Jerry Brown Tells UN That Trump ‘Does Not Represent The People’ Of The US

5:25 PM 12/14/2018 | Energy

Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor

California Gov. Jerry Brown excoriated the Trump administration’s “behavior” at the United Nations climate summit in Poland, arguing it did “not represent the people of the United States.”

“The United States, I’m sorry to say, does not represent the people of the United States,” Brown said in a video address Thursday to U.N. delegates gathered in Katowice for the summit, called COP24.

“California, Washington, New York, Vermont and many, many other states representing tens of millions of people believe in the science of climate change, believe and demand we reduce our carbon emissions,” the Democrat said.

Brown was reacting to news the U.S. joined with Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait in blocking the conference from “welcoming” a U.N. report on limiting future global to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2100 — a report called for in the 2015 Paris Agreement. (RELATED: TheDCNF Asked Paris Climate Accord Backers If They’d Support Banning Private Jets. Most Didn’t Respond)

President Donald Trump promised to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris accord in 2020. Brown is one of Trump’s staunchest critics when it comes to the planned Paris withdrawal.

“We recognize the science undergirding the knowledge we have today on climate change. If we’re going to stay below 1.5 degrees Centigrade from the industrial period we have to take action now,” Brown said.

“The actions and the behavior of the leaders of the United States and Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and Russia and other countries are not acceptable,” Brown added. “This is a suicide mission upon which you have embarked. Pull back.”

However, the U.N. report Brown refers to estimates $122 trillion would be needed to fund the new green energy infrastructure needed to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The report, released in October, also says a carbon tax needed to meet that temperature goal would be as high as $27,000 per ton, or a $240 tax on a gallon of gasoline.

Governor Jerry Brown speaks during a briefing with State officials with President Trump at the incident command post in Chico California

Gov. Jerry Brown speaks during a briefing with State officials as U.S. President Donald Trump, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom (R) and FEMA head Brock Long (2nd L) look on at the incident command post in Chico, California, U.S., Nov. 17, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis.

Thousands of U.N. delegates, government officials and environmentalists gathered for the two-week climate summit in the heart of Poland’s coal country at the beginning of December. So far, the conference has been bogged down by the usual disputes about how countries hand money to poor nations to adapt to global warming.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres made a desperate plea for countries to agree on key details of the Paris accord, which the Obama administration signed onto in 2016. However, emissions are expected to rise another 3 percent this year, despite the Paris accord going into effect.

“People are dying because of climate change. In fires, in mudslides, in floods, in other parts of the country,” Brown said in his video address. “This is serious stuff. You represent humanity. Over 7 billion people are counting on you.”

“Don’t resort to what will be condemned in future years as nothing less than a criminal enterprise. Wake up!” Brown said.

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 15, 2018 10:08 pm

I distinctly remember a vote for President of the United States in 2016 which Donald Trump won. What is this Jerry Brown talking about?

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
December 15, 2018 10:28 pm

Jerry Brown CERTAINLY only represents a small proportion of the USA.

FAR more people voted for Donald Trump than have ever or will ever vote for Jerry Brown.

IIRC, Donald Trump WON the last whole of USA election.

Perhaps this brown-noser should be reminded of this FACT

Reply to  fred250
December 15, 2018 11:11 pm

The Government of California, unfortunately, represents the people of California, whether we like it or not.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 12:06 am

It is appropriate that he represents a bunch of drama queens and pseudo actors.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 1:59 am


bill johnston
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 6:28 am

But when the bills start coming in for the costs of GHG reduction and Gov. Brown is asked to pay his states share, he will plead insolvency and then hit up the feds for help.

Reply to  bill johnston
December 16, 2018 9:51 am

Yellow Vests appear when you run out of “other” peoples money.

Reply to  bill johnston
December 17, 2018 1:18 pm

UN Environment

Re: pension fund money investment.

Scroll down to:

New York State Common Retirement Fund.

New York State also has a “green bank”.

The peoples’ money?

Reply to  bill johnston
December 17, 2018 8:29 pm


Articles: about 362
Search results: decarbonization financing.

Can just scroll through the Article titles.

Reply to  bill johnston
December 17, 2018 9:08 pm

United Nations
Global Search
UN Enterprise Search: decarbonization financing.

So many items it’s almost impossible to read all of the Articles.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 9:37 am

Moonbeam doesn’t represent me: i never voted for that incompetent POS any of the times he’s run for office here.

Reply to  redc1c4
December 16, 2018 2:38 pm

He should be cerified and locked in a loony bin

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 9:54 am

But it doesn’t represent the other states.

Reply to  Nan
December 16, 2018 8:14 pm

Vermont shut down its nuclear power plant and now has about $1 billion cost to obtain hydro power from Quebec.

New York already gets electric power from Ontario and Quebec. New York also has a deal with Quebec to bring even more hydro power to New York City. The NYC deal is now a work-in-progress.

At times, power from Ontario to New York is obtained at cost or below cost of Ontario power production.

Both states want to use renewables and will use Canadian electricity for supply and/or base load power.

Other New England states are also looking to Canada for power supply.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
December 16, 2018 10:22 am

Here is what happened on Jerry Brown’s watch:

California Becoming More Feudal, With Ultra-Rich Lording Over Declining Middle Class
by Joel Kotkin and Marshall Toplansky 10/15/2018

Like the Gambler said: “Read ‘Em ‘n Weep”.

Reply to  fred250
December 16, 2018 2:25 am

Progressives don’t like FACTS. They only like absolute power.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 8:25 am

Reality is a right-wing invention to confuse people.

Reply to  fred250
December 16, 2018 7:11 am

Trump won the Presidential election in the Electoral College, as prescribed in the US Constitution. But he also clearly lost the popular majority of votes cast. And since then, his party lost the 2018 mid-terms with the Democrats gaining a net 40 seats (possibly 41 depending upon the contested NC election) and control of the House.

Legally speaking, as current elected head of state, Trump does represent the US today. it seems rather unlikely, however, that that will still be true in 2 years and a little over 1 month, and perhaps sooner depending upon what comes out of the Mueller report.

In any case, these arguments matter little. US Presidents come and go every few years, along with Congressional majorities. So the US is generally all over the map. policy wise. Maybe that is a good thing, maybe not. But it’s unavoidable with our current system of electing governments, and the constantly shifting public voting patterns.

Reply to  Duane
December 16, 2018 7:39 am

Clinton appears to have won the most votes.
However, once you subtract the illegal votes, the matter is no longer as clear.

Regardless, as Al Gore’s campaign manager once said, if this had been a popular vote contest, both parties would have run vastly different campaigns.

Arguing about popular vote is the whine of a loser.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 9:14 am

If Mark you refer to the 3 million illegal aliens voting claim, that has been proven false:

The repeated claims of fraudulent voting in US elections, raised always from the Republican side, have consistently been shown false

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 9:39 am

someone needs to be reminded that citing “Snopes” is *not* convincing evidence, but rather, it’s an indicator that someone is peddling “fake news” since they haven’t been credible in over a decade.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 11:09 am

Griff, US elections may be the one area you are less qualified to comment on than science issues.
Every election has turned up proof of widespread fraud, and that is without any concerted effort to look.
Whether it is the glaring fraud turned up in Michigan during Jill Stein’s recount, or the ballot harvesting that went on this last time, there is more fraud than anyone can even guess at.
Certainly large numbers of illegals vote…nearly every one of them arrested for anything has been shown to have voted, if anyone checked.
Fraud has been widespread in every election in US history, and that is a documented historical fact. And it has always been most heavily concentrated on the left side.
I only mention a few specific examples from many known instances of fraud, since these are completely impossible to deny, no matter how obtuse and disingenuous one wants to be.
Quoting Snopes just makes you look like the fool you are, but the truth is that everyone on the left lies about voter fraud.
If it was stamped out we would see a very different result in congressional elections.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 12:17 pm

You forgot the dead people. Dead people seem to vote Democrat.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 12:41 pm

If you are talking to me, I did not forget them.
The specific methods of voter fraud are numerous…from illegals voting, multiple voting…all the way to good old fashioned ballot box stuffing.
News ways get invented (like those that only became possible with early voting and widespread vote by mail), but one of the old existing methods has ever gone away.
It is literally beyond belief, to me at least, that this is tolerated.
Even third world sh!tholes manage to hold elections where people get one vote and one vote only.
We need to get rid of anything besides on site election day voting…if you cannot be in a polling place on election day, too damn bad. Set up polling places for overseas soldiers.
Or allow that one exception…all other, show up.
Hand stamped with indelible ink, paper ballots only, no electronic anything…PERIOD.(electromechanical works just fine…any electronic system is vulnerable to hacking)
That is the conclusion I have come to. Universal voter ID only… no drivers licenses that are passed out to illegals and then motor voter registers them automatically!
Talk about BS. And no more honor system voter registration…the stakes could not be higher, and who thinks the honor system is viable when the stakes are as high as they could possibly be: The future of our country, jobs, the economy, our freedoms, and lets not forget trillions of dollars per year in money and who gets to spend it and who has it handed to them for free?
As it is anyone who wants to commit voter fraud has ample opportunity, more than a little motive, and little fear of being caught.
IOW…the very recipe for widespread crime.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 12:43 pm

Sorry about the typos:
…but NOT one of the old existing methods has ever gone away.

(I do not bother to correct them unless the meaning is garbled and hard to discern as a result)

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 1:45 pm

Not being able to prove something is not the same thing as having it disproven.

In your mind the claims have been proven false.
Then again, you are still claiming that arctic ice is in a death spiral.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 1:48 pm

Any time somebody suggests doing things like cleaning the dead from the voting rolls, and co-ordinating with other states so that those who have registered in a new state are automatically removed from the rolls in their old states, the Democrats and liberals go bonkers.
Even doing something as basic as requiring a picture id (which almost every other country in the world that has voting, has implemented) is opposed with every fiber of their being.

The left doesn’t want clean elections, because they know they would lose them.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 4:31 pm


The repeated claims of fraudulent voting in US elections, raised always from the Republican side,”

Forgive me, from what I hear and see from my South Pacific home, is that Donald Trump has endured almost 2 years of investigation for a form of fraudulant voting, somehow caused by some collusion with the Russians, so are you telling us that this was also “Raised from the Republican side”?



Reply to  MarkW
December 17, 2018 12:45 am


Are you calling Trump a loser ??

Reply to  MarkW
December 17, 2018 5:31 am

There has never, ever, ever been any evidence of significant voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election. Not a tiny bit. Even Trump’s own appointed commission, which set out to prove Trump’s ridiculous claims of widespread voter fraud, collapsed and evaporated without producing a scintilla of evidence of voter fraud.

Trump, however, is himself a fraud and a liar. With over 6,600 proven lies spoken and tweeted to date since he entered office in January 2017. His own senior staff people, including his own personal lawyer and illegal “fixer” have called him out for his lies.

He will eventually be fitted out for an enormous orange jumpsuit, appropriate wear in the Federal Super Max where he will likely spend the rest of his life after he leaves office.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
December 17, 2018 7:16 am

You forgot the dead people. Dead people seem to vote Democrat

Yep, even if they were a staunch Republican voter during their life.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Duane
December 16, 2018 8:05 am

“And since then, his party lost the 2018 mid-terms with the Democrats gaining a net 40 seats (possibly 41 depending upon the contested NC election) and control of the House.”

And there were something like 45 Republican House incumbents who retired this year. Had those 45 run for one more term, there is a good chance the Republicans would not have lost the House majority.

In other words, don’t blame the loss of the House on Trump. There are other, more significant factors involved.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 16, 2018 10:59 am

In fact, the candidates who failed to support Trump mostly lost, and those that had his full support and supported him overwhelmingly won.
Good riddance to dead weight.
In 2020 Donald Trump will certainly be re-elected, unless the Ds manage another cheat fest of record proportions.
And even then he will likely win, although plenty of localities have enough cheating to swing the local elections, and even some state-wide ones.
Mueller has nothing, except some process crimes that did not exist before he made them happen.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 16, 2018 1:49 pm

This is the reason why Democrats want direct voting for president.
Right now, cheating in Democrat controlled cities can only swing the state, which they were probably going to win anyway.
With direct voting, every illegal vote matters, and the Democrats will ramp up the machinery to harvest as many as possible.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 17, 2018 9:42 am

Indeed Tom, Incumbents are hard to beat. The fact that so many Republican incumbents decided not to run in 2018 is what helped the Democrats win so many house seats, whereas, in the Senate, we see a completely different story – the GOP gaining Senate seats.

That’s not to say that if those Republicans had run they all would have won, but chances are a good many of them would have (see “Incumbents are hard to beat”) and as the margin of house control is so razor thin there would have been a very good chance of the GOP retaining the house (they only need to keep less than half of those lost seats).

Reply to  Duane
December 16, 2018 8:34 am

“Trump won the Presidential election in the Electoral College, as prescribed in the US Constitution.”

The end.

“But he also clearly lost the popular majority of votes cast.”

But ?!?! There is no “but.” Trump won the actual election that was conducted.

Trump ran to win in the Electoral College. Had he run to get the popular vote, he would have campaigned in California and more in New York. And Ms Clinton might have benefited from actually campaigning in Wisconsin.

Since there was no popular vote election, Trump could not have ‘lost.’

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Duane
December 16, 2018 8:46 am

You seem to forget that elections are binary choices (in most cases). Let the Dems nominate some half-brain like Kamala Harris for the general election and Trump will beat her like a red-headed step child.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 10:25 am

I am rooting for Beto. Kamala is like Queen Elizabeth compared to him.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 11:43 am

Not to worry gentlemen.
The clown car of jackasses they will field will include some that most of us can barely fathom.
Shame about that Avenatti guy…but the fact that he was a promising potential candidate for the left, who only grudgingly decided not to run after being caught beating the crap out of his girlfriend, shows the desperation on that side.
And Beto!?
Ha ha ha ha…aaah…
They are excited about a guy who LOST in the only election he ever ran, that was not a congressional district in the middle of nowhere in which he is by far the richest and most well connected person in it, ell…what more needs to be said.

Well, maybe just this: Hillary, a multiple loser, is widely considered their strongest prospect.
Can anyone think of the last time a major party even considered running a person, who just lost to the incumbent that candidate would be running against, for their nominee?

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 12:32 pm


I chuckle at the thought of Joey Biden thinking that as an aging heterosexual white guy, he can win the hearts of today’s identity-politics driven Liberals and fire them up to come out and vote for him.
And Bernie Sanders, as an avowed aging socialist, can carry middle America, an even bigger hoot.

It’s gonna take some dark horse candidate, like Colorado Gov Hickelooper or MT Gov Bullock, to seriously challenge Trump. But I doubt the identity politics of the socialist Dimocrats will coalesce around a straight white guy.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 1:51 pm

I read this morning that Joe Biden is currently leading in Iowa.
(Probably just name recognition, but it is a hopeful sign.)

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 4:54 pm

My favorite news item regarding the 2020 election this past week was the article in Vox, I think it was, calling for an overhaul of the Constitution so that…and this is really one for the books…Ocrazio Cortez could run for President in 2020!
ICYMI and cannot believe this could be a true story:

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 5:18 pm

Ahhh . . . Beto, the Irisher identifying as Hispanic.

Is cultural appropriation grounds for impeachment?

John Endicott
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 17, 2018 7:24 am

… Ocrazio Cortez…

Oooh, I like that one even better than Occasional Cortex, I’m gonna borrow that. Or combine the too:

Ocrazio Cortex.

Reply to  Duane
December 17, 2018 8:44 pm

Interestingly, I was watching CNN when that Network declared Trump the winner of the Electoral College. At that moment the election was over — and at that particular point in time, their Popular Vote tote board was showing Trump ahead in the PV by just over 1,030,000 votes.

When Trump won the Presidency, he was ahead in BOTH the EC and PV.

So for those who argue that Hillary ‘should’ have been the President because she ultimately secured the PV (which would be unconstitutional), it’s a bit like arguing that a potentially game-winning Field Goal kicked AFTER the game clock had expired … should count.

Midwest Traveler
Reply to  Duane
December 18, 2018 1:12 pm

Made all the more complicated by people claiming the designated leader isn’t the leader (ie. Brown speaking with authority over Trump). Didn’t the dems fall over themselves about the transition team talking to foreign governments with authority because we only have one president? What changed? Oh yeah, liberal hypocrisy.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  fred250
December 16, 2018 7:57 am

” IIRC, Donald Trump WON the last whole of USA election.

Perhaps this brown-noser should be reminded of this FACT”

Liberal elites always think *they* speak for the people of the United States. They don’t like it when others assume that role.

Yes, someone ought to remind Jerry that 63 million Amerians voted for Trump and support what Trump is doing. And it would be my guess that many more than 63 million support Trump now, after seeing the good results he is getting for the people of the United States.

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
December 16, 2018 5:40 am

Even in California, the state only went into Clinton’s column based on the high density population votes.

Many of the counties across California voted for Trump.

Reply to  ATheoK
December 16, 2018 8:28 am

the state only went into Clinton’s column based on the high density population votes.

Cities breed violence, crime, immorality, drug-use, gooberment dependency, marxism, exploitation, excessive taxes, family breakdowns, sexually-transmitted diseases, poor education, etc, etc, etc.

There ya go.

Reply to  beng135
December 18, 2018 3:27 pm

CA also has the highest ranked economic inequality score of all states in the country. Go figure. Social Justice doesn’t seem to be working.

December 15, 2018 10:08 pm

Oh yes, the “science of climate change”.
What the Hell is that in English?
Come to think of it, since climate is REGIONAL, and any change would be indicated by the classification for a region or its size, can anyone point out a region whose Koppen-Geiger classification has experienced a NET change in the last 100 years?
Does Moonbeam understand the difference between climate and weather? Why do people say “climate” when they are mistakenly talking about temperature?

Johne Morton
Reply to  Karabar
December 15, 2018 10:39 pm

What’s worse is that they cite as examples of climate “change” the things that have always defined the climate in those areas since the dawn of man. Hurricanes have always hit Florida and the Gulf Coast, but now when they do it’s climate “change”. The western sides of continents at subtropical latitudes are naturally dry, drought and fire prone, yet somehow now that’s climate “change”. Sorry, it’s climate same. Same as it’s always been.

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  Johne Morton
December 16, 2018 6:28 am

Yep. Organized convoys of treasure galleons from the new world to Spain began just before 1550. In 1550, there were just 17 ships, but by the year 1600 the convoys had expanded to more than 50 much larger vessels. Hurricanes hit the fleet in 1622, 1715, 1733 and 1750.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Johne Morton
December 16, 2018 8:24 am

“Sorry, it’s climate same. Same as it’s always been.”

I like that phrase! It’s exactly right! Climate Same!!!

There’s no unprecedented weather to see here. It’s all happened before, at some time or another in the past. For any extreme weather you can show to have happened recently, there are many examples of even more extreme weather of a similar kind in the past.

These claims of extreme weather caused by human-derived CO2 are easily refuted by merely providing the available statistics which show all categories of weather disasters are less extreme and less frequent today than they were in the past.

There is no evidence that CO2 is having any effect on the Earth’s weather. Climate Alarmists saying it is so, does not make it so.

Reply to  Karabar
December 16, 2018 5:20 am

It is even worse. This is the quote:
“California, Washington, New York, Vermont and many, many other states representing tens of millions of people believe in the science of climate change, believe and demand we reduce our carbon emissions”

There’s quite a few things going on here. Firstly a state does not represent people. A government or the leadership of a state can but not the state itself. Secondly a belief in science is not possible since science deals with facts through empirical observation which excludes beliefs. Thirdly believe and demand we reduce our carbon emissions is a startling incoherent sentence. Does Brown mean these people believe that carbon emissions are going to be reduced? Does he mean these tens of millions of people are going to reduce their carbon emissions or do they only believe they did?
For a person for which public speaking is part of the job, he manages to extremely vague and incomprehensible.

It does make me wonder though, what if these tens of millions of people Jerry Brown speaks of, indeed reduced their carbon emissions, instead of waiting for the others to be forced to do so, wouldn’t they be a shining example for all to admire?

Curious George
Reply to  huls
December 16, 2018 7:38 am

The US actually decreased its carbon dioxide emissions. Perhaps Mr. Brown is unaware of that inconvenient fact.

Reply to  huls
December 16, 2018 7:53 am

Oh, you want Brown to pay attention to and acknowledge facts? Are you nuts? Why would he do that? It spoils his entire schtick if he does that.

Fortunately, that person does NOT represent me in any way at all.

He certainly does have a massive ego to pump.

Reply to  huls
December 16, 2018 8:23 am

For a person for which public speaking is part of the job, he manages to extremely vague and incomprehensible.

For a politician that is a feature, not a bug.

Javert Chip
December 15, 2018 10:12 pm

Exactly how many votes did Gov. Moonbeam get when he ran for President? Not many. He was (and is) viewed as a nut-ball.

No where near as many vutotes as Trump (60M+). I believe the most Jerry’s ever received is about 2.5M; mostly he polls well under 1M.

I moved out of California to Florida so screwballs like Jerry couldn’t speak for me.

Reply to  Javert Chip
December 16, 2018 11:56 am

Not to mention, this was Trump’s first run for any elective office whatsoever.
Completely unprecedented for anyone except a few Generals who had just won a huge war for the country.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Javert Chip
December 16, 2018 12:47 pm

The Moonbeam’s Legacy will be one of enacting sky high taxes, driving un–affordable housing even more un-affordable, and the resulting middle class flight to other states.

December 15, 2018 10:26 pm

I’m Sorry, but Ex-Governor Moonbeam does NOT represent the United States or the vast majority of its citizens! The Farce of Man-made Global Warming, AKA ‘Climate Change”, has failed to persuade the majority of the citizens of the Countries whose Governments have been most ardent in forcing “green” energy on them at the expense of reasonable energy costs. Examples of their Failures after converting to unreliable non-carbon energy systems abound, yet these Priests of CAGW persist, even as their own citizens are beginning to revolt against them. Recent elections are removing several of these Climate Alarmists but in other Countries, such as France, the actions of Green Government Officials are being resisted with more violent actions. The actions of the IPCC are being revealed to one and all to not being based on real Science, but are instead nothing more than Political Efforts to force an Over-controlling “One World” philosophy on everyone. It is long past time for all UN Members to Shutoff all funding for the IPCC and disband this malicious political organization, which refuses to accept the Scientific View that CO2 has no relationship to “global warming” and never has!

December 15, 2018 10:42 pm

The only people Moonbeam may “think” he represents are the nutters in the Greenblob.

December 15, 2018 10:50 pm

$240/gallon. Energy prices so high we can’t afford to run our A/C! We’re going to fry! /sarc

mike macray
Reply to  Toto
December 15, 2018 11:10 pm

….a $240 tax on a gallon of gasoline…..

Perhaps we should test it in France first??

Reply to  mike macray
December 16, 2018 8:00 am

….a $240 tax on a gallon of gasoline…..

Perhaps we should test it in France first??

It would only be right and proper to test it in Los Angeles first.

And Governor Brown should be given the honor of being the 1st to “fill-up” his private vehicle.

And when ya have “examples” of public employees’ unfunded pension liabilities that the private sector can’t possibly pay off, to wit:

$1.4 trillion funding deficit for state public pension systems nationwide,

State of California – $234 billion in unfunded pension liabilities

City of Chicago – $42 billion in unfunded pension liabilities
State of Illinois – $129 billion in unfunded pension liabilities

Why worry about the private sector being forced to pay $240 tax per gallon of gasoline.

“HA”, iffen gasoline tax increases to $240/gallon, ……. then “minimum wage” will have to increase to $1,200.00/hour.

$3/gal gasoline per $15/hr wages, ……verses…… $240/gal gasoline per $1,200/hr wages

December 15, 2018 10:53 pm

And I tell the UN and Jerry Brown that neither one of them represents the people of the US to one-hundredth of the level that President Trump does. Trump represents the silent majority, the one that Jerry thinks doesn’t exist.

As the son and grandson of women who actually worked for the UN back when it actually did some good, I say:

Defund The UN And Kick Them Out Of New York!


mike macray
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 15, 2018 11:12 pm

I’m all on board with that one Willis.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 15, 2018 11:45 pm

Agreed. The UN hasn’t done anything good since the 50s. They are now basically doing the bidding of despots, terrorists, antisemites, China and Russia. There is absolutely no reason we should host or fund them, and there is nothing they accomplish that we couldn’t do unilaterally.

Reply to  WR2
December 16, 2018 7:39 am

Just like any government, it works until the members find that they can vote themselves funds from other people’s money.

Reply to  WR2
December 16, 2018 7:43 am

The list of “good things” the UN did in the 50’s is short, inconsequential, and for the most part, already happening.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 16, 2018 2:28 am

+ 100

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 2:33 am

+ abolish the IMF money changers of this temple.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 2:34 am

Global debt hits all-time high of $184,000,000,000,000

The world’s debt currently exceeds $86,000 per person on average, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The US, China, and Japan are the top three global borrowers, accounting for more than half of the global debt.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 12:11 pm

The vast majority of US debt is money we borrowed from ourselves.
I am not going to bother checking about those others, but I will ask…is this only public debt, this number?
Does this include things like mortgages, credit card debt, local bond issues, etc?

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 16, 2018 2:39 am

Oh yes indeed. They were set up to prevent war and they can’t even do that.

Entitled bureaucrats all.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 16, 2018 7:42 am

To borrow an old bumper sticker
The US out of the UN and the UN out of the US.

December 15, 2018 10:57 pm

I could not find any measurable amount of man made climate change. What a waste of time
and money these cop conferences sre.
Click on my name to find my report.

December 15, 2018 11:05 pm

So the question which needs to be asked is this. Are people like “Moonbeam “off their heads, or are thy cunning people with a totally different agenda, i.e. World Government, by of course that UN body which represents the so called Underdeveloped”” nations..


Tom Gelsthorpe
Reply to  Michael
December 16, 2018 1:42 am

Answer: All of the above. Moonbeam IS nuts, and he DOES want to rule the world b

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Michael
December 16, 2018 9:32 am

Moonbeam is a true believer. He has fixated on CO2 being a danger, and he can’t allow doubt to enter into his mind for personal reasons (motivated by any one of a number of things).

People develop a world view and it is natural to want to hang onto that world view even in the face of seeming evidence to the contrary, because it is painful to realize you have been wrong all along, and it is scary to think you have to find a new world view, and so you blank doubts out of your mind, along with the seeming evidence to the contrary, and you carry on believing in your world view, which makes you feel comfortable you are headed in the right direction.

December 15, 2018 11:15 pm

This Brown donkey lives in his own fantasy world. Deaths from extreme weather events have dropped by 97% since the early 20th century high point.
Here’s Lomborg’s video telling us the truth about our modern world, not Brown’s fantasy planet. Geeezzzz and Californians voted for this fool?

Reply to  Neville
December 16, 2018 1:45 am

Climate change is a ‘Bitcoin science’, no substance, waste of good energy, employed by loonatic fringe in pursuit of easy financial gains in form of government grants.
Every soap bubble of easy money eventually bursts leaving not much of a trace.

Reply to  vukcevic
December 16, 2018 2:38 am

Global debt hits all-time high of $184,000,000,000,000

The world’s debt currently exceeds $86,000 per person on average, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The US, China, and Japan are the top three global borrowers, accounting for more than half of the global debt.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 5:12 am

The world needs a “year of Jubilee” in which all debt is forgiven.

Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 7:48 am

Immediately followed by the vast majority of the world’s pensioners going back to work as their pension funds disappear.

Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 10:40 am

Oh perfect, so folk like myself who’ve lived within my means, haven’t taken advantage of lines of credit to extend my mortgage to whatever pie in the sky ‘value’ it is this week so I could fund the bi-annual world tour that seems so popular with many of my fellow Aussies, who’ve not taken the bank offered million dollar loans so I could speculate on the stock market, who’ve saved cash, bought second hand stuff, lived small – we can just lump it .. while those who’ve done all of the above and bubbled the housing market by taking those loans and buying up houses to inflate the property market can get a free pass?

I see sob stories here of how Little Neddy is distraught because he’s had to sell his boats and jet skis and 5 of his 6 houses and may even loose the house he’s living in (the news article also notes poor Neddy is a mere 32 year old laborer) – I have friends who like myself left school with money we earned working part time, who to this day have never owned a new car .. while their younger siblings (including my own) left school with nothing and expected everything their parents had at the end of their lives right now – the new car, the new house, the new furniture, the holidays – everything.. and they did it.

It’s not sour grapes, it’s defiance. Their debt (greed?) drove the banks to ‘create’ more fictitious money, this money which economists term inflation is actually a devaluation of the real money – and we should forgive this ? In earlier days what the banks did would be called counterfeiting – those who traded it would be guilty of uttering, and both (under Issac Newton) would be punishable by death. He viewed fraud as hurting one man, but counterfeiting as devaluation of real money – that hurt *everyone*.

No, I’m sorry but I can’t agree with you, assuming you are serious, this level of debt cannot be forgiven, those who peddled it must be held accountable. We have 320 billion in legal tender cash in Oz, yet there’s 22 trillion in ‘money’ – bank invented money created when someone borrowed screwing down the value of the real money and hurting those who have little.

Debt has always been with us, but it caused a deficit with the lender and when the debt was repaid and resolved, what remained was the same amount as started. When banks today lend money they invent it into being but when the debt is paid, that fictional counterfeit fake rubbish remains in circulation. It’s immoral and borderline illegal. Were they to ever print a cent of it, they’d be in prison.


Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 1:09 pm

I have to agree that erasing all debt is a horrific idea in the situation we are in.
Nothing could undermine confidence, or wipe out more companies, and more people, faster.
It would cause an economic and financial calamity of unprecedented scope.

Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 1:10 pm

If anything like that were instituted, besides for the moral hazard issues, who would ever lend again?

Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 1:55 pm

Banks don’t create money. Only government can do that.

Reply to  icisil
December 16, 2018 7:45 pm


“Banks don’t create money. Only government can do that.”

I had a link to a page where the Bank of England was proudly explaining how they “create wealth”, taken down now, though they do have this

In Oz we passed the currency act in the 1890’s when banks had printed their own money to such an excess houses traded (in 1890!) for millions of pounds. Of course these ‘bank notes’ weren’t worth the paper they were made of and the economy collapsed destroying lives and businesses. The Currency Act made it illegal for banks to print money..

Flip forward to the 1930’s and the banks were at it again, injecting ‘wealth’ into the economy, inflating everything and lending like .. well, bankers. They circumvented the Currency Act by trading debt beyond anyone’s capacity to pay it, inflating prices again and creating debt slaves – and again the government had to step in and hold them to account. Amendments were made to the currency act, the banks were harshly restricted, a government run bank was set up and things returned to normal.

Then in the 80’s a certain (left) Prime Minister deregulated the banks promising we’d all get wealthy by investing. The money flowed again, but this was the days of the credit card – who needs to print money when you can have digital money? Now we have our banks proposing we go ‘cashless’.

Every time they lend money they invent it into being – there is no cash backing this.. it’s just “made” by the banks and unlike normal debt, it does not get destroyed when it’s repaid.

Here’s a graph of the money supply in humble Oz

(link is here if the image doesn’t embed) taken from JoNova’s page on the matter.

The tiny sliver of orange is our printed currency.. I wasn’t joking when I said 97% of our money was borderline fraudulent counterfeit garbage. Now they’re trying to entice the government to go cashless promising reduced costs to government and putting themselves forward in all matters money related.

They can’t print it, but they still sure as Hades can ‘inject’ it into our money supply.

Meisha Irwin
Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 8:27 am

Don’t forget, though, that $184T is debt is also $184T in capital someone has loaned to the debtor. The issue isn’t how big the debt number is absolute terms, but whether the economic system is strong enough and growing enough to pay the debt service. If the borrowers are borrowing money to invest in assets that provide real value, then no worries.

Obviously, when people or governments borrow money for uneconomic purposes or purely to consume, then the debt holders (and the economies that support them) are in trouble.

Of course, economics can falter for reasons other than debt burden. Still, pay attention to what the debt is buying—that’s usually where the problem lies.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 11:01 am

You do understand that all money is debt. That’s how the owners of the fractional reserve system set it up. They make interest on all money in existence. Pretty good scam.

Reply to  Robertvd
December 16, 2018 3:08 pm

“Global debt hits all-time high of $184,000,000,000,000”
Forty years ago, my economics prof used to say government debt was NO PROBLEM for as long as the lenders thought they were going to get paid back…..

John F. Hultquist
December 15, 2018 11:16 pm

Jerry and friends have joined a cult. They are evil. So is the United Nations.
Tis the season of the year and we should pray for them, if you are the praying sort.
Be of good cheer.

Hot under the collar
December 15, 2018 11:49 pm

Unfortunately for Jerry Brown, the elected President does represent the people of the United States, especially as Trump campaigned on debunking and draining the ‘climate change’ swamp (and orher swamps). Unfortunately for the people of California, they have voted for someone who does the equivalent of standing on a street corner with a “End Is Nigh” placard to represent them.

Reply to  Hot under the collar
December 16, 2018 2:05 am

“End is nigh…” and heels and minishirts, plying their trade like the street walkers they are.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Hot under the collar
December 16, 2018 8:00 am

The end is Nye.

Wiliam Haas
December 16, 2018 12:14 am

Jerry Brown does not know what he is talking about. Trump is the dully elected President of the United States and as such is our current chief of state. Based upon the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rationale that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. The AGW conjecture depends upon the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. Such a radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere, or anywhere else in the solar system. The radiant greenhouse effect is nothing but science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction as well. It is all a matter of science. Apparently Jerry Brown in anti-science.

Martin A
December 16, 2018 12:17 am

“California, Washington, New York, Vermont and many, many other states representing tens of millions of people believe in the science of climate change…”

Yes, no question about it, it’s a religion.

December 16, 2018 12:37 am

Typo alert?

The United States, I’m sorry to say, does not represent the people of the United States,” Brown said in a video …

I suppose there’s a way he could actually have said that. If so, he could have said what he was trying to say a lot better. Anyway, the statement is flat out wrong. The United States government does represent the people of the United States in dealings with foreign governments for instance.

I. Democracy as a Political System of Competition for Power

Democracy is a means for the people to choose their leaders and to hold their leaders accountable for their policies and their conduct in office.

The people decide who will represent them in parliament, and who will head the government at the national and local levels. They do so by choosing between competing parties in regular, free and fair elections. link

It’s called representative democracy. Didn’t they teach civics when Brown went to school? Or am I being too harsh and it’s just a typo.

The liberal media regularly pile on Trump, even when he’s right. Did any of them report Brown’s gaffe?

Doug Huffman
Reply to  commieBob
December 16, 2018 5:19 am

There is no requirement or guarantee of democracy in the US. The Founding Fathers fears mobocracy for all of the reasons that we see around US just now.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  commieBob
December 16, 2018 5:23 am

The Constitution of The United States, Article IV, Section 4, Clause 1: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, […]”

There is no mention of DEMOCRACY in the founding documents.

Reply to  Doug Huffman
December 16, 2018 8:56 am

And nothing on climate, feminism or gender.

Reply to  Doug Huffman
December 17, 2018 5:30 pm

The Founders were just as concerned with the tyranny of the majority (pure democracy) as they were with the establishment of a monarchy or entitled elite. A “Republican Form of Government” was understood to be “representative government”. The people are represented by direct voting for their representatives in the House and the states were represented in the Senate, selected by the state governments. Democracy was decidedly NOT the goal, as only half of one branch of the government had directly elected representatives. Neither judges of the Court, nor the President, nor the members of the Senate were directly elected.

Reply to  commieBob
December 16, 2018 7:56 am

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation:

A lady asked Dr. Franklin “Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?”
Franklin replied “A republic, replied the Doctor, if you can keep it.”

Kaiser Derden
December 16, 2018 12:42 am

Logan Act this fool

December 16, 2018 1:28 am

The next cold fronts will be falling in the US from the northwest. Polar vortex attack in Europe.
comment image

December 16, 2018 1:33 am

Wonderful. No politician now represents the people he allegedly represents, at all.

Whoda thunk it?

So there ya go. They are all frauds with no real mandate… Just like climate scientists…

Reply to  Leo Smith
December 16, 2018 7:54 am

According to liberals, only they know what the people truly want and need.
Therefore it is only possible for liberals to represent the people.

E J Zuiderwijk
December 16, 2018 2:16 am

Mr Brown has his knickers in a twist. It is he himself, governor of one of the 50 odd states, who does not represent the people of the United States.

Reply to  E J Zuiderwijk
December 16, 2018 2:45 am

He is just one of the many metastasis of the progressive cancer killing the body it feast on.

December 16, 2018 3:25 am

… and what makes Jerry think that Jerry Brown represents the people of California then? What makes Jerry think that California represents America?

Jerry doesn’t put much thought into what Jerry says… but Jerry says it anyway.

December 16, 2018 3:29 am

Here’s a scary thought… The next CA governor is far more left than Brown.

Curious George
Reply to  kramer
December 16, 2018 7:44 am

But he is not hooked on the high-speed train to nowhere providing highly paid sinecures for Mr. Brown’s friends. Shouldn’t he care for his own friends?

Tom in Florida
Reply to  kramer
December 16, 2018 8:24 am

It’s not so much that Brown is left, it’s that he’s nuts.

December 16, 2018 4:46 am

For some people, environmentalism is a religion. Jerry Brown belongs to a particular sect within that religion. From my perspective he appears to be a true believer. True believers can do enormous good, or enormous harm.

Reply to  Cynthia
December 16, 2018 12:29 pm

Ideologues on either side are rarely the pragmatic sort, which is what a large and complex country and systems needs most of all…those who do what is best for the most and take what can be gotten, instead of making the perfect the enemy of the good.
Has the ACA been repealed and replaced, the wall funded and construction begun in earnest and all haste, then we would have never seen the recent takeover of congress by the left.
Unfortunately many so-called conservatives were nothing of the sort, and many remain even now.
What they are is swamp rats, who exist to stay in power, above all other considerations.
Two years ago today the Republicans had the most dominant position that have had since at least the late 1920s, and maybe longer than that…and what did they get done?
Shockingly little, legislatively.
Neither the House nor the Senate even managed to pass bills that they had passed multiple times when it was a futile gesture.
McConnel should have ended the filibuster, for one thing, as the Ds have said they would have done if they had won the Senate in 2016 and as they will surely do when they next gain a majority.
Republicans are like politicians who always play a good game of political payback, but never ever raise the stakes of the game. And raising the stakes is what the Democrats love to do best, except possibly for crying when it gets done back to them…they seem to like that pretty good too.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 16, 2018 1:58 pm

A federal judge in Texas this week ruled that without the tax, ObamaCare is unconstitutional.
Of course the ruling is being appealed to the Supreme Court.
We live in interesting times.

Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2018 5:11 pm

I think there is at least one appeals court before SCOTUS, but I could be wrong about that.
The SCOTUS has already ruled that the ACA was Constitutional, in regard to at least one challenge to it.
But, the SCOTUS typically rules narrowly, and so evidently this is a separate question of law being decided on.
This may be an ideal time to have the thing scrapped by the courts however, as something would have to be done and damn fast, and since we have divided government starting in a few weeks, any solution would require bipartisan support.
For anything so sweeping as a law which dictates how our entire health care system is run, it should have never been even considered to do it unilaterally.
The Republican bill that failed due to McCain’s last minute backstab would have preserved much of what was put in place with the original ACA.
There were and are real problems that need/needed fixing, and would be political suicide to eliminate entirely now.
Such as coverage for “pre-existing conditions”.
And many other details have altered how everything is being done such that scrapping those changes now would be terribly disruptive yet again, and would besides necessitate another years long transition period.
My opinion only.

Russ R.
Reply to  Menicholas
December 16, 2018 11:52 pm

Pragmatists are the ones that lose when the political winds change. The States and Districts with the thinnest margins of victory are the ones that frequently change and create a more “party-line” party on the losing side, because they lose their moderates. The winning party becomes more “independent” because the new candidates that won, won tight elections with a narrow victory in a swing State or District.
You talk about needing pragmatists in control, but all your things you would like to see happen, require a “party-line” voting block in Congress. We have not had one of those since 2008, when ObamaCare was passed on a party-line vote, with much pork barreling and arm-twisting. And the passing of ObamaCare trashed the Democratic party at all levels of government, since it’s passage.
Trump needs a punching bag to warm up for the “big event” in 2020. He has one, and he does much better politically to be seen beating up Liberals from Liberal states, than beating up on Rino’s from swing States and Districts.

Reply to  Russ R.
December 17, 2018 6:20 pm

When the left and the right are not composed of people who are primarily ideologues, bipartisan compromises can be reached that solve problems, instead of one side imposing on everyone what they think should happen even though the country is very evenly divided along party lines.
It is only very recently that all sweeping legislation was done unilaterally.
How it is since 2008 is not how it needs to be…how it has been since then is the worst way to legislate.

Russ R.
Reply to  Menicholas
December 17, 2018 10:14 pm

Bipartisan compromises mean I get what I want, you get what you want, and the taxpayer gets the shaft. And the politicians get plausible deniability. So if we don’t like it, the other guy is to blame.
The real problem is government solutions that cost way more than they should, and don’t work. Many times they make the problem worse.
We would not have these problems if the government stuck to the “Limited Government” explicitly defined in the Constitution. If we want changes they need to go through the Amendment process. Washington has ignored much of the limitations on the Feds, by using Commerce Clause to mean things it was never intended to give them power to do. The Tenth Amendment forbids that activity, but it has become common.
Now we are stuck over fighting for who gets what, and who pays. This was never intended to be the role of the Federal Government, without the passage of new Amendments. And the courts have made it worse, instead of enforcing the words as written.
It will get worse, before it gets better.

Reply to  Russ R.
December 17, 2018 6:21 pm

Trump is a perfect example.
He is not an ideologue at all.

Russ R.
Reply to  Cynthia
December 17, 2018 12:27 am

Jerry Brown is a true believer to only one God: Government Power.
All other issues are subservient to his one God, and are supported or opposed based on his ability to mold them to serve his ability to wield Power.
He doesn’t care about the environment and would trash it, if it helped him gain more power over the public. He has no qualms frying birds, or chopping them up, with his “environmental schemes”. For a true believer anything can be rationalized as “the ends justifying the means”.
Anyone that tells you they will help you by taking more of your money and your freedom to solve a nebulous problem, is not going to help you. They are going to take what is yours and use it to make others dependent on that “revenue stream”. You are poorer and the recipient of the fruits of your labor, is cut off from the ladder of independence and personal growth.
Jerry may be unaware of this. He may think he is helping people. But his actions speak louder than his words. And his words are empty of meaning because they only serve one Master. And you are not it.

Garland Lowe
December 16, 2018 5:00 am
Reply to  Garland Lowe
December 16, 2018 5:25 am

So it’s just typical political ploy to gain power and please your own side. Funny how these concerned politicians have very large carbon footprints.

December 16, 2018 5:31 am

Who are you kidding! Trump represents all Americans! You who only represents one state, who has a morale obligation to those people would much rather lay the blame for climate change at Trumps feet than in recorded fact and historical data.
Much like Moron Trudeau of Canada who keeps crying wolf over carbon, while the scientific community has shown that Canada uses more carbon than it produces. And yet.this lying piece of trash continues in his endeavours to charge a carbon tax on something that is required by our lands.
A morally corrupt government who preaches the down falls facing Canadians for their pollution practices, while supporting Quebecers jumping millions of gallons of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence.
One could always say, that California is reaping their harvest according to their sins!

December 16, 2018 5:33 am

Standard tactic of a politician. Say that the “people” are on your side, except the ones who aren’t. They are not “people” at all apparently. Probably not even humans. Just subhumans or something. Millions of people voted for Trump but according to Brown they don’t exist at all.

Is there a some kind of School of Politics where they specifically teach this BS?

Reply to  Fredar
December 16, 2018 5:44 am

Identity politics

December 16, 2018 5:50 am

Governor Brown is part of the lunatic fringe.

Just a month or so ago, Governor Brown was schooled by Trump about forest management and forest fires.

Beside Brown’s trying to lead every eco and enviro movement in California, changing his allegiance and beliefs to suit the loudest voices in the state; Brown depends upon extremists and biased mass media for his all of his talking points.
Making one suspicious of Brown’s ability to reason.

Many of Brown’s pronouncements are faint echoes of the shrill claims he’s heard as the words fall out his private belief chamber. Along with his insistence that Brown’s version of California is supported by 100% of American citizens.

Bruce Cobb
December 16, 2018 6:32 am

Brown and his quasi-Marxist foam-at-the-mouth Libtards are still smarting from Trump’s election, and that it was the Electoral College which elected him, not the popular vote. So when you hear their rhetorical vomitus about “the people”, that is what they mean. They hate the EC, and would like (they think) to get rid of it. It’s a hate borne of convenience and circumstance though, not rationality.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 16, 2018 8:45 am

He is just a puppet of the NWO whose goal it is to destroy Western society.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 16, 2018 10:30 am

The mob vote is almost always a near 50/50 split in any US presidential race. Even in “landslide” victories, it may only deviate as far as 55/45. A 60/40 split would be considered absolutely crushing. Getting a few hundred thousand more votes than the other guy, in an election involving tens of millions of voters, does not a “popular mandate” make, though the lefty-leaners like to pretend otherwise.

Fortunately the mob vote is only a statistical curiousity with no actual bearing on the results.

John Endicott
Reply to  drednicolson
December 17, 2018 9:45 am

Getting a few hundred thousand more votes than the other guy, in an election involving tens of millions of voters, does not a “popular mandate” make, though the lefty-leaners like to pretend otherwise.

It’s only a “popular mandate” when their candidate wins it, when the other guy is the “popular” winner they point to such a thin margin as proof there isn’t a “popular mandate”. If it wasn’t for double standards the left would have no standards.

December 16, 2018 7:04 am

Arnie went one better at Katowicie as reported in The Australian by Graham Lloyd Dec 14-

‘For Schwarzenegger the biggest evil is fossil fuels. “If we had never started in that direction and used other technology, we would have been much better off.”
He says people are not interested in climate change because it is something in the future. People are more concerned about the day to day. How they can put food on the table today, how they can make money today and how they can have a job today. The answer, says Schwarzenegger, is for the messaging to shift from climate change to pollution because pollution kills people now.
“Seven million people die every year because of pollution — especially in Third World countries like India and China, a lot because of indoor pollution,” Schwarzenegger says.’

Careful Arnie as shifting the goalposts from the bogeyman of colourless, odourless gaseous plant food to air pollution points the political finger away from all we deplorables in the developed West and guess who that leaves? Just a tip Arnie, stick with the mung beans and global warming/climate change/climate disruption/extreme weather meme mate or you’ll soon join the heretics.

tom s
December 16, 2018 7:14 am

Hey I got an idea, let’s take natural occurring disasters that have always occurred in the past and show no signs of getting worse (ie hurricanes, tornadoes, flood etc etc) and blame them on our fuel use. Anyone with me? Oh, you say this idea has already been shoved down our collective throats? In that case…never mind.

December 16, 2018 7:33 am

And it’s only Democracy, when a leftist wins.

December 16, 2018 7:35 am

There is no science behind the claim that we need to prevent the Earth from warming more than 1.5C from the depths of the little ice age.
The actual science says that we have been warmer than that line at least 3 times in the last 5000 years, and for most of the last 10,000 years we have been warmer than that.

December 16, 2018 7:37 am

“Don’t resort to what will be condemned in future years as nothing less than a criminal enterprise. Wake up!” Brown said.

The irony, it burns.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
December 17, 2018 9:49 am

It’s called projection. S.O.P for the left.

Tom in Florida
December 16, 2018 8:04 am

Why is Brown even there? I hope he paid for the trip out of his own funds. (yeah, yeah that was sarcasm)

Danley Wolfe
December 16, 2018 8:15 am

Jerry Brown addressing the members of the UN climate group says that what the President says does not represent U.S. positions. Waaa? Now Jerry Brown speaks for the entire country denying the Executive branch authority and stated position – this in itself is a violation of federal law. Lock him up.

Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2018 8:43 am

Moonbeam seems to forget that the first word of IPCC stands for “Intergovernmental”.

His opinion as an outgoing state governor is meaningless drivel. As usual to what comes out of his mouth.

Roger welsh
December 16, 2018 8:45 am

America is very lucky to have Trump. Without him, the corruption would be complete by the raft of corruption,greedy individuals who care for themselves and not the Country
We have the same problem in the uk.

The revolution will happen. Hopefully peacefully.

John Endicott
Reply to  Roger welsh
December 17, 2018 9:47 am

unfortunately peacefully doesn’t look possible as the left have already started the violence (see: Antifa). It’s only going to get worse before it gets better.

Roger welsh
December 16, 2018 8:49 am

Edit. Corrupt not corruption as referee to individuals.

December 16, 2018 9:08 am

Your have to give credit to Democrats for remaining true to their ideological namesake: donkey or ass.

Erik Pedersen
December 16, 2018 9:11 am

Jerry Brown who..?

Flight Level
December 16, 2018 10:00 am

All this is disgraceful, specifically the number of times the verb “believe” is associated with what’s sold as science.
I can already envision the times when former green preachers will have serious issues just walking down the streets.
Their deceptive attacks and phraseology are those of sore loosers. Facts are long gone, irrational fears is all that’s left for sale.
Congrats to Capt. Trump for switching off the money that fuels their boilers. No fuel, no fire.

December 16, 2018 10:03 am

Good riddance but be careful what you wish for. I don’t see California returning to a semblance of balanced government in my lifetime. It will inexorably deteriorate into a puddle of Socialism and stay there until there’s no one left worth stealing from to shore up their Utopia. Already the once stately San Fransisco has declined to a cesspool of crime, filth, disease, and welfare and it will spread from there.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  markl
December 16, 2018 2:53 pm

“. . . a cesspool of crime, filth, disease, and welfare . . .”

Surely, you are talking about Los Angeles.

John Endicott
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
December 17, 2018 9:32 am

It’s a description that fits both.

However, as I don’t recall any news articles about LAs needle and feces in the streets problems (unlike San Fran:
), I’d say that while the term cesspool might figuratively fit LA it literally fits San Fran.

December 16, 2018 10:18 am

Governor Jerry Brown is the idiot architect of deadly California wildfires, if he weren’t governor he would be charged with homicide.

Chris Hagan
December 16, 2018 10:25 am

Always the same story give us money right now or the planet will be destroyed in a hundred years. This years copout 24 had 25000 people. If that money was used properly how many schools and hospitals could have been built in Africa? For that matter they represent 100,000’s of rent seekers all over the world sucking up resources that could better mankind. This whole thing is a crime against humanity and a few are getting rich off it. Find out who these criminals are and Investigate them.

December 16, 2018 10:52 am

I live in California and tens of millions of people dislike this man. Our votes are rigged or Repubs would win here.

December 16, 2018 12:25 pm

122 trillion?
That’s a lot of money!
No wait, if every human on earth pays their fair share it’s only around $70,000 per family of four.
Never mind

Gordon Dressler
December 16, 2018 1:57 pm

Jerry Brown, you poor idiot . . . just read the US Constitution! Whether you like it or not, the US president, as leader of the Executive Branch and Commander-in-Chief of the US’s armed forces, does indeed represent the lawful citizens of these United States as long as he remains in office.

Please show me any place in the Constitution that shows any other single person has this role in an international setting.

(And yes, I am aware the citizens in individual states are represented by their respective Members of Congress, but these of course don’t have a Constitutional right to represent the US as a whole in international dealings. And please don’t bother me with arguments about representation by the US ambassador to the UN and the various ambassadors to individual countries, all of whom serve at the pleasure of the President.)

Reply to  Gordon Dressler
December 16, 2018 5:16 pm

Yeah, but…but…”Not My President”!

Notice how many conservatives needed safe spaces, puppies, and coloring books after this last election?
The rash of fake hate hate-crimes from people on the right, making stuff up to make the left look bad?
Zero and counting.

Edward A. Katz
December 16, 2018 2:09 pm

But Jerry Brown doesn’t even represent the views of all the people of California.

Russ R.
Reply to  Edward A. Katz
December 17, 2018 12:01 am

He represents the only one that counts in his mind. And he seems to think it is the only one that counts in the country and possibly the world.
He’s also very humble. Just ask him, since his opinion is the only one that matters in the Moonbeam-Verse.

Craig from Oz
December 16, 2018 5:57 pm

California Über Alles

December 16, 2018 9:02 pm

“Don’t resort to what will be condemned in future years as nothing less than a criminal enterprise.”

Sounds like sage advice on policy for anyone standing for election against Moonbeam.

December 17, 2018 5:19 am

Jerry Brown will never govern me.

Let him lead the high speed rail workers union or the ice continent of Antarctica.

John Endicott
December 17, 2018 8:01 am

“California, Washington, New York, Vermont and many, many other states representing tens of millions of people believe in the science of climate change, believe and demand we reduce our carbon emissions,” the Democrat said.

first, Jerry, the US has been reducing it’s carbon emissions, all without the draconian power grabbing that you advocate.

second, states are places, they are not sentient and thus incapable of believing in anything let alone “climate change”

third, the people of the united states (including people in the states you mention) have, time and again, when polled put climate change at the very bottom of the priorities that they think Government should address.

Joel Snider
December 17, 2018 9:19 am

A better way to say it would be, ‘Progressives do not represent anybody but Progressives. If you’re not, you might as well not be a citizen.”

December 17, 2018 11:58 am

Speaking of state governors, I just finished writing a long letter to my own state governor on this very issue of US state’s committing to the Paris Accord. My own state, I am sad to say, has an official governor executive order to commit to this fantasy. I only found out about it, day before yesterday.

In addition to NOAA graphs, I used some of Willis E’s graphics [hope he doesn’t mind] to illustrate the utter waste and futility of setting state goals around unicorn dreams [I was a little more diplomatic than that in my letter — calm, almost lawyer-like terseness, with little emotion, and straight, non-flowery, non-inflamatory choice of words]. I wonder how many seconds my eight toiled-over pages will stay out of the governor’s garbage can.

I’ve never written a letter to the governor before. Maybe I should write to Governor B.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
December 17, 2018 4:15 pm

Well, I wrote to Kate Brown here in Oregon. For all the good it did.

Pure and simple – she doesn’t represent me, doesn’t want to, doesn’t care, and she has no concern at all about being voted out of office.

Johann Wundersamer
December 26, 2018 1:50 am

“The United States, I’m sorry to say, does not represent the people of the United States,” Brown said in a video address Thursday to U.N. delegates gathered in Katowice for the summit, called COP24.

“California, Washington, New York, Vermont and many, many other states representing tens of millions of people believe in the science of climate change,”

so everyone of this real belivers may give their donation and leave the realists alone.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights