April 2, 2012 | 12 comments
March 31, 2012 | 8 comments
February 22, 2012 | 7 comments
January 12, 2012 | 8 comments
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
Film director and environmental poseur extraordinaire James Cameron insists that we “have to live with less”. “Have to” generally implies, and specifically in Cameron’s case is intended to mean, something enforceable. Like, say, a law. Consistent with these beliefs, or at least this pose-slash-talking point, he has just given $1 million to the campaign working to defeat California’s Proposition 23.
Prop 23 would delay implementation of the state’s ‘global warming’ law called AB 32 — modeled after Europe’s disastrous experiment, and so touted dishonestly as the ‘world’s first’ such scheme. This is Cameron consistency because, as an energy rationing measure, AB32 is designed to ensure that Californians have to live with less.
That may cause some confusion among those of you in California who have heard that AB 32 is actually the train out of the current era of living with less, the train to a more prosperous time when, to hear its cheerleaders tell things, we’ll all be rich from selling windmills to each other. Or something.
But James Cameron clearly is also self-loathing. And on this issue we find rare common ground.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?