by James Delingpole
Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?
The latest to be exposed is, of course, New York’s ex-Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.
When Schneiderman wasn’t busy – allegedly – “choking, beating and threatening” women, he was busy bullying the people he calls “climate deniers”.
Here he is on a video in 2014 declaring that “climate deniers have no place in public life.”
He was also one of the lead instigators of a scheme by liberal Attorneys General to use lawfare to harass fossil fuel companies such as Peabody Energy and Exxon Mobil. In 2016, he hosted 16 fellow Democrat AGs and former Vice President Al Gore to launch a coalition called AGs United for Clean Power.
“With gridlock and dysfunction gripping Washington, it is up to the states to lead on the generation-defining issue of climate change. We stand ready to defend the next president’s climate change agenda, and vow to fight any efforts to roll-back the meaningful progress we’ve made over the past eight years,” said Attorney General Schneiderman. “Our offices are seriously examining the potential of working together on high-impact, state-level initiatives, such as investigations into whether fossil fuel companies have misled investors about how climate change impacts their investments and business decisions.”
My, how the wheel of fortune has turned since!
Schneiderman’s departure from the scene represents a major blow for the Climate Industrial Complex and its efforts to undermine the Trump administration’s environmental and energy reforms. The jubilation among skeptics has been unconfined, as E & E News reports:
“A lot of climate skeptics are smiling at his downfall because he was an out-of-control, really wacky guy who held a lot of power,” said Marc Morano, who runs the blog Climate Depot.
Morano and his allies have been especially disdainful of the legal attempts Schneiderman led to hold Exxon Mobil Corp. and other oil companies accountable for global warming, calling him “the ultimate shakedown artist.”
“Let’s take a moment to pause and take a look at the strategy of blaming energy companies for bad weather,” Morano said. He added that Schneiderman’s resignation and quick disappearance from the public scene will force climate activists to reconsider their approach.
“He was the lightning rod,” he said. “He was the instigator. It definitely limits the movement when you take out the lead guy.”
Yup. But we still haven’t answered the question: why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such reptiles?
Let me give you a few more examples:
Al Gore and the Portland massage therapist (one of several victims, allegedly, of his tentacular groping…)
Rajendra Pachauri, former head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, exposed as a serial sex pest.
David Suzuki – Canada’s most feted eco-campaigner who just happens to be a dick who is extremely rude and – see also Gore – an appalling hypocrite:
Suzuki, who did not return calls to respond, spends a lot of time hectoring others about over-population (but he has five children), reducing our carbon footprint (he has a jet-set lifestyle of the rich and famous), living smaller (he owns four houses in B.C. and an apartment in Port Douglas, Australia) and much else besides.
‘Suzuki is fond of flying all over the planet to deliver his $30,000 to $50,000 speeches, while hypocritically imploring others to stay close to home.’
Michael Mann – creator of that discredited artifact the Hockey Stick – who apart from being a hypersensitive and hyper-litigious bully likes to claim, falsely, that he won the Nobel Prize.
etc.
This is only a hypothesis – though it’s a lot more plausible, I think, than man-made global warming theory – but I think it might have to do with the well-observed phenomenon that unpleasant people are attracted to environmental causes in order to greenwash their image.
They’re a bit like sinners who in the past tried to expunge themselves of their earthly vices by engaging in particularly bracing acts of religious devotion.
Championing green causes is the modern equivalent of donning a hair shirt, or going on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, or renouncing society altogether and living on top of a rock in the desert.
The difference is, of course, that there is no personal cost, no suffering involved. You just parade all your green virtue and, hey presto, it magicks away all your vices without any of the trouble of forcing yourself to become a better person.
This isn’t just true of green virtue-signaling, by the way. It’s true of people who espouse liberal politics generally.
Greens and liberals are always looking for dirt in the lives of leading conservatives. The psychological term for this is “Projection.”
Full story at Breitbart
In other news:
Fate Of Schneiderman’s Climate Fight Could Hinge On NY’s Conservative Senate
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
He is absolutely right.
Of course he is right, but who do you hold up as an icon of virtue? DJT? Don’t make me laugh.
Depends on what you mean by “icon of virtue”? There’s no such thing as a perfect person. The question is how imperfect one is allowed to be. Trump had few if any complaints before he was elected, so it’s fairly safe to assume that the hatred and complaints are not about his behavior, but the fact that he beat Hillary.
What is an “icon of virtue”? Are they like unicorns—pure fantasy?
People didn’t vote for Trump because they thought he was the most righteous and morally pure, we voted for him because his personal flaws are compatible with the battles we want him to fight.
Winston Churchill was a great wartime Prime Minister, but was ONLY effective and desirable as a PM in time of war.
We didn’t think that we were electing a saint, we voted to put a giant in the vanguard.
Nobody holds up DJT as an “icon of virtue”. The people were well aware of his flaws when they voted for him. His main “virtue” was that he wasn’t Hillary and he wasn’t an establishment politician (ie swamp creature).
And Mr. Endicott … he wasn’t a … Republican either. Not a GOPe. Which is why he is STILL being attacked. Through the complicity of Mitch McConnel, John McCain, et.al.
I totally agree with PTP. I knew I didn’t like Trump as a person when I voted for him in both the primary and the general election. I knew what type of person he was. But he was the only candidates who was talking about real issues that really mattered. And I wasn’t voting for him to be my best buddy. I was voting for him because I agreed with his position on the big issues. If you were hiring a financial manager to handle your money, which would you prefer – a guy who sweet talks you and is a crook and who puts in some lousy investments or a guy you might not like on a personal level and who has a miserable personal life but who is a sharp investor and will make you some good investments?
And why does any program or anything need “an icon of virtue?” I don’t expect any person to be totally virtuous, an icon, if you will – including myself. I do expect people to live the life they believe others should live if they truly believe that lifestyle is required. You can appear in any concert hall, lecture hall, or even beer hall via the internet, so you don’t need to “jet off” to some neat touristy place to give a lecture. I don’t follow leaders that say “do as I say, not as I do.” I follow leaders that do themselves what they say is right, not what is nice. And as for elected officials, you hold their records accountable, and if they aren’t good, well…
Trebla, what does this have to do with DJT? Are you suggesting there are only two ‘sides’ on this entire planet? Look closely: it has more facets than denizens.
We have no reason to accept nonsense as guidance, whether mathematical in the case of the Hockey Stick, or in the case of the moralizing attack dogs proposing how morality needs to be adopted by others. As they say, people who live in glass houses, shouldn’t.
Defrocking one climate cleric doesn’t tell us anything about the mismatching socks of another. When it comes to morals, Western civilization is tottering so I can’t see much advantage in getting preachy or condescending. Let’s agree the tunnel is long and there is not much light.
Does Trump pay rent for the space he occupies in your head?
You should laugh. The joke is clearly on you.
Why do you impugn a functioning sitting President who is actually accomplishing his promises?
Why do you impugn President trump when the discussion is about prominent environmental campaign scumbags, sleazebag, hypocrites, frauds and trolling trollops?
Whom do you to offer in contrast to President Trump?
Queen HRC?
Emperor BOH?
Bill Clinton?
Either of the Bushs’?
Fauxahontas?
Socialist Sanders?
Any of the boring Republican also rans?
Making it quite certain you suffer from TDS (Trump Derangement Symptoms).
For some personal reason, you wanted to irrationally impugn a President, whose successful accomplishments have already substantially improved:
America’s economy,
international relationships,
dealt successively with several rogue countries,
improved American hope while reducing thousands of regulations.
etc.
and all within 18 months, even while Democrats actively pursue scorched Earth obstructionism.
All while the alleged “Russia collusion” false claims implode as ongoing investigations unveils illegality after illegality, all performed by colluding Democrat partisans and FBI/DOJ miscreants.
The last few months have witnessed DOJ/FBI desperately hiding information regarding their FISA applications allegedly based on a Trump Transition employee.
The last few days have been filled with discussion regarding the new revelation that the FBI had an embedded agent infiltrating the Trump Campaign team; while Mueller’s prosecutions get destroyed in courtrooms.
Worse and worse!
Lots of proven colluding seditious Democrat partisans are in line for indictments and wearing orange jumpsuits.
Yet, you trebla, focus on slimily impugning the one highly visible functioning performing Government employee, President Trump.
There are other descriptive terms for your insulting attitude; ungrateful, unhelpful, ungracious, illogical, etc.
Trebla
It’s difficult to appear credible attacking the POTUS from the humble positions in life you and I occupy.
“So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
Could you cast the first stone?
I couldn’t.
If Trump wasn’t ‘an icon of virtue’ by the standards of modern politicians who think nothing of exploiting charity rules, using their position to make money, or murdering thousands for political gain, he wouldn’t be in the White House. The left have been desperate to find anything significant that they can use against him for two years now, and have completely failed.
DNFTT
Well actually he is not “absolutely right”.
The psychological term “projection” ( which is not a proper noun ) means identifying faults in others which are faults that you ( subconsciously ) recognise in yourself. It does NOT mean digging dirt on the opposition.
Apart from that final paragraph , he does have a good argument.
The only true and proper leadership is by personal example.
That is the true virtue.
I am still looking for green leader to live by his/her words.
I’ve lived under a lot of Presidents, now. It is most interesting that the worst Presidents were the most virtuous ones. Carter would head the list (who only lusted in his heart), followed by Ford, then Obama (who only smoked, and dabbled with drugs in college), Eisenhower (long-term extra-marital affair), Nixon (paranoia, severe lack of honesty, as opposed to being merely dishonest like the rest), Bush 1 groped women (my favorite magician was David Cop-a-feel), Bush II (alcohol, questionable ethics), Kennedy (women and drugs), Clinton (sexual assault). The jury is out on how bad Trump is wrt virtue. The odd man out is Reagan, who seems to have had a clean record except for his divorce, yet was one of the most effective Presidents.
Jtom, you forgot Lyndon Johnson, who was sort of effective on civil rights, but used political pull (at least) to enrich himself, and was noted for several long term affairs, and systematic personal abuse of his aides. Getting into his foreign policy would be a long post, but he was quite willing to have people die to avoid political embarrassment.
When you need to drain the swamp, you don’t send in a priest. You send in a bigger bully than the ones who have infested the swamp.
He was elected and will be re elected, to the job of President , not icon of virtue. By icon of virtue do you mean Jefferson, Washington etc. Or do you mean Alinsky or Clinton ( either, both) or Obama, who collected a Nobel Peace prize before spending every day of his two terms at war, the only President to ever do so.
Greg,
When referring to a specific word, that word then BECOMES a proper noun. This is because at that point, you are using the word as a name for itself.
Additionally, the projection that was being referred to, was the assumption that there simply must be something nefarious to uncover with all of their digging, because they know how they go about gaining power.
“Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?”
I believe its what psychologists call “projection”, i.e., they are compensating for their wretched behaviour by appearing to be super-virtuous.
And who has more incentive to engage in virtue signalling than hypocrites and sleazebags who have something to hide in their private lives? If they work so hard to erect a grand facade of virtue, it is because they hope to hide who they really are behind the facade.
Projection is not compensation. Projection consists of unconsciously impugning someone else’s character based on actual flaws within oneself.
thank you jorge, too many including JD, don’t seem to have the slightest idea what projection mean in psychology while claiming that others are engaged in psychological projection.
I guess that means that they are just making ill-informed claims to dig dirt on the opposition. Sounds like projection to me.
David Johnson
May 11, 2018 at 9:02 am
He is absolutely right.
———–
Yes, certainly his absolutely right.
He is broken, by his own self destructing megalomania and the bullish self rightness.
By his own definition and addressing in this issue, he happens to be a proven climate denier.
Farther more, the used term “harassment” does not do justice, is more like an open wide public extortion.
The most arrogant bullish “gangster” like extortion, with no any regard what so ever for the constitution of his own country.
cheers
did you say anything of substance? It looked about gibberish to me
I can’t make heads or tail of whom you were referring
whiten
I suspect you are a drive by troll.
Nevertheless, as a British citizen I’ll append a response if I may be so bold.
Prior to his election, I was repulsed by Trump’s media persona as a glitzy, money grabbing, media hound who was presented as repulsive, even to gregarious Americans.
Then I saw him competing against Hilary Clinton for POTUS, no competition I thought. As much as I was wary of Hilary, I didn’t understand the depths to which her and Bill could sink, however, that was still media hype as far as I was concerned, remember, non US, casual observer.
Out of mascocistic interest, I visited Trumps website and was presented with an unsophisticated delivery of a manifesto that seemed the creation of an enthusiastic secondary school child, not wrong, but fantastically optimistic and flag waving.
I was almost horrified when he was elected, but considered him a risky bet in the face of equally risky competition, the best of the worst.
Now, our last Prime Minister was the epitome of suave, Eaton educated, cultured British gentry, and he bombed, as has our current PM who presents herself as such, but with much more humble beginnings. Despite our British Bulldog pride, we are lions, led by lambs.
We were once, led by a lion, Winston Churchill, a man at least as unpopular as Trump. We were also once led by another lion, Margaret Thatcher, now at least as unpopular as Trump. But what they both delivered, was what everyone craved, radical change. But when it came, the lambs bleated about their poor condition. But the UK prospered under both.
My perception so far is, that America is lucky to have a lion leading it, no matter how unpopular he may appear now.
Radical change is coming, you all asked for it, now you’re going to get it, good or bad. If it’s bad for you, tough titties, you asked for it. If it doesn’t suit you, console yourself, you might get what suits you next time round.
The most important thing, however, is to grasp the opportunity. It might be a rough ride, but at least it’s a ride.
Trump is a lion, be grateful he’s on your side.
Whiten
Assuming you stop foaming at the mouth long enough to actually respond, I’m interested in your evidence for claiming Trump “…with no any regard what so ever for the constitution of his own country….” (sic). What exactly has Trump done to disrespect or disregard the US constitution?
Obama (I’m guessing your hero) failed to submit the Iran deal to the Senate; Obama failed to submit the Paris Accord to the Senate; Obama dispersed $1B+ in “climate funds” to the Paris group with no congressional authorization; Obama had more 9-0 reversals by the Supreme Court than any other president. All this from the world’s supposedly most intelligent constitutional scholar.
Ok, Whiten – your turn.
HotScot
May 11, 2018 at 3:30 pm
whiten
I suspect you are a drive by troll.
————
:)…It hurts, it really does, doesn’t it, HotScot…!
I think I need not much to clarify, but still for what it could help, my comment here was about the blog post addressing an AG position. The “he” as per AG.
DJT is not an AG…
He is the POTUS……me not commenting about the “he” POTUS…:)
Still the act of “her” hurts!
Cheer
Typical,not only is whiten incapable of explaining, much less defending his position, all he can do is throw even more insults. A troll, and a low class one at that.
MarkW
May 12, 2018 at 12:42 pm
————
You pretty much starting a “sound” like me…please stop that silly “copy-cat” thingy of yours…be your self for once…oh well, if you can manage, that is.
“Better to live one day a lion than a hundred years a sheep.” – old Italian proverb
What a ridiculous article. So because the guy holds views on climate change that Delingpole doesn’t like, he celebrates that he is also a crook. Well guess what…. there are a number of people on the climate science denying team who are looking pretty shoddy too. Try Cardinal Pell (sex abuse against children), Scott Pruitt (nose in the trough)… hell, even the president has a number of women accusing him of sexual assault. But so what? It’s a futile and childish game trying to link an individuals belief on climate change and their morality. Does show how low Delingpole is willing to stop though. The man has no morals.
Simon,
You make s#!t up. The President has never been accused of sexual assault, unless you are referring to Bill Clinton.
Interesting how simple simon once again tries to change the subject.
It’s like another troll who when we point out that wind mills kill birds, whines “well so do cars”.
Joel, and the accusations against Pruitt remain just that. Of course to our ever loving trolls, they don’t need proof. If they needed proof, they couldn’t love the global warming sc@m.
people, DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!
It would be fun to create an article discussing the trolley trollertons who frequent the site, publicly lambasting them for their inept, inane, uninteresting blather.
‘It’s a futile and childish game trying to link an individuals belief on climate change and their morality.’
Well you’ve just demonstrated your own willingness to stoop. I don’t know if it’s related to your views on climate change. There does seem to be a lot of crossover though. Kind of goes with the holier-than-thou control-freak personality type.
I wonder what sort of vices your hiding by your own posturing?
Has Cardinal Pell been found to be guilty of anything?
Katio1505
Not yet. It appears the most credible charges of sex abuse have been dropped due to the death (due to cancer) of the claimant.
Other charges remain to be adjudicated.
joelobryan May 11, 2018 at 12:50 pm
Simon,
“You make s#!t up. The President has never been accused of sexual assault, unless you are referring to Bill Clinton.”
Summer Zervos has filed a defamation lawsuit . She was a contestant on The Apprentice, who says Trump sexually assaulted her in 2007 and then called her a liar when she spoke out about it in 2016. I”d say that’s being accused wouldn’t you?
“I”d say that’s being accused wouldn’t you?”
So where’s the sexual assault case?
Joel Snider May 11, 2018 at 4:00 pm
‘It’s a futile and childish game trying to link an individuals belief on climate change and their morality.’
I wonder what sort of vices your hiding by your own posturing?”
Reading comprehension not a strength huh? I was making the point ones morals are irrelevant when it comes to climate change views. There are good and not so good people on both sides. Delingpole’s attempt to paint those who accept the science as more immoral than those who don’t is really scraping the bottom of the barrel. Takes me back to the pathetic unabomber posters put out by some right wing nut bar group
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2012/may/04/heartland-institute-global-warming-murder
It’s like saying Hitler was a vegetarian so all vegetarians are mass murderers.
“hell, even the president has a number of women accusing him of sexual assault.”
About a dozen or so women have publicly complained about Trump, but none have ever provided any evidence for their claims, and all have had plenty of opportunity.
One woman claimed Trump fondled her on a public airplane, and she is the only woman who has claimed Trump laid hands on her, the other women have other complaints such as one who was triggered merely by Trump asking for her telephone number, which she gave to him. Trump has a witness for the airplane fondling claim who says Trump wasn’t anywhere near the woman for the entire flight.
Normally, when you have a bunch of women making complaints about a man, you have to lean towards believing the women’s claims, but in this circumstance, you have to consider that Trump is dealing with the Clinton Mafia and the Democrats who will stoop to any low to harm their political opponents, so in this case, you have to ask yourself if this public attack on Trump by these women hasn’t been orchestrated by the Clinton Mafia and the Dems. Especially since all they have ever put forward are allegations, and have left it at that. Makes me think they don’t have a case to make or they would have made it already.
As for Stormy Daniels. She admitted in writing that she did not have an affair with Trump. Now she is changing her tune, and we know why.
The worst thing any of Trump’s critics have on Trump is his “lockerroom” talk with Billy the snake, where Trump bragged that he could grab any woman he wanted to. He didn’t say he did that, he just said he could. This is not the first time one man has bragged to another about how desireable he thinks he is to the opposite sex. This is not sexual harrassement folks. It’s braggadocio. Noone would ever know about it if this private conversation had never been made public.
So just like the Russian Collusion Lie, there is nothing on Trump concerning sexual harrassement or assault, either. Just a lot of misinterpretation and lies. And people see through it, too. The Left just knew something like this would bring Trump down. But not so fast! No, Trump’s supporters know what’s going on and support Trump.
Have a nice day.
TA
Ha ha. Believe what you will. So Donald is Mr Moral is he? Tell that to Stormy and Donnies wife.
“Ha ha. Believe what you will.”
Yeah, you too, Simon.
In Simon’s world, everyone he disagrees with is required to be an angel in all aspects of their life.
Otherwise they must be ignored.
Seems like R K Pachauri would have made another paragraph, but I guess there’s enough examples.
oops. dang.
14 Psychological Forces That Make Good People Do Bad Things https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-travis-bradberry/14-psychological-forces-t_b_9752132.html
Great article James. Sadly it is too true!
Good old Dellers – always get’s to the heart of the matter.
“Moral” crusaders often turn out to be rather reprehensible people.The example that comes to mind was Charles Keating, a prominent anti-pornography activist who was later convicted of fraud in the Lincoln Savings and Loan case.
All part of “moral licensing”, which has been discussed for. The person in question makes a great show of public virtue in some area, and then takes that as a downpayment that he can use to act abominably in another area. Leftists like Schneidermann pay great lip service to “Women’s Rights!!!” and “MeToo!” in public, and figure that gives him a Moral License to savagely beat and abuse women in private.
speaking of “metoo”, does anyone else find it ironic that most folks still read “#” as “pound”?
#MeToo! ahh the blissfully appropriate irony. The progressives never really understands just how embarrassing they are. And btw, that whole movement is about futher crippling speech and masculinity, and nothing else, save for a few straglers to get some attention (when they should have went to authorities YEARS AGO WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPENED!.
bunch of trolls and losers looking for a payout, with maybe a few reputable cases.
honestliberty
Had not noticed that (but ironic, none the less).
However, I did notice an article about #metoo listing all the prominent outed scumbags (about 100+ of them).
List had about 95% liberal democrat men, 5% Republicans, and 1-2 women (go figure).
“does anyone else find it ironic that most folks still read “#” as “pound”
For about 90% of my lifespan, that’s all it was. That and the comment symbol for a Unix script.
A very interesting question. I’ve thought about a variation of it from time to time . . . People who set themselves up as highly principled, as do gooders, people whose mission in life is apparently to serve others, seem often to get themselves embroiled in sex and other scandals to a noticeable degree. . . They often come across as genuinely intent on doing good and may get themselves into the public glare more as a result, and that might create a false impression that they’re more inclined to derail themselves than folks from the right of the political spectrum, who make no bones about being out to further their own interests and who get less media attention (yeah, yeah, I’m digging out my flak jacket as I type!). .. . Or . .
Or, it might just be, which is what I suspect, that trying to do good (and frequently failing because they can’t resist temptation) is simply compensatory behaviour; a kinda pursuit of redemption, which they seek because of either awareness of their inclinations, or some subconscious mechanism is at work to balance their scandalous proclivities with something saintly. I’m not saying that all do-gooders are potential sex criminals, but I think there’s something to the compensatory behaviour idea . . .
Actually, your idea might explain carbon credits. One can dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere (or have questionable proclivities and habits) but if one buys credits to offset it, it’s okay (if one “does good” in another area, the questionable activities can be overlooked). I hadn’t really thought of that until now, but it kind of makes sense. You can continue to “sin” if you donate enough to the cause.
Yes Sheri: They used to be called indulgences. Flogged off by the church. Nothing new under the sun.
Schneiderman
Schneiderman
Just another rat-faced man
Wears eye liner
As a tell
Role plays slavery
In his cell
Look out! Here comes that Schneiderman
Webs of lies
Any size
Beats the girls
Till they cries
Look out! Here comes that Schneiderman
His AG crew
Framed #ExxonKnew
Thought they’d apply
The money screw
Look out! Here comes that Schneiderman
That’s a +2
LAST LINES- In his dreeeamy tights – where the girls cannot fight – he just beeeeats them ripe -with Reptilian delight – Schneiderman – did Grandstand – like Al gore in a Chakra Band
Now deplored -as a Boar – a slave driver to be ignored
Look out !! Perverse as Weiner’s lore ! -Once was a great Man Whore !
With Behind bars he’ll score- and it will be quite sore !!!!!
I am amused. Good job!
Sorry guys, but don’t quit your day jobs.
Rob, lousy cadence first verse. Brilliant second verse, fell away third verse.
DR.GSPANGLOSS, really bad Rap.
Ah, the pains of climate virtue signalling….
What’s happening now is that a lot of jerks (and I suspect, some innocent folks) are being held to account. It’s going way overboard and people’s lives are being ruined over things that aren’t illegal.
I’m beginning to think that social media are ruining America. link We’re quickly going back to the days of lynch mobs and witch burnings.
Very muchly agree with you.
this is an extension of the collectivist push, the social engineering aspect of the androgenous society.
Males don’t even want to copulate with females any more, they’d rather be on their electronic devices.
Real men are getting to the point where it isn’t worth it because they don’t even know anymore what is permissible. This is an affront to masculinity, free speech, and freedom in general. The long slow march to totalitarianism, couched in inclusive diversity gobbleygook. You know, the type of lies people like Kristi eat up.
Honestliberty,
Thanks for thinking of me. I’m afraid, though, that you’re got me mixed up with someone else. If I believed what was told me, I’d be a skeptic by now, since I’ve spent 100 times more time discussing climate with skeptics than with anyone else.. I don’t believe what I hear, though, and I do my own digging to verify what’s said. That’s how I discovered that Delingpole is not only a fool but a liar.
He’s my old nemesis, you see. I used to hang out at Breitbart, but I must have become a threat, pointing out his falsehoods, because I was banned. Banned from Breitbart! That takes some doing.
Yup, old Jimmy spreads sheer ignorant prop’ganda, lies, misinterpretations – and that’s just the science. He doesn’t know squat about the science, so he relies a lot on other blogs for his errors. His real specialty, though, is insults and slander. He loves to think of cute ways to show his hatred and spread it around.
And look how popular and powerful Breitbart is.
The internet is a wonderful tool, but it’s also an ideal way to manipulate opinions and a perfect vehicle for confirmation bias. How many of you think about that?
How many of you have really considered the campaigns of misinformation and how that affects the current situation? Have you read the documents? Seen the names of prominent skeptics hired by the energy sector to tell conservatives that the science is uncertain, still being debated, and that warming would be good anyway? And why aren’t some of the documents posted here, if space is devoted to the lawsuits? It’s big news, directly associated with climate change policy.
Maybe, just maybe, you aren’t getting the full story here?
PS Honestliberty, I know how hard it is these days, when sex is so wonderfully casual and meaningless. You’d think women would want men in a position of power groping them, rubbing against them, etc. and so forth. Women are obviously against freedom..
Kristi maybe you need to practice what you speak/write.
She thinks she’s smart, but doesn’t know logic doesn’t suffer fools lightly.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, toots.
But then you’ve opened your mouth and removed all doubt. You can’t win here lady, you are outmatched in wits and intellect. But, continue to pretend. I know. It comforts your type.
commieBob
Oh for Pete’s sake Bob.
The, “things are getting so bad the world will end” with lynch mobs and witch burnings, was the chant of my parents generation through the 50’s and 60’s. It was the chant of my early youth, and the chant of my middle age. I can’t stand the repetition of it in my later years, it’s just nonsense.
Please don’t dramatise.
The gospel from HotScot.
Other’s feelings are verboten!
Javert Chip
Are you sweet on commieBob all of a sudden?
I’m sure he”s capable of replying to me himself.
I’m certain he’d do a better job as well.
HotScot
Ok. Got it. Now you control who responds.
Jian Ghomeshi is accused of sexual assault by several females. As a result he lost his radio broadcasting job and will have trouble getting any sort of work.
Ghomeshi was charged and faced trial. The charges fell apart. In the eyes of the law he’s not guilty. In that light, it would be fair to say that his life has been ruined on the basis of unsubstantiated accusations. That’s entirely in the spirit of lynch mobs and witch burnings. The social justice warriors don’t even give lip service to things like fair play and due process.
Here’s a long list of powerful men facing (mostly unsubstantiated) sexual harassment allegations. Many have had their livelihoods destroyed. Many of those probably deserved it. What about the few that are actually innocent?
The social justice warriors only care about vengeance. They have no concept of justice or fair play. In that regard it appears that society is taking a big step backward when the SJWs don’t face the same opprobrium as the KKK.
Bob
Personally, I think that if there is an accusation of sexual assault against anyone it should be kept private, for the very reasons you highlight. Bandwagon jumping because an individual is famous is as bad as the sexual event itself if it’s proven to be false.
However, there is also the case to be made that when individuals are exposed by one person, and that is publicly expressed, then more victims might come forward.
Most of this kicked off in the UK with the alleged serial paedophile Jimmy Savile. A high profile entertainer who died a celebrity, but was exposed after his death. It was the blue touchpaper. However,Savile was never able to defend himself and was portrayed in the media as a monster. Not that I’m suggesting he wasn’t, my point is though, is that it was trial by media to which he couldn’t respond.
Now, the difficult bit is, am I a social justice warrior? A female colleague approached me because she claimed to have been sexually assaulted by a manager of our department. I can’t unknow that information so I reported it to my company’s whistle blowing department because the manager might already have been under investigation for a similar event, or he might have gone on to commit more sexual assaults. The woman has gone on to make a formal complaint because of my support and guidance.
Did I do something wrong, and does that make me a SJW?
An SJW would never ask that question. 🙂 There’s a huge difference between standing up for what’s right and being a member of a lynch mob. The SJWs are morally stunted and can’t tell the difference.
They are being hoisted by their own petard.
I think it has to do with “Hero Complex” issues. I suspect that most of these guys were real losers in high school, college, and elsewhere. I mean, look at McKibbles, or anyone that gets arrested for greenpeas antics, would you really want them trap-blocking for you on delayed handoff up the B gap? I think not, I think I’d rather have Pompeo or Brett Baier or the Trumpster cut-blocking that linebacker
I would add that they carry extreme doubt about their worthiness as a person, so they must then seek the approval of whatever gang of people that is most likely to fall for their pitch.
The description you are groping towards is: they are Narcissists. Narcissists need praise, even if insincere (Narcissistic income). Progressives appear to be rife with Narcissism.
“Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?”
Because there are a lot scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites and frauds about and some of them campaign about the environment?
Exactly.
What’s the control group for this? Politicians who don’t speak out a lot on Green issues? Lawyers who work on corporate law?
Or maybe just Hollywood stars who aren’t eco-warriors.
If they are all exemplars of personal morality then the article may have a point.
But it doesn’t.
I think a significant difference between the Schneiderman, Gore, Suzuki group and the Clinton, Weinstein group is that the former are personally profiting (fame, dollars or both) while trying to change laws and lives to conform to a lifestyle they don’t live while the latter are just hypocrites or scumbags on a personal level.
Suzuki is also known to request all females entourages with his speaking fees……
I reminded the wife, after the Schneiderman revelation, that liberal chicks are easy. They’re the ones with no moral compass (no, being “green” is not “morality”) … with loose sexual proclivities. They make easy targets for “green” cult leaders. Same thing with PETA, BTW.
Which explains why ALL these Schneiderman victims kept silent about their abuse. They didn’t see his behaviour … or their participation in it … as being immoral. Just a fun romp with an “important” “leader” of so many leftist causes. A real “green” Jim Jones, or “eco” David Koresch, or … unabombing Ted Kaczynski. These gals probably felt “special” that they were servicing such a powerful “man”
Kenji: I think it’s worse than that, from reports I’ve read, at least a couple of the four have said they knew it was wrong but didn’t report because they thought he was doing great work as AG and they didn’t want to ruin him. They are (or were) politically active on the left, so they knew it would ruin his career. Read Mark Steyn’s take on it, you’ll enjoy it.
So they sold their soul to the devil. Are they really “victims”?
Your point was brought home to me a few years ago when I read an article written by a liberal woman. She actually claimed that if we could ask Mary Jo Kopechne today if it was all worth it, she would say, “yes” because of Ted Kennedy’s achievements for women’s rights and abortion. Mary Jo had political ambitions of her own. To assume that her life and future accomplishments were less important than Kennedy’s, and to view her as a small stepping stone toward Kennedy’s greatness, goes beyond misogyny. But, apparently, there are liberal women out there who think that women should be willing to sacrifice themselves for the “cause.”
because it’s a s c a m……why is anyone surprised when s c a m e r s are attracted to a s c a m
My favorite expression is … “only a swindler can be swindled”. Or, if you wish, “only a scamster can be scammed”. If one has larceny in their heart … they will most likely fall victim to a scam. Which is how I define all the “true believing” eco acolytes. They are all trying to get over on the rest of us … signaling their virtue or selling their USELESS windmills and other inefficient contraptions to replace fossil fuels.
Kenji
Sadly, highly untrue.
Tens of thousands of elderly are scammed (real-time PC virus removal as an example) for $ millions/billions each year. 3.4 Billion (B) robocalls were made last month offering things like free vacations.
No larceny required on behalf of the victims.
You know that a bunch of people in the political class and the press in NYC culture knew about this for a very long time. All of them kept their mouths shut. And in the meantime a bunch of them, even those guilty of similar behavior, sanctimoniously preached to us about such subjects as women’s rights, sexual harassment, the glass ceiling, etc.
And ALL OF THEM are SCUM!
And they wonder why they have lost so much credibility and influence?
Trump KNEW about claims ex-New York State attorney general Eric Schneiderman was abusing women when he tweeted he was ‘worse than Elliot Spitzer or Anthony Weiner’ lawyer reveals
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5719043/Trump-KNEW-claims-ex-New-York-State-attorney-general-Eric-Schneiderman-abusing-women.html
Yea and then when it breaks into the news the press scum sit there with a straight face and act like they had no idea! They are nothing more than immoral highly paid liars.
They all knew about Jerry Sandusky as well, and said nothing. For years and years, and said nothing. The managers knew, other teachers knew. Was he too important? or is there some other psychology involved?
It’s moral exhibitionism. Like the Jekyll and Hyde dynamic. The moral public face, while indulging their true natures in secret. Back when Ted Bundy first came to public knowledge – he was known to be the type that helped old ladies across the street, he worked for a crisis hotline – its protective coloring, and the very soul of hypocrisy.
“They’re a bit like sinners who in the past tried to expunge themselves of their earthly vices by engaging in particularly bracing acts of religious devotion.”
It also brings to mind more than one TV evangelist with a little honey in the background to minister to one’s earthly needs.
At least the TV Ministers have the self awareness to appear in public … weeping … and asking forgiveness for their own sins. You will get NO such confession from the green ministry.
But the solution for both is the same. Defeat them! Pound on them until you bury them. You can’t compromise with them. It is winner takes all.
“Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?”
They’re politicians, what do you expect?
Indeed. Scumbags are drawn to power like flies to steaming fresh crap.
The difference is that the media actively seek out crimes by right-wing politicians, while covering up for the left.
The keyword is ‘control’. Deep down they all are control freaks, in their relations with others, i.p. females, and in their professional capacity. It manifests itself in an urge to save humanity from itself. And, as Mencken noticed, the urge to save us is always a proxy for the need to control us.
Or as Jordan Peterson suggests in his book “12 Rules for Life, an antidote for chaos” … these “green” pedagogues need to to clean their own rooms … before lecturing others. Inotherwords … solve their own personal problems before pontificating about “societies problems”.
Everybody wants to save the planet… nobody wants to do the dishes.
And Peter Gleik too.
Like at the ground level the preachy types are the ones who least practice good sustainable environmental habits compared even to those who totally reject man made climate change theories. To be the strongest fish in a pond you have to be the same as the other fish but more so.
Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?
I put a high degree of probability that many of the prominent environmental campaigners just haven’t be found out yet.
I wish to add Jagadish Shukla to the list of climate leaders who failed.
“man-made global warming theory”
It’s not a theory, It’s not even a hypothesis. It is a SCAM and, it seems, it’s a SCAM invented, promoted and litigated by SCUM.
Surely Weinstein must be involved somewhere!
“Why is it that so many prominent environmental campaigners turn out to be such scumbags, sleazebags, hypocrites or frauds?
A: If a person is willing to use their position in an abuse of power, such as Schneiderman frequently did (weaponizing prosecutorial and litigation powers for a political agenda), then that person likely feels they have license to abuse people to get what they want as well.
“>>> I think it might have to do with the well-observed phenomenon that unpleasant people are attracted to environmental causes in order to greenwash their image. <<<"
No, I don't think so.
Unpleasant people, bullies like Schneiderman, Pachauri, Suzuki, Mann, Gore, they're attracted to environmentalism because it is a yet another fascist ideology that lets them bully other people, break their bones, break shopping windows, impose torment on everybody, assert themselves over the unwashed masses, and get away with it. If Communists were in power in the US, this lot would be right there, at the top of the Communist Party.
They. Are. Thugs.
It's in their genes.
I think there is something to the projection theory but there is more likely a sociopathic explanation. Sociopaths have an uncanny ability to “read” another person and exploit their vulnerability. The antisocial behavior is camouflaged by interactive signaling that either comforts or disarms the victim. Exploitation comes after the unguarded person, or people, have bought into the facade and then become useful, for whatever the purpose. Some are even elegant and artful in their skill at entrapping others. The targets have their own issues but I won’t get into that. It is a very interesting area of study as the boundaries between an influential person, versus a manipulative person, to outright dangerous sociopath is a little bit dodgy.
Nah, they are just all … little men … who have been bestowed unreasonable POWER, by the Socialiist elements within our democracies. They are Deep State bureaucrats who wield political power as a cover for their own shortcomings.
Schneiderman reminds me of the small, awkward, wimpy kid who was always the last kid chosen for the basketball team … who has spent his entire life “getting even” with those jocks, and all the pretty girls who ignored him in the hallways of his middle school.
They all seem to have sought high status without accountability. That is a sign of people who are weak and know that they are not competent.
Schneiderman probably won’t be chosen for basketball in prison either! Lol!
LOL