I am constantly amazed by the double standards that characterize the environmental/liberal movement.

Billionaires are bad…unless they are called Oprah, Spielberg, or Soros.

Flying is bad too because of the emissions it produces is bad for the environment, or so environmentalists tell us. But it seems it is only other people flying that is damaging.

Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, Rajendra Pachauri, and the tens of thousands of IPCC fellow travelers spend their lives on planes and receive no criticism from their hypocritical environmental cheerleaders.

And the hypocrisy continues with their coverage of California’s Prop23, which aims to suspend Global Warming legislation that will increase energy bills and drive businesses and jobs out of the state.

Environmentalists, and their enabling environmental “correspondents” who work for establishment newspapers and blogs, cannot wait to let us know that much of the money supporting Prop23 is coming from “out of state oil companies.”

This is true, except these companies also employ thousands of people in California in real jobs.

But perhaps more importantly, it ignores reality.

(more…)

My eye-opening experience with Enron revealed to my surprise just how it is that certain interests actually drive Big Green, and make otherwise inconceivable policy ideas into threats and often even reality. The revelation was such that it left me shaking my head in wonder as to how the (now suddenly) obvious, at least seeing how it escapes the interest of at least the establishment press cheerleading the same agenda: when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you are guaranteed the enthusiastic support of Paul.

In fact — as I learned regarding Enron’s and BP’s pet projects, “carbon cap-and-trade” and related ‘green jobs’ schemes all designed to make uneconomic investments in windmills etc. pay off — sometimes the entire enterprise is Paul’s idea.

So it is that we see with deep pocketed gents now scrambling to protect their bets on uneconomic investments and rent-seeking schemes, by supporting the campaign to defeat Proposition 23 in California. Prop 23 would delay California’s climatically meaningless but economically suicidal state-level adoption of Kyoto agenda, called AB 32. Oddly, there is no condemnation of these bags of money being thrown at killing a ballot initiative, despite the opprobrium heaped upon those few who have dared venture in to help the “Yes” campaign.

This is a shame, for the question Cui bono? is so readily answered simply by scanning the growing list of those digging deep to make sure the ‘green’ gravy train of wealth transfers isn’t derailed (regardless of the fairly obvious economic consequences if they are successful, which in a rational world would be of great interest to a watchdog press).

(more…)