Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson just secured a major book deal from Random House. The book, entitled “Lovely One,” is aptly named given the sharp contrast to the reception to the book deal given to her colleague, Amy Coney Barrett. Barrett’s book, also with a Random House company, was opposed by publishers and editors including over 50 who publicly claimed to be working at Penguin Random House companies. She was deemed a persona non grata by editors who wanted to prevent readers from reading about her own personal views and history.
“Lovely One” will tell Jackson’s life’s story and she will receive an advance of $1 million. I am delighted by the news of the book. Jackson has a fascinating life story to tell.
It is the reception to the book that is most striking. As discussed earlier, various publishers and editors publicly called for Barrett to be barred from publication due to her jurisprudential views. It did not matter that these views are generally shared not only by over half of the Supreme Court and hundreds of judges but arguably half of the voters. After all, why burn books when you can effectively ban them?
The public letter entitled “We Dissent” made the usual absurd protestation that, just because we are seeking to ban books of those with opposing views, we still “care deeply about freedom of speech.” They simply justified their anti-free speech position by insisting that any harm “in the form of censorship” is less than “the form of assault on inalienable human rights” in opposing abortion or other constitutional rights. Yet, the letter is not simply dangerous. It is perfectly delusional. While calling for the book to be blocked, the editors and writers bizarrely insisted “we are not calling for censorship.”
Among the “literary figures” who signed the public petition were Penguin Random house editors and staff. This included over fifty individuals who listed their association with Penguin and Random House in publicly calling for the book banning. While we cannot confirm many of these signatories, they remain publicly posted and some claim senior positions at the company:
Listed in order on the petition:
- Michelle Lee, Assistant Editor/Penguin Young Readers
- Ada Fung, Editor, Penguin Random House
- Mary, Penguin Publishing Group
- Isabella Biedenharn, Random House
- Estelle Malmed, Senior Associate, Ebook Dev Ops, Penguin Random House
- Abbe Wright, Penguin Random House
- Bridget Sweet, Production Editor, Penguin Random House
- Maija Baldauf, Penguin Publishing Group
- Emily Schultz, Author with Penguin Random House
- Emily Hoffman, Assistant Managing Editor/Penguin Random House
- Megan Tripp, Senior Social Media Manager, Random House Group
- Emilie Mills, Subsidiary Rights/Penguin Random House
- Bridget [No Last Name listed], Penguin Random House
- Ty Nowicki, Director Creative Ops / Random House
- Emi Lotto, Production Manager, Penguin Random House
- Claire Yee, Senior editor / Penguin Random House
- James Akinaka, Digital Marketing Manager, Penguin Random House
- Angela Sardella, Penguin Random House
- Corina Diez, Marketing Associate/ Random House
- Anna Scheithauer, Copyright Associate/Penguin Random House
- Korra Saqqara (Christa Angelios), Copyright Associate, Penguin Random House
- Ashleigh Heaton, Assistant Director of Marketing, Penguin Random House
- Josh Luft, Sr. Manager/Penguin Random House
- Heather Lewis, Copyrights Assoc. / Penguin Random House LLC
- Gretchen Durning, Associate Editor / Penguin Random House
- Kate Bennion, Penguin Random House
- Lindsey Tulloch, Penguin Random House
- Casey Nugent, Penguin Random House
- Molly Humphrey, Penguin Random House
- Alex Cruz-Jimenez, Marketing Associate, Penguin Random House
- Sarah Blumenstock, Senior Editor/Penguin Random House
- Carole DeSanti, ex-VP and Exec Ed, PenguinRandomHouse
- Miranda Stinson, Penguin Random House (former employee, 2019-2021)
- Yunyi Zhang, Managing Editorial Assistant/Penguin Publishing Group
- Katelyn MacKenzie, Production Manager/Penguin Random House
- Maya Smith, Penguin Random House
- Sarah Turbin, Penguin Random House
- Kayla Steinorth, Penguin Random House
- Danielle K, Penguin Random House
- Kristine Swartz, Senior Editor, Penguin Random House
- Rob Holden, Penguin Random House
- Hope Ellis, Managing editor, Penguin Random House
- Dasia Payne, Managing Editorial, Penguin Random House
- Charlotte Lesnick, Penguin Random House
- Richard Wylde, Penguin Random House
- Alison Wallach, Penguin Random House
- Maggie Hinders, Penguin Random House
- Becca Brummett, Associate Manager/Penguin Random House
- Grant Griglak, Director / Penguin Random House
- Irene Gould, Penguin Random House
- Liz Lee, Managing Editor, Penguin Random House Canada
Again, the signatures of these petitions are not authenticated or confirmed. Indeed, some “literary figures” signed simply as “Barbara Hirsch, Avid reader” or only gave initials or first names (including two alleged employees identified only as “Mary” and “Bridget”).
Conservative, libertarian, or even contrarian writers often discuss how difficult it is to be published today due to the bias of editors and reviewers. This bias is often kept concealed and even denied in public. In this case, however, over 50 self-identified as Penguin Random House editors and staff members to expressly call for the banning of books by those who hold opposing views on issues like abortion.
For Barrett, the intolerance was nothing new. At her alma mater, Rhodes College alumni sought to strip references to Barrett from the college because they disagree with her views. Her college sorority was even forced to apologize for simply congratulating her for being one of a handful of women to be nominated to the high court.
No attack appears to be beyond the pale for media or the left. Barrett sat through days of such baseless attacks on her character and even had to face attacks referencing her children. Ibram X. Kendi, the director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, claimed that her adoption of two Haitian children raised the image of a “white colonizer” and suggested that the children were little more than props for their mother.
That is the difference between being the “Lovely One” or the “Evil One” in the eyes of editors and writers. Rather than transcending their own bias and working for a diversity of opinions in publications, these editors and writers want less free expression on the pages of Penguin Random House and other publications. They are not alone. The petition contains editors from the largest academic and commercial publishers.
This letter was not simply another manifestation of viewpoint intolerance. It is a statement would seem to constitute virtual self-loathing from people who work in the literary world; writers and editors who cannot abide the publication of opposing views.
In NYC they have a station 1010 WINS, whose catchphrase is: all news all the time.
The catchphrase modern-day American liberals live by is all censorship all the time.
Here is a saying that is trustworthy and tru: the Left’s instincts are always totalitarian.
A closed mind?
Ibram X. Kendi, the director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, claimed that her adoption of two Haitian children raised the image of a “white colonizer” and suggested that the children were little more than props for their mother.
So, the director of an academic “antiracist” center says Justice Barrett should not have adopted two Haitian children because she has the wrong skin color? Mm-hm, sounds really “antiracist” to me, and proves we really do live in clown world here in modern-day America.
Kendi offers a rationale argument against ‘white folk’ involvement in the socio-economic and political affairs of people of color. I’m content to leave such matters to him and others of his ilk. I don’t recall if he objected to the nomination of the most ‘qualified’ woman of color to the SCOTUS as being little more than a prop for the POTUS.
His brain might be scrambled trying to figure out how to react to the fact she is married to a white man.
Correct in his view they are better off in the slums of Port au Prince
Any chance Musk can buy Penguin Random House? Looks like we need another airing of truth files, and more house cleaning.
Sam: !!!!!! Tweet your suggestion to Musk, before he stops reading them and sells! Books have a longer and wider-reaching impact than ephemeral tweets.
There was a time when bias of this level got people fired.
“Lovely One”? How’s “Conceited One” grab you? Or maybe, “Can’t Figure Out Biology One” or perhaps “Got Here On My Immutable Characterists One”?
It’s great living here in Rome, ain’t it?
mespo: When one humorously strikes upon a real point/gist, it is extra funny. Thank you.
lin:
“mespo: When one humorously strikes upon a real point/gist, it is extra funny. Thank you.”
**********************************
There’s never been an edge made sharper or harder than wit. But the thanks really goes to some of my teachers primarliy Voltaire, Wilde and Wodehouse. They’re the rapier; I’m just a rusty pen knfe.
This is wrong on several levels. 1st the bulk of these signers work for the same company, Is it not their job to use their expertise and judgment to bring value to that company and increase its profits ? This public disdain for an extremely well known public figure brings brings that judgment and expertise in to question. It also tarnished the image of their employer. That is surly ground’s for discipline if not termination. By doing neither of these thing’s. Yes they gave Barrett a book deal but by not at a minimum rebuking these people for using the company name Random House has given tacit approval for their actions.
This reminds me of Obama receiving the Nobel Prize for doing nothing. They control the media narrative and can fabricate literally anything to advance the Left’s narrative. Jackson doesn’t have prove or publish anything. Her Super Bowl ring has already been ordered…..
Are you not aware the Supreme Court is in the hands of political extremists?
Care to give evidence of this extremism?
Abortion.
LOL. The aborters are in the minority, the sane people are in control.
Abortion is the ultimate expression of the left’s “ends justify the means” philosophy – disgusting.
The extremism on the bench is waning and it is getting back to normalcy.
Got anything else? Racism, maybe?
Neil, george might be a troll. But the total lack of anything of intellectual heft identifies it as a bot. Don’ t feed trolls, and for sure don’t waste time responding to computer code
He got it for being our true hope for peace.
George227: You forgot the 😉 . You know, the little ‘wink’ thing. Because, surely you’re just kidding.
Even if we were to assume (for sake of argument) that he got the prize because of what the Nobel Committee “hoped” he would do (which may in fact be true), it is still ridiculous. The prize has traditionally been given for what people actually do to promote peace, not for what the committee hopes they will do in the future. By giving it on that basis, the committee turned the prize into a political endorsement. As Dennis Prager says, the Left ruins everything it touches. And that includes the Nobel Prize.
Look up the citation. It was after Dubya lied us into a disgusting war.
So we give out Nobel Prize based on hope?
Hope is not a course of action.
And Obama failed.
Obama authorized 542 drone strikes, killing an estimated 3,797 people, including 324 civilians. Some were American citizens, and not afforded due process before being assassinated.
“Turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”
– President Obama, 2011.
His claim is Obama was the “true” hope. That’s where he went wrong. Obama may have been “a” hope, but he was a false hope.
How’d that work out? That obama POS was the most racist elected official since Byrd. Him and flim-flam man eric holder are behind the most disgusting change in trajectory of this nation since the hwBush/clinton collaborative. Read the allybank shakedown orchestrated by those racist pigs.
Turns out the nobel committee were under some kind of delusion about half black/half white people and peace leadership, maybe they are racists?
In fact, the US hasn’t seen as much racial strife as it did after obama took office since the 60s.
So much for hope…we did get a change though…more racism.
Obama made all kinds of promises regarding peace to get elected.
In office he was just another deep state aparatich.
Trump is the Only US president since Gerald Ford to NOT attack another nation while in office.
In doing that, and then finding out Obama was just as much of a war president as any other before him, the Nobel Committee forever diminished its prestige.
This intolerant left will not just fade away. The intolerant right of McCarthy’s time did not just fade away but actually had to be stood up to and finally pushed over. We on the right should remember that. Yes the intolerant left will probably start to eat its own but don’t rely on it. When it starts to do that self eating then we need to be there to deliver the kill shot or push it over or any adjective you desire but to make sure it’s dead.. It always needs to be resisted. The Bolsheviks were a minor party in post Tsar Russia until they staged a coup and grabbed the whole enchilada. Same with Hitler, who many thought would burn out or could be managed. The CCP was a midget in total defeat and took the long trek to near obscurity until it reappeared and swept to power. Never assume a political view is dead until it’s truly dead and you have to make sure.
“Ripley/Hicks for 2024. It’s the only way to be sure.” 😊
You lost on Jan 6!
We all lost that day.
You are right to worry about small cabals grabbing power in chaos.
That is typically how the left secures tyranical power.
Because absent tyranny they fail.
Why have you used the female pronoun “she” rather than “it” to describe Jackson? Jackson swore under oath during its confirmation hearings that it does not know that it is a woman because it is not a biologist.
Evidence the denial of Simon & Schuster’s proposed merger with Penguin Random House is one the courts got right. All that collective-thinking under an even larger tent? What could possibly go wrong.
tootsiebug: great point, thank you.
The Left: Hateful, hypocritical bigots.
My gosh, as a Vietnam Vet, I know the first step to violence is the dehumanization of others.
Let’s debate and not turn to hate.
george227:
“My gosh, as a Vietnam Vet, I know the first step to violence is the dehumanization of others.
Let’s debate and not turn to hate.”
*****************************
Yes, George III is just a kind, eccentric tyrant who looks great in ermine. Know your enemy, soldier.
We all saw our enemies on January 6!
Didnt you just say something about the first step to violence is the dehumanization of others?
Yes, I did not say they were monsters who need killing. They were insurrectionists breaking into the Capitol and attacking the Capitol Police. What would you call them? Patriots?
They were not insurrectionists.
They were protestors who devolved into a riot. Based off the videos and his own testimony, Ray Epps instigated some of that violence. Been noted Ray Epps has not be arrested or charged for his acts, yet others whom did far less have.
Others who did assault police should be charged accordingly.
However, that day pales in comparison to the 2020 Fiery, Yet Mostly Peaceful Summer of Love that resulted in billions of dollars in damage, people killed and police were also assaulted.
Note, some Democrats donated money to post bail for some of those arsonists, looters.
UpstateFarmer: Some convicted of ‘seditious conspiracy’:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_proceedings_in_the_January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack
The arsonists were right-wingers, trashing, burning, and looting. Like the criminals on Jan 6.
“The arsonists were right-wingers, trashing, burning, and looting. Like the criminals on Jan 6.”
**************************
Yeah BLM and antifa were most assuredly Trump voters. Have you considered filling out that Agent Orange disability application?
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/article-abstract/2774857#:~:text=Conclusions%20and%20Relevance%20Veterans%20with,and%20medical%20and%20psychiatric%20comorbidities.
“We all saw our enemies on January 6!”
************************
Yep, they were, as Stalin said, “counting the votes” or cowering in their offices or maybe just pretending to be there.
“I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this—who will count the votes, and how.”
~Boris Bazhanov The Memoirs of Stalin’s Former Secretary (1992)
Trump likes Putin and Stalin for their strength in murdering others because they wanted to do it.
horehey227:
“Trump likes Putin and Stalin for their strength in murdering others because they wanted to do it.”
****************************
Pretty good mind reading. Do you do parties or do we just get all this “wisdom” for free? Love it when the Leftist testifies to that which he can’t possibly know.
Do you live in the real world ?
This left wing nut disconnect with reality is disturbing.
The obvious totalitarians and maccarthites in the US are on the left.
Trump did not set the FBI and DOJ on parents of school kids.
You rant about J6 – hby far the least violent protest in all of the preceding Year.
Pick any night in Portland in 2020 and that was far more violent.
J6 shocked the left – because middle aged conservatives do not protest.
The entire J6 ongoing nonsense is because it is absolutely imperative for the survival of the left that middle aged conservatives remain terrified to protest.
Should conservatives actually take to the streets – the left is OVER.
The entire J6 ongoing nonsense is because . . .
. . . the Left needs a continuous distraction from the reality that they are systematically dismantling America and putting a censorship-based police state in its place.
J6 is fundimental to the left. It is not a distraction.
Until the Tea Party we have NEVER had protests in this country that were not on the left.
In the last decade we have seen the TP, the Covid Lockdown protests, the Canada Truckers protests, and J6.
It is absolutely critical to the future of the left that working class people do not EVER become serious about protesting.
The purpose of the J6 hearings is to make absolutely sure that everyone on the right know that if they protest they will end up in jail.
It certainly is fundamental to the Left. My meaning was that they need it to try and distract us (or so they think).
I agree, but that is far from the most important reason for the left’s ongoing J6 nonsense.
It is very important to understand that J6 terrifies the left – not just Pelosi and Biden – but left wing nuts here.
Because when middle aged people come out to protest – governments topple.
One of the reasons that the left rants so much about J6 is because it could have succeeded.
What if protestors had successfully managed to peacefully” take the capital – with Congress in it and demanded a new election, or an audit of all 6 swing states or a special counsel to look into the election ? Or any of a long list of other things.
Contra the left – the vast majority of J6 was peaceful. It was only lack of organization and planning that prevented protesters from catching Congress in the Capitol.
Arguably protestors needed to do almost nothing Beyond surround Congress and Glare while they voted on the election.
horehey227:
Oh you were in ‘Nam like I was at Bull Run — the latter being a pretty apt description of your commentary. My noe deceased uncle (who was there and decorated for it) always liked to call out these fakers with a question about their unit, base assignment and CO. They always were “stumped” or as we civilians call it — liars.
VN, eh? Good work over there. You think you’d have learned a lesson.
Why have conservatives turned to whiners? Outgrow this adolescence phase.
We’re laughing at you, not whining.
Were you laughing on January 6?
Yes, I was , until Pelosi’s FBI hoisted the false flag and her brown shirt slaughtered an innocent young girl, but that is what the left does, to the tune of 9000+ per year, kill other Americans.
And then when the uniparty gets in charge, it goes out and kills other nations’ people. You proud of that, because that is what you voted for, you identitarian warmonger. You have nothing of value to offer, neither does anyone you support – just look at the proof in the pudding. Show me a city run by democrats that is better after they take over – there are none.
We laugh at you because you are products of your own design. Pathetic.
Didnt you just say something about the first step to violence is the dehumanization of others?
Liberals can only tolerated their own opinions.
Nope. I think debating with other sides is necessary. Just griping in partisan blogs will not do it.
@george
This isn’t a partisan blog (it’s a legal blog. You’d know that if you were an actual reader), and you are clearly a troll, but I’ll bite:
Begin the debate then, george. And I, along with many others, including our host, are not Conservatives.
Go!
Thank you for the response, and bear with me, since my fingers are poor tools lately after a heart problem.
I was responding to the assertions of others, as you can check. What do you want me to prove? That I served my country in the war, or I earned a Master of Science in Environmental Management, or that our household and both electric cars run off our PV system on the roof? All of that is true. I am real, I am liberal, and think we need to talk.
You are correct. I should have said partisan griping in a legal blog.
I agree completely. Many of us do not debate. Mush of what we see – here in social media, left and right is just pointless griping, where what we need is actual debate.
That said – here and most everywhere – the right is far more open minded than the left.
I was watching a Dylan documentary last night and there was a brief reference to Mario Savio and the Berkeley free speech movement.
Free speech used to be a core value of the LEFT.
Today the modern McCarthyites are all on the left.
I agree. Tell me where you do it.
O I get it now. Conservatives are pushing for books to be banned from schools because they are so tolerant and they believe in free speech! They are pushing to enact laws to stop the teaching of certain subjects or stop anyone for talking about certain issues even in colleges and universities because they are so tolerant and believe in free speech! What codswallop!
Publishing houses give the contracts they do because they think they can make money out of the books they publish. That is they publish books that they think people will want to read.
I just love the way you publish people‘s names and then say the petitions are not authenticated. Hmm. Why do you do that? Do you want to chill free speech?
Professor, I realize you are now the mouth piece for the right but really.
The two situations are: 1) employees of a publishing company are allegedly trying to prevent their employer from publishing a book because they don’t like what they imagine the author will say, and 2) a group of people elected by the public voting on what books should be included in a school’s curriculum.
In your mind those are similar?
Conservatives are pushing for books to be banned from schools because they are so tolerant and they believe in free speech!
Bad try. Maybe its because we don’t want our children indoctrinated with tranny sex and the like, no matter how much you enjoy such.
Svelaz provided a list of books that are allegedly being banned by conservatives.
Many are inappropriate for some age groups. No one thinks that schools should carry Hustler.
But I note that several purportedly banned books are being banned by the LEFT not the right.
Regardless, there is a world of difference between parents deciding of the millions of books in existance – which are appropriate in a 3rd grade school library, and book publishers refusing to publish anything from an ideology that reflects 1/2 the country.
No one is Banning Maus from publication – only from inclusion in an elementary school library that can not contain every book ever published, and therefore MUST reject the vast majority of all books. Kids are still free to find Maus on the internet or many other places.
While the point regarding Barrett was to restrict almost anyone from hearing her story.
Your poor argument is typical of the left. Constantly comparing apples and oranges.
Despite Turley’s editorial, NY book publishers are free to choose what they wish to publish.
And as we have seen when the left has influenced other arena’s to silence those they do not like – Go Woke, Go Broke.
Free markets are self regulating. Book publishers exist to make money for their owners. Not to advance ideologies.
Schools unfortunately are not free markets – or this problem would not exist.
They are government silo’s. School libraries MUST make choices. You are hearing about the instances in which Parents sought to say no to The fight in schools is not whether there specific books. You are not hearing the millions of times school librarians say no for a wide variety of reasons. Certainly sometime ideological. The fight in schools is not whether millions of books will be excluded. But who will decide.
Well stated. You certainly put a lot of time into making these points. It is appreciated.
Thank you.
The arguments of the left rarely hold up even at the most surface level.
Svelaz has been ranting for over a year that private entities are free to censor as they please.
He is actually correct – though he turns a blind eye to the fact that private actors are also required to honor the agreements they make with others. Twitters TOS does not and never has said “we can censor whatever we want for any reason at all”
I am constantly stating the tautology that infringements on rights must be justified.
The left is generally correct – there is no such thing as an absolute right.
Rights can be infringed on when JUSTIFIED.
It is not hypocrisy to say that Government can not even ask to censor political speech on a public forum, but Can make speech decisions in a school – which is NOT a forum for limitless free speech, but a place to educate children.
I would greatly prefer and most edge cases would resolve themselves – it Government stuck to only what government is necescary for – and education is not one of those.
No one would give a Schiff is woke day care taught kids they could be any gender they wanted – if as a parent you did not want that – you could choose another day care. It is only when force – aka government is involved that all these issues become a problem.
We have SCOTUS deeply involved in what Universities can and can not do regarding their student body. All these issues would go away entirely if government was not providing universities with public money.
Justifying infringement on individual rights is relatively easy outside of government. I can infringe on your rights in whatever way I please – inside my home – so long as you are free to leave. It is only where government is involved that justifying infringement is and is supposed to be hard.
Government is force. That is its purpose. Government exists to accomplish ONLY those things that can not be accomplished by force.
Robert Nozick does an excellent job of starting from core universal principles, building from scratch a moral and ethical framework for government, that defines the boundaries of moral and ethical government. In his book “Anarchy, State, Utopia”
Unfortunately while an excellent book, it is also possibly the most difficult to read book I have ever read. Not because of complex language, but because it is rigidly pure logical examination of extremely complex edge cases – complexities most people never consider.
There are alternative and arguably superior arrangements to what we have settled on, that do not have the flaw that our current self government has of force without individual consent. Regardless, none of those arrangements are going to happen. Given that we have government that we have not individually and fully consented to, that imposes moral and ethical constraints on government.
Put differently the lefts concept of pure democracy where rights can be infringed willing nilly by consensus is perfectly legitimate – if people are completely free to walk away from government.
But all of this is beyond most of the left wing nuts here, who can not deal with even mildly complex issues like abortion without ignoring the fact that a baby is in and dependant on, but not part of the woman.
John Say,
Well said.
Don’t you mean WITH a notable difference?
The “deal breaker” may be abortion since 43 of the 51 names appear to be female. Or maybe they hate the way she styles her hair? Hard to tell.
And that’s one of the major differences between the left and the right. The left has completely forfeited any tolerance or intellectual diversity it may once have had. It is now a bunch of anti-intellectual thugs who failed to move the country through persuasion, so now uses violence, deception, bullying and cancellation. The civilized right are, amazingly, keeping their powder dry, but the left takes that as a sign of weakness, not prudence. The left will overreach, and then all hell will break loose.
Perfectly expressed. Thank you.
“There’s nothing a leftist hates more than being held to their own standards.” –Derek Hunter
Try me.
Intellectual diversity is incredibly important.
None of us are smart enough to get everything right in a vaccuum.
The failure of covid public policy across much of the west is a direct consequence of silencing other voices.
We get things badly wrong when we do not allow different points of view.
If you would listen to the left – everything is about hatred, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and the world is going to hell.
These are all problems. But they are not big problems. They are actually quite little problems.
But the left is trying to force BIG solutions on us that will inevitably make everything worse not better.
It is the absence of other voices in their lives that allows those on the left to think what they care about is all their is to care about.
A personal case in point. My daughter was adopted from China at two. As a result I am “oversensitized” to the condition of children in third world countries (most of China is not third world today, but it was then). I donate to charities that provide aid to children in third world countries.
Those on the left rant about the problems of poor kids in the US. There are real problems – ones we shoudl be concerned about,
But they are tiny compared to those of kids elsewhere in the world.
Those on the left want a government solution.
Nothing against working to improve conditions for children in poverty in the US – but why should I have to contribute to improve conditions for poor children in the US when there are children elsewhere in the world far worse off ?
We can not as a nation fix all the problems in our own country – much less the world. But when we act through government, we take away or reduce the opportunity for people to address what THEY see as problems.
Each of us sees the world differently. None of us sees everything in perfect perspective.
But the lovely conservatives who carry guns and invade the Capital, state house and coffee bars are tolerant intellectuals who only want to educate people. Give it a rest.
Oh bother. Look, every night in every major liberal center in the nation, liberals murder others with guns, knives, cars fists, etc. to the tune of 8-9000 per year.
Now, I realize that your coffee house may feel unsafe because of a coupe people that think different than you, but until you get your own houses in order, you give it a rest. Then you may be able to look into the mirror deeper and see that this fashion-hire that got a book deal for no reason other than being a fashion hire is a cancer on all our neighborhoods. But, I doubt anyone can educate you to understand that, but maybe, just maybe…
They did not invade the capital. They can not invade the capital. The government belongs to all of us – including them.
They no more invaded the capital than Kavanaugh protestors did.
Are conservatives not permitted in the Capital, coffee bars and state houses ?
Democrats certainly “invade” those frequently.
Conservatives have guns for many reasons.
One of those many reasons is that You are dangerous.
Regarldess you would have far less problems with conservatives if you were not so busy trying to impose your will on all by force.
Focus government on its actual job – reducing Crime. Securing our borders, Defending this country.
And leave the rest alone. The Greatness of America is that we are capable of taking care of ourselves.
Without your help we can find the energy we need and then some, grow the food we need and then some. Build the cars we need and then some.
The criminals attacked democracy on January 6. Are you trying to excuse them?
And this liberal has worked to give us quality alternative energy and electric cars for decades, through the Electric Power Research Institute and PG&E.
And this liberal has worked to give us quality alternative energy and electric cars for decades, through the Electric Power Research Institute and PG&E.
My son has been toiling in electric powered heavy equipment. Today its not feasible. Not feasible to eliminate fossil fuels. Not feasible that electric generated from NON FOSSIL FUEL, can sustain the USA economy.
Just to sign off. IF fossi fuels were problem, and electric is the answer, we would be bringing online 1 nuclear power plant per month.
That is not happening, so fossil fuels aren’t the problem you claim them to be. Because we refuse to take the needed action.
iowan2: False. Find factual information in
https://bravenewclimate.proboards.com/board/4/energy
What do they say about Ocean Acidification?
We are starting to lose Dungeness crabs on the left coast already from the change in pH.
“We are starting to lose…”
You’re Paul Erlich using a pen name???
We are starting to lose>>The great barrier reef>>> Bolar Bears>>>Bees>>Spotted Owls>> Northern Ice Cap>> Manhattan.
I could go on. We of a certain vintage and an interest in the environment have lived through dozens of these scare mongering stories.
God save us from left wing nuts.
Please name a SINGLE Malthusian prediction EVER, that has actually come true.
Even Malthus ultimately grasped that he was wrong.
Dinosaurs do not roam the earth – Man had nothing to do with that.
Humans consume about 5×10^20 J/year. In all of human history we have not consumed more than 10^23J
Most Huricanes release as much energy as all humans ever have.
Nuclear tests in the 50’s released massive amounts of radioactive CO2 into the atmosphere. From that we learned that the half live of Human CO2 in the atmosphere is about 7 years.
Your ranting about changes in Ph of the ocean – Why is the Ph changing ? Because the Ocean is absorbing CO2.
The Oceans release and absorption of CO@ dwarfs human CO2 by many orders of magnitude.
At the scale of the planet – Humans are noise.
And if we were so fortunate as to actually increase global temperatures a few degrees, that would result in a more prosperous world a more verdant world.
Today we feed more than twice the human population of 1965, more than twice as well as in 1965 a small portion of the arable land on the planet – and only half the lad we used in 1965.
There are many reasons for that improvement. Increased atmospheric CO2 is One of those.
I was alive in the 60’s. My back yard turns into a lush jungle much faster today than it did 50+ years ago.
As a Child I lived in the country. I never saw a deer, a fox, a hawk, an owl, a bat. only rabbits and groundhogs.
Today I live on 2 acres in the suburbs. Every day a dozen day cross my yard. Fox’s owls, hawks can be spotted if you look for them.
And keeping the rabbits and groundhogs out of the gardens is impossible.
Today there are more bears living in New Jersey than when the colonists arrived.
Without humans the current population density of Bears would not be sustainable.
Nature – including most predators has adapted to living with humans, and it has done so quite well.
The reality is we are doing fine.
It is not your field. It is mine. We can do it, and are doing it. Doing it now, replacing fossil fuel power with renewables, which are cheaper and faster to build. We cannot afford nuclear power, nor the time and expense it takes to build one.
“It is not your field. It is mine.”
********************************
Great. You first. Let me know when you need a ride some cold dark night on an impassable icy interstate. I’ll pick you up in my gas-guzzling FWD.
Doing it now, replacing fossil fuel power with renewables,
We are not. Successfuly. That’s why there are spot electrical outages.
What we are fighting is the renewables are not dependable.
Some day we may get there, but the market needs to be allowed to let it happen.
Contra George they are also only cheaper so long as they are not required to be dependable.
In probably half of the country electric rates are high enough that suburban homeowners can put solar systems on their roof and end up breaking even after 7 years. But these systems are not 24×7 and accomplish nothing except reducing daytime demand on power companies.
And the Power companies STILL must build sufficient capacity to operate on cloudy days. So the savings is purely to the homeowner.
It does not reduce the power companies capital investments.
The fact that Solar is easy to install and has a short payback as an investment, is not the same as it is a dependable 24x7x365 solution.
The moment you require a storage system for Solar – its total cost exceeds that of fossil fuel systems.
George talks about new battery technology – but there is nothing that is more than incremental improvement on the best we have now.
We need large decreases in weight to go much further in cars. We need drastic cost reductions and capacity increases – all of which are basic science problems right now – not mere engineering problems.
Cars are for SOME uses feasable today. But not for all uses.
Ultimately we are likely to solve all these problems. But probably not quickly, and less quickly the more government is involved.
Nothing you have posted so far indicates that you have a clue what you are talking about.
Absolutely Nuclear in the US is ridiculously expensive and takes forever to build – and we build the most antique and inefficient reactors generations out of date.
But none of that has to be true.
There is no renewable system today that costs less than fossil fuels in a complete working reliable dependable system.
Absolutely as supplemental systems, as a means of reducing total grid load, Solar while the sun shines supplemental systems increasingly make economic sense. But not as 24×7 systems. The same is true of every other “renewable” except hydro.
Alternative energy that can meet the demands of the US economy and growth without fossil fuels is a pipe dream.
The only way that is possible is to reduce our lifestyle to something more like late 1800s. But no one talks about that.
Solar panels and wind turbines are landfill bound. But non one talks about that or the costs it would take to recycle them. Only 10% of solar panels are recycled as it is.
A UK study found there are not enough rare earth minerals to make the batteries for all would be EVs. And that is just in the UK, not including the US or the rest of the world.
And in order to get those rare earth minerals, serious raping of the land.
BTW, Russia is one of the leading exporters of cobalt and nickel. Are we really going to risk WWIII or even nuclear Armageddon so everyone can drive an EV?
UpstateFarmer: Discover how it is done by-reading in
https://bravenewclimate.proboards.com/board/4/energy
Start looking into battery technology. My Li-ion batteries in my 2013 Model S are crude next to other technologies, which do not need Cobalt or Lithium. Look into flow batteries for wind turbines and PV arrays, sodium-containing batteries, and others.
There are no existing or near term likely chemical battery technologies that are likely to make so called “renewable” energy possible on any consequential scale.
Further every single “renewable” technology is not even close to dependable. The sun does not always shine, the wind does not always blow. That inherently means some OTHER energy source must exist capable of meeting near 100% of our needs all the time.
So the real cost of “renewable” energy is double or triple the cost to produce the power.
WE do have One battery technology that is actually incredibly efficient and cheap. We can use renewable energy to pump water into man made lakes and then generate electricity on demand as it flow back down when we need it. That technology is many times more efficient, and near infinitely longer lasting, and can more than meet our capacity demands.
It is physically impossible to match the energy storage capacity of fossil fuels, for the very simple reason that Hydrocarbons are only 1/2 the raw materials for combustion. The other half and most of the mass, comes from oxygen in the air which we do not have to carry with us.
Regardless, I am not inherently anti-“reneweable” energy – we have transitioned from one energy source to another multiple times over the past century plus. We will likely do so again.
But I am vigorously opposed to government sticking its fingers into energy. Free markets have transitioned from Biologic energy, to wood, peat, coal, oil, gas and electric over the past 200 years – all without government. We will do so again, possibly many more times. But that process will be slower, less eficient and overall worse the more heavily government is involved.
Shifts in the way people function often happen rapidly – but only when the perceived value by free people exceeds the value of what they are doing currently.
If you are among those would correctly predicts and invests in that – you could be the next John D Rockefeller.
John Say”
Electric cars is just another grift by the Left to cash out on people’s gullibility. Like the Climate Crisis, Mythical Institutional Racism and White Privilege it plays well in the board room and not so well everywhere else. Don’t bother casting pearls before horehey22much.
Mespo – I do not care – so long as government stays out.
I trust people to make their own choices – possibly ones I do not like.
So long as government stays out of it we will all do fine.
I actually beleive there is a future in both electric cars and renewable energy.
There are several use cases where electric cars are superior even today.
But they are not universally superior, nor even close to equal for all tasks.
I think as a suplimental distributed form of energy solar is likely to be very important.
Even without government subsidies it can economically justify itself in some applications now.
But we are a long long long way from it being a supplimental cost saving measure, to the backbone of our power grid.
I am also enthusiastic about Gas Turbines. While in raw numbers they are more costly than coal plants, in full cycle costs their are competitive. Further unlike coal plants they can be distributed. That is a really big deal. We can scatter various sized gas turbines all over – from individual homes through to entire cities. This makes the grid more bottom up and more resilient.
It is physically impossible to match the energy storage capacity of fossil fuels,
This is the equation that renewables cant solve. Energy density.
Corn growers know we can burn corn in ICE. Sustainable, oh boy! can we grow corn. But the net energy is abysmal, if its even positive. DuPont spent $100’s of millions building a crop residue ethanol plant. (corn stalks)5 years latter, and 2 falls of baling cornstalks, they never got any further that a ribbon cutting ceremony. Millions of bales (2000lb) dotted the Iowa Country Side, the infrastructure was in place and functioning to supply that plant. Not a single drop of ethanol was ever produced. I’m guessing DuPont met the requirements to receive the govt grants, and shut down a process the engineers NEVER got to work.
Big surprise, when corn doesnt really work, but subsidies keep it alive. But moving to cornstalks = orders of magnitudes less energy dense source. Was never going to work.
Energy density.
Corn ethanol was pushed not by environmentalists, but Iowa farmers. They owned Congressional Republicans.
George devolves into meaningless back and forth, failing to support is claims about a non- FF electric grid.
You cut and paste OK, but you lack foundational knowledge
Ethanol was pushed by corn growers and does provide a sustainable energy source. You deflection is proof of you ignorance.
Didn’t you folk want the baker to not have to put words on it he did not like?
As an Iowan, what are your thoughts on ag subsidies, generally and ethanol subsidies specifically?
Like all federal govt programs probably not a good thing. But agricultural exports are controlled by the federal govt. Which means they are a bargin chip. When played carelessly, farmers go broke.
Agreed. It’s something our trading partners do for their countries…no reason not to do it here to help keep trade with those countries ‘fairer’ and ag products less expensive for the consumer at home. Is there a better crop than corn that could be raised for ethanol in the US? I’ve read that other countries convert switchgrass to ethanol with multiple harvests per growing season offsetting some of the costs. Yet it doesn’t seem to give any more bang, literally, for the buck compared to corn or other food crops. Any amount of ethanol in fuel results in lower engine power output, efficiency and miles per gallon. I admit I take advantage of the tax breaks and use ethanol every driving day. I don’t imagine my internal combustion engines are going to last as long. Having said that, until Air Force One and the fleet of limousines that serve the President’s transportation needs are converted 100% to ‘green’ energies, count me out as believing virtue signaling will solve future national energy policy.
Your in a different area.
I do not have a fundimental problem with Bio-Fuels – except that government should stay out of them.
What You are noting is that Corn is just an incredibly inefficient way to make ethanol.
In South america – particularly Brazil, Ethanol is produced from sugar cane and it can be produced at significantly lower costs than fossil fuels.
There are other potentially excellent ways to produce bio-fuels – particularly ethanol. But TODAY none are cost competitive with fossil fuels.
Regardless, BioFuels are entirely different from batteries.
BioFuels do NOT suffer from the energy density problems that batteries do – because just like gasoline – the Oxygen for combustion is not part of the energy mass that must be stored.
“The criminals attacked democracy on January 6. Are you trying to excuse them?”
No I am saying that is NOT what occured.
We are NOT a democracy – that is plain idiocy.
Congress is answerable to us – individually and collectively.
At the very least extreme circumstances we are entitled to protest, to petition government, to assemble, as guaranteed by the first amendment, which itself is merely a reflection of what must be to have legitimate government.
We are free to do all of the above even if we are egregiously WRONG. We are free to do all of the above even if we actually KNOW we are egregiously wrong. We are free to Demand that an election be overturned. We are free to do so even if it was a perfectly lawful, fraud free election that was transparent and in not anyway rigged.
Our rights are not conditioned on being correct.
So 99.99% of what you and the left object to regarding Jan 6 is total complete bunk. Meaning that even if your were correct about nearly all the facts and nearly all the intents – there still would be no crime.
But you are NOT right about 99.99% of the facts.
The election was conducted lawlessly.
There is ample evidence of large scale ballot harvesting – illegal in 49 sates.
The entire country patiently dealt with your collusion delusion nonsense for years. Nonsense that was obvious garbage from day one.
We allowed the FBI to trample the rights of individuals. We appointed a Special Counsel to conduct a snipe hunt.
One who never bothered to look at what was in plain sight.
We did this all driven by the Hoax concocted by Hillary and her aparatich’s that the 2016 Election outcome was altered by Russian influence.
In the end the actual involvement of Russia in the 2016 election was miniscule, laughable and stupid.
Yet, at your demand we tore the country apart to find the grain of sand irritating your but.
Yet, in 2020 – we have every single agency within the federal government working to influence the outcome of the election.
Far, far far more of a moral, ethical and legal problem than foriegn ifluence in an election is when government itself takes sides on who should control government. That is quite litterally totalitaran.
Nor is that the only misconduct in the 2020 election.
We also have almost 1/2 Billion in Zuckerbucks being used to allow private parties to take over significant portions of the machinery of local elections – but only in a few critical locations. No one would tolerate it if the Republican party said – lets skip campaigning and buying adds,
Lets just buy off election officials. Nor is this some secret – Time magazine wrote a story where those who did this Bragged about doing so.
Nor is that the end of the 2020 election misconduct.
The constitution unarguably places control of federal elections in the hands of legislatures. We can debate whether that allows for any role for governors or Courts. But it is without any doubt that Governors and courts can not lawfully take over elections federal elections do as they please and completely ignore legislatures that exist and are perfectly capable of making lawful changes to elections if such changes are necessary. The rules for conducting the 2020 election (and subsequent elections) were changed lawlessly on the fly without the involvement of legislatures which the constitution ALWAYS requires.
None of the above is in the slightest dispute. All of this happened in 2020.
Each individual item above is 100,000 times more significant than Russian influence in 2020.
Absolutely ALL of the above is government itself impermissibly puting it thumb – no its entire body on the scales of an election.
Which is the most immoral and illegal and unethical action that can occur in an election.
Now having unarguably done all of the above – and in many instances so badly as to create oportunities for ballot fraud that you could drive a truck with hundreds of thousands of ballots through, why is it that you think that Republicans should NOT beleive there was massive election fraud ?
Once people have REPEATEDLY engaged in immoral, unethical and often lawless conduct, there is no reason to believe they would not also engage in ballot fraud.
All murderers are not also rapists. But it is not hard to beleive that someone who would commit murder would also commit rape.
Given all the above the REAL question is why on Jan 6. There were not 10,000 people Armed with Ar-15’s demanding a stop to the steal.
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”
Declaration of independence.
“Now too many see the protests as the problem. No, the problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take to the streets: persistent, poisonous inequities and injustice,” Cuomo said. “And please, show me where it says protesters are supposed to be polite and peaceful. Because I can show you that outraged citizens are what made the country what she is and led to any major milestone. To be honest, this is not a tranquil time.”
“Police are the ones required to be peaceful, to de-escalate, to remain calm,” he said.
Chris Cuomo CNN.
You are not a liberal.
A liberal is someone who prizes individual liberty.
Prof. Turley is a liberal.
He is appalled at the violation of peoples rights that the left is behind.
With respect to whatever you have done at PG&E – kudos I guess.
Regardless, you were paid to do whatever you did, and free to go elsewhere if you were not happy doing it.
Getting paid to freely do something you like is wonderful. It is not selfless public service.
And it is not a justification to use force against others to advance the cause you were paid to work on or any other.
I do not personally care if you worked for Phillip Morris making more addictive cigarettes.
So long as you do not try to leverage government force acheive your goals.
The force I saw was from insurrectionist criminals trying to upset our government.
So you were watching science fiction.
“Our government” belongs in part to those people you are calling criminals.
And they and all of us are entitled to lawful, transparent, fraud free, error free elections without any government influence.
We did not get that or anything close to that.
If that continues, one way or the other REAL violence is ensured.
Kurds in France are violently protesting decades of being treated as 2nd class citizens – are they justified ?
People in Hong Kong protested enmass, and sometimes those protests became violent over depriving them of their rights through rigged elections – are they justified ?
People in China are protesting Xi and the CCP – They are protesting over failed Covid Policies, They are protesting over failed economic policies, and the protests are often violent – are they justified ?
People in Iran have periodically protested – often violently the theocratic regime that has been imposed on them by force and rigged elections – are they justified ?
Protests occur accross the world all the time. When those protests confront tyranny they often turn violent.
I would prefer that the left in this country be defeated at the ballot box – and likely they will be. There are upper bounds to the extent to which elections can be rigged, but the democratic loss of working class voters is a trend that is only starting.
The Democrats Go to person on Demographics – Ruy Texieria who predicted a permanent democratic majority as the US moved to beoming a minority majority nation, is now sounding warning bells that the shift in minorities to republicans if not stopped soon will destroy the democratic party.
Democrats have lost connection with their own base. Woke nonsense is not popular.
If that does not work – I would prefer to see the end of current tryanny = the same way that the Berlin Wall collapsed – with millions of people in the streets saying “This government no longer has our consent” – just as the declaration of indepence suggests.
There are many ways the left can fail. Most are not violent.
But you can be assured – the left WILL fail. The only question is how soon, and how much we will all suffer first.
The failure of the left is baked into the the ideology.
The US is not Russia at the turn of the century, China in the 40’s or even Iran since the late 70’s.
Americans have experienced freedom and prosperity. They will anger rapidly as things get worse.
The criminals who truly attack democracy took power on Jan 6. The left always projects.
I’m still waiting for my “quality” alternative energy and a good reason for it.
Wanna do something important, get those tankers that ship us china’s crap to use an alternative energy so that biden’s buddies can send us crappy goods made with child and slave labor using coal energy with a bit less pollution. But you try to pretend that you’re doing something that even comes within a rounding error of that pollution amount.
GioCon – I also noticed that the great majority of the signors were female. Is this because of the underlying political issue (abortion) or are women more likely to claim offense from unpopular political opiniions?
edwardmahl: I skipped over the list, but that is a very interesting and worthy point you raise.
GioCon,
I think that the left that once encouraged intellectual diversity does not have the same philosophical roots as the intolerant thugs called leftists today. They are two very different species sharing the same name.
Predictable. And ludicrous. If Ketanji has an IQ above 100, or is anything more than a Dem DEI pawn, she really needs to prove it. A lawyer friend of mine once told me becoming a lawyer doesn’t require brains, just good test taking skills (sounds like how a certain generation does virtually everything, but I digress). There is nothing inherently magical about a degree or a title. I expect the modern left to be the regime it has become until it burns out and fades away, there will never be a reversal. A whole lot of ‘liberals’ that still think they are voting for JFK are going to be very embarrassed in the future; if they had any decency they’d actually be ashamed. 🫤
Biden got much done for the American People, while we got nothing but lies and illness from Trump.
If every American person was a defense contractor, black model, or banker you’d be correct.
Nobel Prize next.
Book deals are nothing more than money laundering. Who paid for the book? Whereis the market? She has done nothing but get appointed as an affirmative action seat.
@chuckiechan
In their arrogance they just automatically assume people are fascinated because the left told them they should be. They are probably correct, the lib sheeple will lap it up in order to appear relevant and ‘open minded’. She’ll likely sell many; I guarantee a fraction will actually be read, and that is just the honest truth. The publisher gets their payday, so they don’t particularly care.
What a shocker! Affirmative action justice gets a payoff — I mean, book deal. Who saw that coming?
She EARNED that position. From what springs your nastiness to her?
From what springs that nastiness?? Affirmative action and anything of its ilk that determines qualification. You have no way of knowing to what extent complexion trumped competency on her path up the ladder. You never will and, tragically, neither will she. Given where she now sits, why should she?
I am sure that is what you want to think.
Furthermore, there was a time in this country when employment ads read “ white, Christian only “. our nation worked long and hard to wipe that clean. Civil rights laws were promulgated to support that effort but now the omelette has flipped and nobody seems to be much concerned about what’s in the frying pan.