climate change. Their sole purpose is to enrich, at taxpayers’ expense, a few of the rent-seekers, troughers, crony-capitalists and other charlatans who are leeching off the back of this disgusting $1.5 trillion per annum scam.

Follow the money: this is the real reason Gore has made this movie. And it’s the reason there has been such squealing objection to President Trump’s (actually quite disappointingly modest) attempts to take on the Climate Industrial Complex.

Still, you can tell Trump is headed in the right direction from the kind of people who are attacking him.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Tommy Robinson’s Critics Are Disgusting Apologists for Radical Islam

©Rachel Megawhat/Breitbart London

Whenever there’s another terrorist atrocity like the one in Stockholm last week, and the one in Alexandria on Palm Sunday, and the one in St Petersburg a few days before, and the one in London the week before that, we often ask ourselves despairingly what on earth we can do to make a difference.
Well, I’ll tell you exactly what we can do. It occurred to me after interviewing this week’s Delingpole podcast guest – the founder of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson.
The interview itself was fascinating. I urge you to listen if you haven’t already: whatever preconceptions you may have about Robinson, I think you’ll be appalled by the way he has been scapegoated and maltreated by the British authorities, charmed by his honesty, and bowled over by his courage in the face of extreme danger.
But what I found even more illuminating was the response from all those people out there who wanted to tell me that Tommy Robinson was a disgusting individual whom I should never have interviewed (either for Breitbart or for a separate piece I wrote in the Spectator) and that my decision to do so made me a despicable fascist.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

EPA’s Obama-Era Endangerment Finding a Disgrace to Science, Menace to Economy

Carolyn Kaster/AP

One of the most expensive, intrusive, and far-reaching pieces of legislation in recent U.S. history is a bad smell from the Obama era, motivated by a leftist, anti-capitalist agenda and based on the purest nonsense.

This is why two free market groups have petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reconsider its CO2 Endangerment Finding. It was introduced (on Pearl Harbor Day in 2009) for political, not scientific reasons under the Obama Administration and is being used by green activists to hold the U.S. economy for ransom:

Two groups — Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC) — claim EPA’s 2009 “endangerment finding” should be updated with new evidence invalidating the agency’s previous claim greenhouse gases threatened public health.

Their concerns are understandable given that, as CHECC argues in its petition, the flimsy evidence on which EPA based its endangerment finding has now been proven false beyond all reasonable doubt.

The Endangerment Finding purported to find that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide constitute a “danger” to human health and welfare because of their effect in warming the atmosphere.

But there is no real-world evidence to support this conclusion, which derives purely from discredited computer models which have increasingly diverged from observed data:

When EPA released its CO2 endangerment finding in 2009, it used three lines of evidence to bolster its argument that greenhouse gases threatened human health through global warming.The crux of EPA’s argument rested on the existence of a “tropical hotspot” where global warming would be most apparent. That is, there should be enhanced warming in the tropical troposphere — the “fingerprint” of global warming.

However, according to a report produced last year by three respected scientists — James P Wallace III, John Christy, and Joe D’Aleo — this Tropical Hotspot (THS) “simply does not exist in the real world.”

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Only Gullible Fools Believe That the Great Barrier Reef Is Dying

©William West/AFP/Getty

The Great Barrier Reef is dead. It has ceased to be, expired and gone to meet its maker, kicked the bucket, shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and gone to join the bleedin’ choir invisible. It is an Ex Great Barrier Reef.
Well, at least it is if you believe the left-wing media such as the Guardian, which claims today that the reef is at “terminal stage” because of damage allegedly caused by “climate change”.

Lots of eco loons have been rending their garments and throwing their (recyclable, organic, gluten-free) toys out of the pram in horror at this hideous disaster.

Horror at hideous disaster!

But it’s OK. As I keep trying to explain here to anyone who’ll listen – and obviously, also, to annoy the greenies – is that the Great Barrier Reef isn’t in the remotest danger. Yes, it has experienced bleaching, but this is normal – especially in dramatic El Ninos like the one we’ve just had – and there is no reason to suspect that the GBR won’t recover.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Post-Brexit Britain Wants to Escape Its EU Renewables Targets. About Time Too

renewables
ODD ANDERSEN/AFP/Getty Images

Officials in the Treasury and the business department are looking for a way to abandon the national goal of getting 15 percent renewable energy by 2020, which is almost double the current level, according to a person with knowledge of the matter who asked not to be identified because the discussions are private.

Erasing the target would allow Britain to skirt fines that could reach tens of millions of pounds since it’s on track to narrowly miss the 2020 goal. It would also move the U.K. out of step with other European Union nations that maintain targets as part of their membership in the region’s energy market. The U.K. wishes to preserve its link to the market and smooth cross-border trading of electricity, which has helped lower power prices, the person said.

Let’s translate that into English, shall we?

Under its current status as an EU vassal state, Britain is committed to suicidal, unaffordable “clean” energy targets based on the green religious prejudices and junk-science-driven scaremongering of unelected, unaccountable, borderline-Commie technocrats in Brussels.

These targets were made law by the 2008 Climate Change Act, drafted with the help of a left-wing activist from Friends of the Earth Bryony – now Baroness (!) – Worthington, supervised by the dim eco-zealot and unpopular Labour leader Ed Miliband during his stint as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. This will cost the UK taxpayer, by 2030, around £300 billion – while making no measurable difference to the planet’s climate.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

PA’s Scott Pruitt Gets Eaten Alive by Fox

Fox News Sunday / Screenshot

I just watched Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, get eaten alive by Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace.

Not only was it an ugly and painful sight but it was also a very dispiriting one.

Here is the guy who was carefully selected to be in the vanguard of President Trump’s war on the Green Blob which, for decades, has been doing untold damage to liberty, the scientific method, and the economy.

And he can’t even answer a few basic and obvious questions about why the job he is doing is necessary, important, and right.

Wallace asked him about the UN’s view that it was 95 percent likely that more than half the temperature increase since the mid-20th century is due to human activity.

Pruitt sweated, stuttered, and floundered.

Wallace asked him about NOAA’s claim that 2015 and 2016 are the hottest years on record.

Pruitt had no convincing comeback.

Wallace asked him the age-old question beloved by climate alarmists: “What if you’re wrong? What if CO2 is causing dramatic climate change and we as humans are responsible?”

Pruitt just didn’t know how to respond.

There should have been nothing complicated or unexpected about these questions. They are the kind of thing any half-way decent interviewer might have asked, be he a hostile one or a semi-friendly Fox News one playing devil’s advocate.

And if Scott Pruitt had had even the most cursory briefing and media training in his new role, he should have been prepared for them.

Not only should he have known the most effective answers to give; but he should have been so confident in the rightness and truth of his cause that he should have been able to seize the moment and make the points that really need to be made about President Trump’s environmental policy: that it is being enacted for the good of science, for the good of the economy and the core mission of Making America Great Again.

How could Scott Pruitt not do this?

Any one of us on the skeptical side of the argument could have pointed him to dozens of leading scientists — and hundreds if not thousands of papers and articles — that could easily have enabled Pruitt to say what needed to be said.

He could have noted the incompetence, corruption, and mendacity of the heavily politicized IPCC; the dishonest manipulation by organizations like NOAA — indeed especially NOAA — of the raw temperature data; the utter meaninglessness of the “hottest year evah” claims so often made in the liberal media.

And he could easily have batted off the “What if you’re wrong?” question by making perhaps the most important point of all that needs to be made about the “war” on “carbon”: that what it all comes down to is cost benefit analysis. To whit: the trillions of dollars being spent every year on the possibility that there might be a problem, a) could be spent much more usefully elsewhere and b) are doing more harm than good.

Pruitt was incapable of doing this though because, trained lawyer though he is, he is simply not on top of his brief.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

More Climate Fake News From The BBC

Yesterday I asked of lying liar climate ‘scientist’ Michael Mann: “Does anyone take this guy seriously any more?”

But the question was a purely rhetorical one. I already knew the depressing true answer having just sat, fuming, in my car listening to Mann being given the red carpet treatment on a BBC Radio 4 science programme.

“Oh Professor Doctor Mann, Sir, may it please your eminence to descend from your radiant cloud for a few precious moments and explain to us mere mortals why your amazing and unquestionably brilliant new paper on global warming demonstrates you to be even more right about climate change than you were even in the days when you won your Nobel prize?” fawned and grovelled the BBC’s interviewer from his prostrate position on the studio floor.

Perhaps I exaggerate slightly.

But it would be fair to say that the BBC’s interviewer, Adam Rutherford, sought to leave the listener in no doubt that when it came to climate science the “Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science” Michael Mann was a respected expert of great insight whose opinions one could totally trust.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Michael Mann Vs the Truth at Congressional Climate Hearing

Apart from being a tetchy, hotheaded, rude, bullying, cackhanded, ignorant, malevolent and embarrassingly useless excuse for a scientist, Professor Michael Mann – the guy behind the serially-discredited Hockey Stick – is also the most outrageous liar.

Mann used often to claim that he was a Nobel Prizewinner – till someone unhelpfully pointed out that he was but one of hundreds of scientists who contributed to Assessment Reports by the IPCC (which did win the Nobel Prize in 2007)

This week the bald-pated shyster was up to his old tricks again, telling a string of porkie pies at a climate science hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

Given how litigious the mendacious, bloviating poltroon can be – he’s currently engaged in at least two defamation suits: one against Tim Ball, the other against Mark Steyn – I obviously have to tread very carefully here.

So I’d just like to say, as delicately and politely as I can to the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State University:

“Liar, liar. Your pants on fire.”

Here’s the evidence:

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

179 Million Reasons Why Trump Can Never Destroy The EPA

Valerie/Macon/AFP/Getty/AP

Today President Donald Trump visits the Environmental Protection Agency – the snake which he has scotched but which he is sadly a long way from killing.

On SiriusXM Breitbart News Daily this morning Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow asked me why this simple job is proving so difficult for Trump’s appointed EPA chief. Listen to our exchange below:

Well here are 179 million reasons why, courtesy of a Daily Caller investigation.

Six nonprofit groups that criticized President Donald Trump’s proposed budget cuts failed to mention the nearly $179 million in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grants they’ve received since 2009, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group (TheDCNF) analysis of federal spending data.

The agency has funded thousands of such groups since former President Barack Obama’s 2009 inauguration, but TheDCNF focused only on six of the largest nonprofit recipients in its analysis of grant data compiled by the watchdog Open The Books.

But if you had to limit yourself to just one reason, I’d say simply: Jimmy Kimmel.

Which isn’t to say that the amiable liberal chat show host represents the Belly of the Beast of Green Evil. Merely that Kimmel is the perfect example of the kind of person who makes conservatives like Scott Pruitt feel uncomfortable about sounding too hardcore on environmental issues.

Earlier this year, for example, Kimmel sent out this ugly message to his eight million Twitter followers.

Who wants to be dissed by easy-going, likeable, not-aggressively-political Jimmy Kimmel?

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations