The president obviously thinks it’s a big problem, so I wonder what he thinks of filmmaker James Cameron’s ad against (Paul Chesser’s description) “California ballot initiative Proposition 23, which would stop the state’s extreme global warming emissions law (Assembly Bill 32) until its unemployment rate falls below 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters”:
I don’t know anything about the substance of the issue, though my inclination would be to assume Cameron’s full of it. But what’s interesting is that Cameron is a foreigner, a Canadian citizen, who withdrew his application for U.S. citizenship after Bush won reelection in 2004. So what business does he have telling Americans how to vote on anything? Do Americans appear in Canadian political ads?
Making an American ad for a Canadian party would effectively tank their campaign.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes and have you seen James Cameron's carbon foorprint?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDoes this mean that we will hear less of Daniel Hannan's nonsense?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs this the same James Cameron who was dubbed “Titanic chicken of the sea” for slamming global warming skeptics as “swine” on the day he was supposed to be debating them?
The same Director James Cameron that called for gun fight with global warming skeptics: ‘I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads’ then not having the guts to actually follow through with a debate that he set up in the first place with Climate Depot’s Marc Morano?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMikey I. is the titular head of the Canadian Liberal Party. He's an American, at least by time spent.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@RussellB - "Does this mean that we will hear less of Daniel Hannan's nonsense?"
----
Are you actually trying to draw an equivalence between Daniel Hannan writing a book and doing media interviews and James Cameron appearing in campaign commercials???
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Publius: What's the problem? They're both foreigners who are advocating certain policies within the US, which is the point at hand. I don't particularly think it's relevant; we can listen to these people if we want, or ignore them if we want.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course he is a full time resident who works in the country and his wife and children are all American, so it's not as if he has no stake in the matter. But don't let reasonable points get in the way of a good old fashioned jingoistic rage-against-the-guy-we-disagree-with session.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Lorraine- thanks that was my (badly made) point. If we're going to complain about "foreigners" making political points then we have to complain about them all, not just the ones we disagree with.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe point is that it is the WHITEHOUSE that started this nonsense with their keening wails about the minuscule amounts of foreign money that go into certain organizations' coffers. Here we have actual foreigners buying air time to support political changes. Where is Obama's outrage?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere's a difference between a non-American sharing his or her viewpoint on any number of topics inside the United States versus a non-American electioneering on behalf of a U.S. candidate or campaign. They are free to do either, but only the latter is unseemly.
How two people in this thread do not comprehend the difference is beyond me, but perhaps they would rather nit pick than ask why anyone would listen to James Cameron about anything other than how to make an over-priced film without a coherent plot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Lorraine - There's quite a bit of obvious and profound difference between the free exchange of ideas and out-and-out electioneering, one which was thankfully recognized by the Supreme Court in the recent Citizens United case. If what Hannan is doing were the same as what Cameron is doing, then all "speech" (books, films, interviews, public comments, lectures, you name it) would be subject to the same regulations, restrictions, and limitations as campaign activities.
Your position that Hannan promoting his book and doing media interviews is the same as James Cameron appearing in anti-Prop 23 campaign commercials was rejected in Citizens United and puts you on the same side as the Ginsburg/Breyer/Stevens/Sotomayor liberal minority...and opposite the First Amendment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRJG wrote: "Of course he is a full time resident who works in the country and his wife and children are all American, so it's not as if he has no stake in the matter."
------
Irrelevant, as he's still a foreign national interfering in our elections in violation of federal law. But don't let reason get in the way of a good old fashioned simplistic and illogical liberal argument.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@ Publius: All sarcasm aside, you are wrong about this commercial being illegal. There is nothing in election law that stops Cameron from advocating for his position, even if he is from another country. As to the points I made in my first comment, Krikorian asked what business Cameron has trying to tell Americans how to vote on anything. I was only pointing out that he does have interests in the matter. Finally, it occurs to me that the tone of my comment was a good deal more combative than I intended it to be. I was really trying to be playful, but I often forget that communication online always seems to magnify the hostility in anything by a factor of ten. So sorry if I caused offense, but I don't think I was as wildly illogical as you suggest.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse