Latest SJW Whine: Lack Of Diversity In Books

For people who say they are forward looking, upbeat, and positive, they sure seem to be miserable and major league whiners

(AFP) As the film and music industries grapple with the fallout from the race rows that dogged the Oscars and the Brit Awards, English author Bali Rai warns publishing too has a serious diversity issue.

The award-winning writer, who has Indian heritage but was born and grew up in Leicester, echoes critics of Hollywood and the Academy Awards when he suggests gatekeepers are only recognising a narrow band of talent and ideas, which does not properly reflect society.

He explains: “Publishing in the UK is a white, middle and upper class monolith. Britain is 14 percent non-white, yet how many authors reflect that? If it’s more than 0.5 percent, I’d be shocked,” Rai tells AFP, in an interview ahead of his appearance at the Hong Kong Young Readers Festival.

So, he doesn’t really know how many reflect publishing, he’s just guessing. And whining.

“It is a sad fact that non-white people, the LGBT community and many more do not see themselves in UK fiction from childhood. So many — including me to begin with — grow up thinking that books are about middle and upper class white people,” he adds. (snip)

He says: “It’s about more than racism in society — although that exists — it’s about publishers being unwilling to think outside of their narrow ivory-tower worlds and break with tradition.

Well, there’s an answer to that. We’ll get to that in a minute

“Imagine if Harry Potter had been called Harish Patel or Hamza Pathan, for example? Would those books have been published, never mind become the mega-successes that they became? Right now, in the UK, the answer is no.”

But, they weren’t. The answer is not “force publishing houses to publish more from minorities, Blacks, LGBT, etc”. The answer is “write a good book that people will read.” Rai does recommend more reading programs in schools, which I heartily endorse. But, some people are not going to read, and certainly not read as voraciously as I do. My parents instilled the love of reading in me at a young age, as did my elementary school. Reading wasn’t just fundamental, it was fun. What was better at a young age than the book fair? Going to the library was a treat. As I tell people, if you see me looking at my smartphone, there’s a 50/50 chance I’m reading a book. Kindle Unlimited is the best $10 a month I spend.

And, in this day of e-books, people can easily self publish. There are categories at Amazon for African American literature, urban, LGBT, women’s, and, yes, men’s. You can pretty much find what you want (what I want is less romance intermixed with my Scifi and horror genres, but, that’s a different complaint). And, people can self publish. Many authors I read started out self publishing, and many still do. Some go through small publishing houses. Many will never have a book in a brick and mortar book store.

If there’s a dearth of minority writers, well, that’s not on the publishing houses: that’s on the minority writers. Want to get picked up by a big publishing house? Write a book that will make money.

Of course, SJWs won’t see it that way: they would want to force publishing houses to publish books. And, if Rai has a problem, perhaps he can start his own publishing house.

Read: Latest SJW Whine: Lack Of Diversity In Books »

Team Obama Dumps $500 Million Into UN Climate Slush Fund

Thank goodness, the UN Green Climate Fund was almost out of cash. Seriously, what would dictators do without it? Fortunately, there’s almost no transparency in the way the funds are used

(Reuters) The United States has paid $500 million into the United Nations’ Green Climate Fund, the first tranche of the $3 billion it pledged as part of the commitments it made in the December Paris Climate Agreement, the State Department confirmed Monday.

“This grant is the first step toward meeting the president’s commitment of $3 billion to the GCF, and shows that the United States stands squarely behind our international climate commitments,” a State Department spokesman said.

I’d like to say this is Obama’s commitment, so, he should use his own money or raise it from soliciting donations from all the uber-rich Warmists in the U.S. But, they don’t like to use their own money, they like Other People’s money, and the idiot Republicans in Congress authorized this money in the latest sprawling budget deal.

Think what we could do with $500 million. Work programs for US citizens. Fixing the issue in Flint, Michigan. Fixing the problems with the Veteran’s Administration. Heck, it could be used to save much of Obamacare’s failing co-ops and exchanges. Liberals would like that, right? Help send US citizens to college. At the end of the day, this is just a redistribution of wealth scheme, which enriches the United Nations and dictators. The United State will receive no benefit from this. Like much of the aid money the US gives to the UN, we’ll not be given any kudos when it is distributed.

Héla Cheikhrouhou, the fund’s executive director, told Reuters earlier this month she will ask the board to approve an increase of between 80 and 120 new staff to meet the spending target.

So, instead of being spent on ‘climate change’ initiatives, a goodly chunk will simply go towards paying for administration. Will the UN provide all the details on how the money is spent? Doubtful.

Read: Team Obama Dumps $500 Million Into UN Climate Slush Fund »

Five Reasons Trump May Be A Better President Than You Think

This comes to us via Breitbart’s Brian McClanahan, who wonders if a President Trump would be that bad, noting that the Establishment thinks so, and offers 5 reasons why Trump would be better than you think. Let’s dive into four of them, before hitting up the one that really stood out to me.

First is that Trump supposedly has some good advisors, such as Senator Jeff Sessions, and will “look into things”, rather than simply acting with executive orders. Not sure if I’m buying the executive orders thing.

Second, Trump won’t start WWIII, because he was totes against the Iraq War (McClanahan forgets to mention that Trump was for Operation Iraqi Freedom before he was against it, and flipped at the same time Democrats decided to take a stand against President Bush for political purposes) and would place American interests over those of other nations. I can see Trump being rather isolationist for international affairs, and protectionist regarding economic affairs.

Third is that we may get Judge Andrew Napolitano (yeah, the Fox News guy) on the Supreme Court. Seriously. I’m not sure how putting a guy who is a 9/11 Truther on the Supreme Court is a good idea.

Fifth is that Trump would clean up corruption, starting with prosecuting Hillary Clinton, and writes “It would not be hard to image a similar great purge of establishment corruption from D.C. should Trump be elected. It would be like shining lights on cockroaches.” A case could be made for and against Trump cleaning up corruption.

Here’s the 4th

Trump brings back the Reagan coalition: It wasn’t that long ago that people used to salivate over the 1980s Reagan coalition of blue-collar Democrats and white-collar Republicans. Trump has that kind of appeal. This is why his message resonates across the political spectrum and why many Americans are supporting him. If the Republican Party is serious about a “big tent” philosophy, Trump is their guy. Most conservatives vote Republican because they lack real alternatives. It is better, they think, to hold their nose and pull the lever for Mitt Romney than vote for Barack Obama. This hasn’t worked, and American knows it. Trump represents real America, what Glenn Beck recently derided as the “bubba effect,” and real America is ready to kick the establishment to the curb. They want jobs, security, and someone who isn’t afraid to stand up to the cultural Marxism of the establishment, both Left and Right. Reagan would agree. He nailed the “bubba” vote as well. That worked out ok.

Trump very much is bringing together many constituents. He’s even captured some Conservatives and Tea Party folks. I’ve talked to a lot of folks, and it seems that many who are squishy Republicans, squishy Democrats, Blue Dog Democrats, and those who hate both parties are going for Trump. Interestingly, though, Trump has brought together the Establishment Republicans and Conservatives/Tea Party members in their #NeverTrump calls. Their reasons vary. But, they are most certainly against Trump. Because, while he does hold some Conservative positions, he also holds many that are Liberal, and he’s flipped and flopped, so, we do not really know his deeply held convictions.

All that said, here’s something to consider: many are holding on to their Principles in saying #NeverTrump. I understand that feeling. But, this is politics, so, let’s add another P word: pragmatism. Is it better to have a guy who claims to be a Republican in office than someone like Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders? Is it better to get some of what you want rather than all of what you don’t want? Yes, we’ve been disappointed time and time again by Republicans. How’s it working out with President Obama? Are you enjoying this period of time? You may despise John McCain and Mitt Romney, but, would they have been better?

Furthermore, those against Trump have to consider that the GOP needs to retain the House and Senate. I doubt there’s any chance of losing the House, but, the Senate could be lost. We need to be fired up even if Trump is the nominee, and make sure we get out and vote. And get others to vote. This goes for the States that have state elections in November, as well.

Politics is about Power, a fourth P. You need to be in the majority to have wield power. Do you want Obamacare replaced? Vote Trump if he’s the candidate. Hold your nose. Think pragmatism. But, hope that it is Cruz who wins the nomination.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Five Reasons Trump May Be A Better President Than You Think »

Thank Goodness, We Now Have A ‘Climate Change’ Purity Pledge For Politicians

This will most likely spread throughout the rest of the 350.0rg nut-o-sphere

Affirmer or Denier? Activist Issues Climate-Change “Litmus Test”

It’s test time in Tallahassee, as one man wants to get lawmakers and other state leaders to state once and for all where they stand on climate change and the risk it poses to Florida.

Environmental engineer Bart Bibler is the driving force behind what he calls the climate-change “litmus test.” In it, he’s asking policymakers to acknowledge climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity, and that Florida is particularly vulnerable.

It reads more like a purity pledge, comrades

  • I hereby acknowledge that Climate Change is real and is now primarily caused by human activity.
  • I recognize that this is of grave threat to the future of Florida and the planet.
  • I understand that we should think globally, but we must act locally.
  • Since Florida is one of the most vulnerable places on our planet, and is named The Sunshine State, I agree that we should be leaders in renewable energy, and we should begin immediately.
  • I am confident that if we aggressively begin a renewable energy path, this will ensure significant job creation and a sustainable economy in Florida.

If they do not sign, will they be subjected to Bernie Sanders call to “bring climate deniers to justice”? Those who have not signed it have already been branded deniers, hence, Enemies Of The State, until they recant.

BTW, Bibler was not fired for saying “climate change” as reported. He was reprimanded for failing to do his job properly.

Read: Thank Goodness, We Now Have A ‘Climate Change’ Purity Pledge For Politicians »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful field that should be turned into biofuels and replaced with solar panels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Political Clown Parade, with a post on the passing of Nancy Reagan.

Read: If All You See… »

Western Washington U Snowflakes Admit They’re Horrible People

The Daily Beast’s Robby Sauve brings us this story of pure Special Snowflake Syndrome, where the inmates are demanding to run the asylum

The College That Wants to Ban ‘History’

Students at Western Washington University have reached a turning point in their campus’s hxstory. (For one thing, they’re now spelling it with an ‘x’—more on that later.) Activists are demanding the creation of a new college dedicated to social justice activism, a student committee to police offensive speech, and culturally segregated living arrangements at the school, which is in Bellingham, up in the very northwest corner of the state. (snip)

WWU’s student-activist community—the frightening-sounding Assembly for Power and Liberation—made their demands public earlier this week….

One of those demands is the creation of a school that would train the Special Snowflakes to be Social Justice Warriors. They’re demanding the administration pony up they money for this, and offer no idea as to how. They figure it’s not their problem. If you think I’m kidding, read their manifesto. Furthermore, they are demanding that all those involved with “de-colonial work” be paid. The whole thing is as nutty as you’d expect.

Something stands out more, though

Activists have also demanded the creation of an Office for Social Transformation, which would employ 15 students—young Robespierres in training—for the purposes of monitoring “racist, anti-black, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ableist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and otherwise oppressive behavior on campus.” (Anti-Semitism, one notes, is curiously omitted.)

Interesting. Are these Special Snowflakes admitting that they are basically horrible people? That they are racist, homophobic, sexist, etc? Why the need for this type of totalitarianism if they aren’t? WWU is an extremely liberal school in the first place in a rather liberal area. And these Special Snowflakes are, in fact, horrible people, many of whom will be smacked in the face by the dead mackerel of reality once they leave the colleges and have to enter the real world.

Read: Western Washington U Snowflakes Admit They’re Horrible People »

Glenn Beck: Donald Trump Is Like Hitler In 1929 Or Something

Glenn Beck has been on an anti-Trump kick virtually since Trump announced. Every single time I turn on his morning show, it seems the subject is Trump (if it’s not a commercial, a product placement at the end of a segment, or an old time revival speech). I rarely hear him talk about Hillary or others. He’s welcome to do whatever he wants on his show, but, it does get rather tedious listening to the doom and gloom. Beck decided to ramp up the moonbattery during an appearance on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos (via Breitbart, which has the video)

BECK: The GOP has one last chance to listen to the people. Um, and the people that — and I understand it. They’re very, very angry because the GOP did not listen the first time around. They didn’t listen to the Ron Paul people who are way ahead of the curve. Then the Tea Party people they rubbed our nose in it, and they are tired, and they have created Donald Trump. The people are speaking clearly. And there’s two ways to go. Anger and nationalism. Nationalism has been done before in history. You can go for nationalism. You can go for anger.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Trump is Adolf Hitler?

BECK: If you look what is happening with Donald Trump and his playing to the lowest common denominator and the anger in us. You know, Adolf Hitler — we all look at Adolf Hitler in 1940. We should look at him in 1929. He was the kind of funny, character that said the things that people were thinking. Where Donald Trump takes it, I have absolutely no idea. But, Donald Trump is a dangerous man with the things he’s been saying. Now, the GOP is playing unbelievable games right now. Trying to make sure they get their way. And they’re trying to go for a brokered convention. I’m against Donald Trump. But I’ll tell you one thing, if he gets close enough, and the GOP tries to play games, I won’t vote for Donald Trump ever, but I’ll stand with his right because the people have spoken. And what the GOP is doing, they’re stirring things up because they’re more afraid of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) than Donald Trump.

Beyond stupid.

Read: Glenn Beck: Donald Trump Is Like Hitler In 1929 Or Something »

During Democrat Debate, Hillary Clinton Totally Enthused To Discuss Her Email Server Issue

Just kidding. She deflected like crazy, per the transcript of the debate at the NY Times (via a story at The Hill)

COOPER: Secretary Clinton, I want to ask you about something you talked about this morning. You said this morning, about your emails, that you expect the investigation to be wrapped up soon. The Republican front-runner, Donald Trump says, he’s going to talk about your emails every single day if he is the nominee and out on the campaign trail.

Democrats want to know, your supporters want to know, if you’re the nominee, how are you going to take him on?

CLINTON: Well, let me start by saying that the last time I checked as of last night, Donald Trump had received 3.6 million votes, which is a good number. And there is only one candidate in either party who has more votes than him and that’s me.(APPLAUSE)

CLINTON: And, I am building a broad, diverse coalition across our country. I’m very excited by the support we’re receiving. I have said, and I’ll repeat here, I think that Donald Trump’s bigotry, his bullying, his bluster, are not going to wear (oh) well on the American people. (APPLAUSE)

So, I will look forward to engaging him because, you know, I don’t think we need to make America great again. America didn’t stop being great, we have to make it whole again. We have to knock down the barriers, we have to end the divisiveness, we have to unify the country.

And, if I’m fortunate enough to be the nominee that’s exactly what I will do.

At which point there was no follow up question to see if she would answer the first question. You can that whomever the GOP candidate is, be it Trump, Cruz, or the Establishment pulls some sort of shenanigans during the convention, the issue of Hillary’s insecure server will be brought up. Heck, the server I use to host this blog has more security than Hillary’s server. You can look up the SSL security certificate for Dreamhost, as I’m sure you can look up the one for the host Right Wing News uses (as this will be crossposted). Hillary, who was transmitting all three levels of classified material through her server had no SSL certificate. The State Department uses many, many IT people to continue to upgrade the software in an attempt to stop intrusion attempts. And even they have been hacked.

And, for those who say “there’s been no breach”, per one person, you need to be reminded that “But not detecting a breach is not the same as not being breached, security experts say.” And when you’re using crummy software, it’s harder to detect. Sometimes, it takes years to see that there was a breach.

Let’s be clear: if a Republican did this, Democrats would be freaking out and calling it treason, and would be demanding for an independent prosecutor. And, excepting the treason part, they’d be right. Regardless, Hillary will be subjected to quite a bit of questions from whomever the Republican candidate is over this situation, most particularly questioning her judgement. And, she should probably heed her own words

Sanders made the call for Snyder’s resignation again at the debate, before Clinton was asked about Flint.

“One of the points that I have made is the governor of this state should understand that his dereliction of duty was irresponsible,” Sanders said. “He should resign.”

Clinton said “amen” to Sanders’ comments, and then added her own call for Snyder’s removal..

It’s certainly a dereliction of duty to put the national security of the United States at risk simply because Hillary found it inconvenient to use the State Department email system. Try blowing off filing your taxes and tell the IRS you found it inconvenient. See what happens.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: During Democrat Debate, Hillary Clinton Totally Enthused To Discuss Her Email Server Issue »

We Need A Carbon Tax For The News Media

Over the years, so many in the Credentialed Media have called for carbon taxes and cap and trade programs. Here’s the latest, as the editorial board of the Toronto Star makes their case

Canada needs to set a price on carbon, once and for all: Editorial

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau knows it. Most Canadians know it. And Ontario’s Kathleen Wynne and most of the premiers know it.

We need to put a serious price on carbon to do our bit to keep the Earth from getting too warm, and inflicting havoc on much of the planet in the form of melting ice caps, freakish weather, heat waves, droughts and floods.

So it’s discouraging that Trudeau and the premiers could not agree at their get-together in Vancouver this past week on a “pan-Canadian framework” to peg the price of carbon at $15 a tonne, $30 a tonne or some other modest but credible figure to deter fossil fuel consumption.

Instead, they punted the decision into the fuzzy future. Despite our heady pledges at theUnited Nations climate conference in Paris a few months ago, Canada will be going green no time soon.

Now, something interesting occurred to me: all the carbon taxes and such that the Credentialed Media calls for would not apply to the TV, Internet, and paper news business. This always applies to Other People. Yet, think of the vast amounts of energy, resources, and fossil fuels needed for the news sector to do their jobs. The Toronto Star needs vast amounts of fossil fuels to gather the news, then deliver their papers. They use vast amounts of paper, which comes from killing trees, to publish their paper. Think of all the energy needed to gather the news, produce the news, then disseminate it, both in dead tree edition and on the Internet. Think of all the resources needed to keep the reporters up and running, as well as the buildings and vehicles. This is all super-bad for climate change.

Hence, I suggest that any news organization that has recommended any sort of carbon tax and/or a cap and trade scheme be subject to

  • a carbon tax of $45 a metric ton of carbon pollution
  • a surcharge of 35 cents per liter/gallon of gasoline purchased by a news organization
  • a road tax of 2 cents per mile traveled for all employees during their work day and on company vehicles
  • a tax of $1 per pound of paper used to make newspapers
  • a requirement that all news organizations upgrade their buildings so that they are 100% LEED compliant
  • all helicopters used to gather news can only use biofuels
  • and none may raise the cost of their services/products

Those are very modest proposals, are they not? Reasonable, right? Surely, those who advocate for carbon taxes and/or cap and trade schemes would be willing to participate, right?

Read: We Need A Carbon Tax For The News Media »

If All You See…

…is a world that will soon be covered 100% by water from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Vox Popoli, with a post on perception vs perspective.

It’s ladies of horror movies week, so, have to start off with one of the best, Jamie Lee Curtis from Halloween. Since there are so many “scream queens” and only 6 more days, who’s your favorite?

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove