President Macron Is Heading for His Green Waterloo

France's President Emmanuel Macron gestures during a bilateral meeting with India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the second day of the G20 Leaders' Summit in Buenos Aires, on December 01, 2018. - The leaders of countries G20 leaders on Saturday found the minimum common ground on the global economy at …
LUDOVIC MARIN/AFP/Getty

Audio version.

As the Gilets Jaunes protests in France catch fire, French President Emmanuel Macron is heading for his green Waterloo. And really, humiliation, defeat and — with luck — exile somewhere really remote just couldn’t happen to a more deserving candidate.

One reason this dime store Napoleon has it coming is outlined in a characteristically incisive piece by Dominic Lawson in the MailIt’s headlined: “Why It’s Hard Not to Gloat at the Travails of the Strutting French President Who Called Brexiteers Liars.”

Lawson points out that of all the European leaders, no one has gone further out of his way to try to shaft Britain’s Brexit prospects than the pint-sized Mummy’s Boy Macron.

Read the rest on Breitbart.

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

French Anti-Environmental Riots Could Signal the End of Green Tyranny

TOPSHOT - A picture taken on November 25, 2018 near the Arc de Triomphe on the Champs-Elysees avenue in Paris shows broken barriers a day after a rally by yellow vest (Gilets jaunes) protestors against rising oil prices and living costs. - Security forces in Paris fired tear gas and …
Getty Images

Audio version.

Hundreds of thousands of protestors all over France have beendemonstrating for the last eight days. Mostly the protests have been peaceful if disruptive, but some like the ones in Paris have turned violent.

The police have used tear gas and water cannon; there have been dozens of arrests and at least two deaths. But amid the misery and mayhem, there’s one small crumb of consolation: these protestors could be ringing the death knell for the green tyranny which has held the West in its thrall for the last four decades.

Unlike the rabble of UK eco-activists who’ve been irritating Londoners over the last couple of weekends (blocking traffic; gluing themselves to the doors of government buildings; trying to get arrested), the protestors in France think environmentalism is the problem, not the solution.

Material burns during a protest of the yellow vest (yellow vest) movement against rising oil prices and living costs as night falls, at The Arc de Triomphe on the Champs Elysees in Paris, on November 24, 2018. / BERTRAND GUAY/AFP/Getty Images

French president Emmanuel Macron had broken a new record becoming the most unpopular French president in history at this stage of his presidential term according to polls.

Read the rest on Breitbart.

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

Would You Buy a Used Carbon Tax from Hank Paulson?

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

“I screwed up the economy, your jobs and your mortgages so – hey – I’m just the guy you can trust to tell you what to do about climate change!”

That was my take home message of a piece Hank Paulson penned for the New York Times a couple of years ago on the urgent need for a carbon tax.

Two years on – with fellow GOP Establishment stooges James Baker and George Shultz – he’s still harping on the same tedious theme.

This copper-bottomed, ocean-going shyster Paulson is the kind of Dubya-period  throwback whose advice the Trump administration should avoid like the plague.

As Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson not only failed to predict the 2008 financial crash – the US economy is “very healthy” and “robust” he insisted in 2007 – but it’s quite possible that his encouragement of risky lending while he was at Goldman Sachs helped cause it.

But that’s because Paulson is the very embodiment of the liberal elite which both the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump were designed to overthrow.

Paulson may notionally identify as a Republican. Or, at least, he served with a “Republican” administration. But what’s quite evident from his demands for a carbon tax is that he belongs to that shiftless DC/corporatist/bankster elite which couldn’t give two hoots whether it’s a Democrat or Republican in charge, just so long as the elite get to maintain their power base and their revenue stream.

Note how, back in 2014 when he was calling for that carbon tax in the New York Times, he boasted about teaming up with Tom Steyer (arch-liberal hedge funder, creator of the NextGen super PAC) and Michael Bloomberg. These men are not conservatives.

What they are is crony capitalists. They are the embodiment of almost everything that America voted against when it voted for Donald Trump.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

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

Ronald Reagan Would Have Hated this Stupid ‘Conservative’ Carbon Tax Idea

Joe Raedle/Getty Images, Rusty Kennedy/AP Photo

Donald Trump should pursue a regressive, counterproductive, pointless tax policy to deal with a non-existent problem because it’s “what the Gipper would have wanted.”

Yeah, right.

What the late Ronald Reagan is actually doing right now, I strongly suspect, is reaching for the celestial sickbag over this absurd proposal – endorsed by, amongst others, his former Secretary of State George Shultz – that President Trump should bring in a “carbon tax” in order to “combat climate change.”

Obviously the New York Times is very excited about this proposal because it thinks it’s a sign that conservatives are seeing the light:

A group of Republican elder statesmen is calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fight climate change.

The group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, with former Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former secretary of the Treasury, says that taxing carbon pollution produced by burning fossil fuels is “a conservative climate solution” based on free-market principles.

Mr. Baker is scheduled to meet on Wednesday with White House officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, Jared Kushner, the senior adviser to the president, and Gary D. Cohn, director of the National Economic Council, as well as Ivanka Trump.

Nope. What this story actually does is remind us of one of the main reasons why Donald Trump – and not any of his more Establishment rivals – ended up winning the GOP nomination: because the GOP Establishment had drifted so far away from the conservative principles they were supposed to uphold that they might just as well have been Democrats.

According to Baker: “I’m not at all sure the Gipper wouldn’t have been very happy with this.”

Read the rest at Breitbart.

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

How Australia Surrendered to the Wowsers

Regulating themselves to death

Flannery at 12 o’clock

Today is ANZAC Day in Australia and New Zealand. It seems an appropriate time to reflect on what Australia was and what it has become. (Sorry Kiwis: can’t comment on you this time, though I wish I could. Please forgive me for not coming this time – especially you, Josie Jackson, my Official Biographer and Kiwi wunderkind.)

I said the other day what a marvellous achievement it was, the way those early generations of Aussies turned a relentless hell into a fair approximation of paradise on earth. What I see now, however, is a fair proportion of the current generation doing their damnedest to reverse the process.

You can’t move a car to a different state without having to submit it to about A$400 worth of checks to make sure it’s roadworthy. You can’t run a fishing boat without having about 12 different permits. You can’t light a barbie pretty much anywhere unless you have at least two fire crews on hand with no less than 3,000 gallons of water, plus a doctorate in health and safety with regards to preparation of raw-meat products. You can’t kill a crocodile even though their populations are expanding so fast they’ll soon be overtaking humans. You can’t study at “Uni” without doing a mandatory course module explaining what you’re studying from the point of view of the “Traditional Owners” – (the people formerly known as Aborigines). You can’t earn a living as a fruit farmer in the Murray Darling basin because a bunch of Eco Fascists from the WWF say you can’t. You can’t open a mine without being told that what you’re doing is theft because, like, man, natural resources belong to everyone. You can’t chop down the trees on your land because they’re a “carbon sink” now, fulfilling Australia’s obligations under the Kyoto protocol to deal with the non-existent problem of CO2 (a plant food). You can’t have a thriving economy because that might discriminate against all the lazy bastards who don’t want to work so what you have to do is shackle it and hobble it with a mining tax and a carbon tax in order to redistribute wealth in the guise of “saving the planet.” I could go on. (Our own Ozboy has some further trenchant views on this subject)

I’ve been to Gallipoli. I have an idea what your ancestors went through in 1915. They did not give up their lives and limbs in order that you might surrender a century on to a bunch of wowsers.

Related posts:

  1. Freedom of speech is dead in Australia
  2. Australia’s green orchidectomy*
  3. Australia counts the cost of environmental lunacy – and plots its sweet revenge
  4. Australia shows us all the way by sacking its useless, pointless Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery

5 thoughts on “How Australia surrendered to the wowsers”

  1. Bern Pero9 says:27th April 2012 at 12:35 amLooks like your research for this article was done by the writers of the YOUNG ONES ! Load of flippant crap !
  2. vapourised says:27th April 2012 at 4:02 pmwithout even hearing your voice – just reading the style – you come across as a precious little camp twat with a massive “look at me” complex. For the sake of a lack of spitoons please crawl back into the cupboard.
  3. Fkyw says:28th April 2012 at 1:30 amHeard you for the first time yesterday on radio in Melbourne – couldn’t help passing you off as a total whack job. Total waste of time.
  4. Aussiesue26 says:29th April 2012 at 3:39 amI saw you James on The Bold Report today (29/4/2012), and I said about time someone like you came forward and exposed all these money grabbing liers about global warming. I never believed it in the first time I heard about it, afterall living in Australia we always have droughts, floods, heat, cold and anything else mother nature throws our way, been happening since the world began.
  5. ThanksJames says:1st May 2012 at 11:29 amLooks like you’ve offended some of the precious little ABC toadies below. Keep at it James. The Left in Australia is going down the gurgler, so they’re hypersensitive at the moment. Sorry the ABC couldn’t be fair with their interviewing. They only want to hear one line and nothing else. What possessed you to go into the lion’s den like that? You did well under extremely trying circumstances. Thanks for visiting, many of us are grateful you have taken time to come here.

Comments are closed.

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

Why I owe Aussie QC Raymond Finkelstein a pint | James Delingpole

March 5, 2012

Gratuitous saltwater crocodile picture

Today’s column is dedicated to Raymond Finkelstein QC. Raymond who? Well, he’s the kind of left-leaning activist lawyer I’d normally run a mile from – especially since he’s behind a scary new report which, if implemented, will kill what’s left of freedom of speech in Australia and pretty much criminalise climate scepticism. (H/T John O’Sullivan; Peter Dun)

But as far as I’m concerned, the man’s a total bloody hero and when I come to Oz in mid-April I’d like to buy him a pint. Why? Because thanks to good old Raymond I’m going to sell loads more copies of my book Killing The Earth To Save It: How Environmentalists are Ruining the Planet, Destroying the Economy and Stealing Your Jobs (Connor Court).

Raymond – or Pinkie Finkie, as I’m sure he’d preferred it if I called him, because the Aussies do love a bit of informality, don’t they? – has produced a report on media regulation in Australia so terrifyingly authoritarian it makes the Leveson Enquiry look like a model of balance, sanity and restraint. (According to Mark Steyn – via Jo Nova – the Chinese have been eyeing Pinkie Finkie’s report with gobsmacked admiration, wondering whether they could ever get away with producing something quite so extreme…)

You can read the full 400 pages here, if you’re feeling masochistic. But Australian Climate Madness has a pretty good summary of the key issues of concern, starting with Pinkie Finkie’s proposal to create a new super-regulator called the News Media Council [missed a trick there, didn’t he? surely Ministry of Truth would have been more appropriate] which will impose its idea of fairness and balance not only on newspapers but even on blogs with as few hits as 15,000 a year.

But whose idea of fairness and balance?

It’s an astonishing fact that of the 10600 submissions received by the inquiry no fewer than 9600 were boilerplate submissions from left-wing pressure groups, led by Avaaz “a global civic organization launched in January 2007 that promotes activism on issues such as climate change, human rights, poverty and corruption.” (See Andrew Bolt for further details)

This bias is certainly evident in its attitude to climate change. It cites a December 2011 report by the left-leaning Australian Centre for Independent Journalism on media coverage of climate change policy in Australia. The report – A Sceptical Climate – had found that “negative coverage of government policy outweighed positive coverage by 73 per cent to 27 per cent” and that the preponderance of negative coverage was even greater among Murdoch-owned newspapers.

To which the only sane and sensible response is: “Yeah? And???” Of course a left-wing think tank is going to find climate scepticism objectionable. Of course it’s going to seize every opportunity to have a dig at papers owned by Rupert Murdoch. But had Pinkie Finkie been wearing his scrupulously neutral wig of blind justice – rather than his I HEART George Soros hat – it might have occurred to him that there was a much more plausible reason than media bias as to why the Gillard Government’s carbon tax got such generally negative coverage.

Maybe the carbon tax was just a bloody stupid idea and everyone with an ounce of sense could SEE it was a bloody stupid idea!

Pinkie Finkie, however, takes the view that any newspaper that takes a firm line against an iniquitous, wrong-headed, economically suicidal, unscientifically-based, activist-driven, morally bankrupt new carbon tax system must perforce be in need of stricter regulation.

4.38 However, to have an opinion and campaign for it is one thing; reporting is another, and in news reporting it is expected by the public, as well as by professional journalists, that the coverage will be fair and accurate.

4.39 Nonetheless, there is a widely-held public view that, despite industry-developed codes of practice that state this, the reporting of news is not fair, accurate and balanced.

“Widely-held public view”. Yes, well I suppose it really is “widely-held” if you ignore the fact that 86 per cent of those submissions were the result of leftist astroturfing, much of it – not unlike the Leveson Inquiry – motivated mainly by a desire to get Murdoch.

(Lest you doubt it, here’s what Avaaz said to its mob: (H/T Andrew Bolt)

The media inquiry we fought hard to win is under threat — Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers are working to discredit and limit the investigation into his stranglehold on our media. But a flood of public comments from each of us will set an ambitious agenda and save the inquiry.)

Anyway, you get the idea. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, and all that. We’ve saw in the Andrew Bolt aborigines case that freedom of speech in Australia was already on its last legs, thanks to the way the system has been hijacked by activist judges. If Finkelstein gets his way, this could be the final nail in the coffin.

I personally don’t think it will be. I think the Carbon Tax, the Bolt trial and now this are going to lead to the mother of all political backlashes, and that when it comes to the next general election the avowedly climate sceptical Tony Abbott is going to be a shoo-in.

But let’s allow lefties like Pinkie Finkie and Gillard and Tim Flannery and Bob Brown their hour in the sun because the longer they stay there, the more damage they do and the more damage they will be seen to have done. This is important. (The same applies to Obama’s US; sadly it’s not going to work here, not with Cameron poisoning the wells for Conservatism for ever). If Australia is to get the government it needs (and deserves) it must first experience the full horror of the government it doesn’t deserve. The more easily ordinary people can see just how authoritarian, petty-minded, bullying, meddling and grotesquely biased the left can be when it holds the reins of power, the more enthusiastic they’ll be about throwing the bastards into the croc pit come 2013. (Or sooner, if we’re lucky.)

Related posts:

  1. Climategate: five Aussie MPs lead the way by resigning in disgust over carbon tax
  2. Aussie sceptics destroy EU carbon commissioner
  3. Global warming: red-faced climatologist issues grovelling apology
  4. Julian Assange is not a Climategate hero

3 thoughts on “Why I owe Aussie QC Raymond Finkelstein a pint”

  1. Nige Cook says:5th March 2012 at 10:15 pmJames, let me explain: anyone who points out the fact that the emperor’s clothes are threadbare is a menace to freedom of speech and needs to be muzzled. Freedom of speech cannot work in a dictatorship of lefties. You should know that, having seen the struggles good olf Brezhnev had to muzzle dissidents.

    There is nothing illogical for a lying dogmatic orthodoxy to suppress freedom of speech when it disproves the lies. Quite the contrary, it would be criminally insane for them not to try to ban the facts. Fortunately, in England there is no need for a law to be passed by Parliament here, banning a scientific journal’s peer reviewers from permitting publication of facts. They’re sufficiently corrupt that it’s simply not needed. Oz is different…

  2. Finbar says:8th March 2012 at 11:27 pmNow that you’re all sweary, may I call you an obnoxious cunt?
  3. Openwifi says:9th March 2012 at 3:25 pmThis is a bit of a shame:

    http://www.delingpolestudio.co.uk/Design_Portfolio/Pages/WWF.html

Comments are closed.

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

Cap and Trade: Which Part of ‘We Can’t Afford It’ Doesn’t Obama Understand?

Obama's crazy new Bill will do nothing to stop this

But they still don’t produce as much hot air as Al Gore…

Wakey wakey America: nightmare day is here. The day when the House of Representatives votes on probably the most pointless, damaging, wrong-headed and suicidally dumb piece of legislation since…

Well I was going to say Prohibition, but even Prohibition had a certain twisted logic to it. (You know: “Daddy, why does your breath smell funny? Why do you keep hitting Mom? Why’s there no money for food again this week?” etc. I’m not saying I’m persuaded by this argument but at least you can concede the Temperance movement had one).

So that must mean then that the Climate Bill – aka Waxman-Markey after the two, rather sinister-looking representatives who wrote it – being pushed through the House today is quite simply the worst piece of US legislation in living memory. And possibly beyond.

Why? Well at the cost of the biggest tax increase in American history, it will achieve precisely zilch.

(Actually, not quite zilch. There are one or two people who are going to be doing very nicely out of it, from the Libtard apparatchiks and Algore fellow travellers who’ve invested in the right carbon-trading companies to all those vested interests in the Mid-West who have been bought off with the inevitable pork barrelling concessions designed to ease the bill’s awkward passage.)

According to an analysis by the Heritage Foundation the Waxman-Markey bill –  whose centrepiece is a tax on carbon emissions, often known as “cap and trade” because it sounds innocuous and no one understands what it means – will by 2035 reduce aggregate gross domestic product by $7.4 trillion. (That’s more than 6 times the projected cost of President Obama’s ENTIRE universal healthcare programme).

But the misery doesn’t end there:

“In an average year, 844,000 jobs would be destroyed, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by almost 2 million.”

“Consumers would pay through the nose as electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket, as President Obama once put it, by 90% adjusted for inflation. Inflation-adjusted gasoline prices would rise 74%, residential natural gas prices by 55% and the average family’s annual energy bill by $1,500.”

And how exactly will the world benefit from this swingeing tax on the stuff every one of us breathes out every minute of day?

“According to an analysis by Chip Knappenberger, administrator of the World Climate Report, the reduction of U.S. CO2 emissions to 83% below 2005 levels by 2050 — the goal of the Waxman-Markey bill — would reduce global temperature in 2050 by a mere 0.05 degree Celsius.”

There’s ‘no debate on carbon pollution’ jeopardizing the planet, claims President Obama, who clearly gets all his information from the liberal broadcast media and the dead tree press, both of which for reasons known only to themselves cleave to the Al Gore “Anthropogenic Global Warming” meme like cognitive dissonant rats to a sinking ship.

Out here in the real world, meanwhile, there are fewer and fewer of us who want any more of their money of wasted on this bizarre eco-fascist fantasy. It was an exciting and novel distraction in the good old days when we still felt rich and a bit guilty for being rich and wanted to devise new ways of punishing ourselves for our (perceived) eco sins. But not any more. We haven’t the money to bribe the Third World to reduce its carbon emissions; nor are our economies nearly strong enough to absorb the burden of green taxation and zealous  and intrusive green legislation.

What’s more, the science is increasingly with us. Today I shall be praying with all my heart that Waxman-Markey dies the death it so fully deserves. So too will everyone else in the world who values liberty, a healthy global economy and plain common sense.

Enough ManBearPig already! The beast must be slain!

Related posts:

  1. Bloody marvellous Aussies kill carbon emissions bill
  2. Pope Catholic; Obama energy official profits from AGW
  3. Welcome to the New World Order
  4. Is ‘Kojak’ Obama losing all his hair?
Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations