Archive for the ‘Political correctness’ Category

The case for wind farms #2: bird-choppers kill bats too!

June 15, 2009

Until now, I thought the only arguments in favour of wind farms was that they provide entertainment in the form of eagles being sucked into the propeller blades and turned into fast food for rats and foxes.

After all, they disfigure the countryside, they consume vast quantities of concrete. Does anyone know the carbon footprint of building a wind farm -including the trucks carrying the pieces and what BP executives spend their related bonuses on?

They often don’t generate energy at all: “too little” or “too much wind” so a back up oil-fired power station has to be built nearby to “top up” supply. They also explode.

But I was wrong.

Not only do bird-choppers kill birds (reducing the threat of avian influenza) and make a dreadful racket, they could exterminate West Virginia’s bat population too!

I want a wind farm next door to me right now, call me a chiroptophobe if you wish.

The Big O: Oprah’s Obama Opera

September 10, 2008

Notice: I wrote back in February about Suzy Orman’s use of the “Oprah Effect” to promote her books. My only regret is that, because I wanted to focus on the copyright versus open source element, I did not make it clear that Oprah Winfrey was the vehicle for the million-copy giveaway. Despite the criticisms I have made, and which to her credit Oprah has allowed to be posted on her website, I’m more for her than against.

The story begins with this entry on The Drudge Report:

Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America — but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!

Oprah’s staff is sharply divided on the merits of booking Sarah Palin, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

“Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on,” an insider explains. “Oprah’s website is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama.”

One executive close to Winfrey is warning any Palin ban could ignite a dramatic backlash!

Drudge also claimed that both Oprah nor show producer Sheri Salata had “refused” to comment and that both had donated substantial amounts to Senator Barack Obama’s (Democrat, Illinois) campaign for the U.S. presidency.

So far, nothing much for me to comment on. It’s a straightforward case of political bias, but Oprah is only harming her own commercial credibility with some of her viewers, so what?

Here, the response by Harpo Productions, Oprah’s company, was like pouring petrol on a fire. Being posted to Oprah’s discussion community allowed a storm to erupt:

“The item in today’s Drudge Report is categorically untrue. There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over.” – Oprah Winfrey, September 5, 2008

Now I decided to join in, focusing the point that either there had been no discussion, hinting at a Stalinist management style, or the statement was an obvious lie, which is bad for the “role model” business.

Here’s my response: (more…)

Capitalism DOES cause homophobia (in a way)

September 6, 2008

Over at The Volokh Conspiracy, a question about whether capitalism causes homophobia.

Here’s my reasoning, based on the stated views of the North Korean government.

1) North Korea doesn’t have homosexuality, it is a “bourgeois disease.”

2) Therefore, only degenerate capitalist societies have homosexuals.

3) Therefore, only people living in capitalist societies need be afraid or hostile to them.

Q.E.D.

Seems like a clear indictment of capitalism to me.
[Hat tip: Instapundit]

First our bodies, now our souls

March 11, 2008

The British National Labour Party continues to destroy individual liberty. First our bodies are to become the property of the State, then we are to be branded like cattle. And now the latest terrorist recruitment campaign by the British government is to introduce an oath of allegiance for teenagers.

If it were me, I would without a moment’s hesitation decide to support anyone who promised to destroy the Royal Family and the Westminster government. Assuming there are some children with more than an micron of self-awareness in the U.K., I think this will go badly. It’s worth noting that the architect of this evil proposal, might be behind bars if he were a nasty Conservative.

However, keeping in the spirit of things, I offer my version of the oath of allegiance (with apologies to Babylon 5):

I WILL COOPERATE WITH THE STATE FOR THE GOOD OF THE STATE AND MY OWN SURVIVAL.

I WILL CONFESS TO ALL CRIMES OF WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACCUSED.

I WILL BE RELEASED AND RETURNED TO SOCIETY A PRODUCTIVE CITIZEN IF I COOPERATE.

RESISTANCE WILL BE PUNISHED.

COOPERATION WILL BE REWARDED.

I WILL COOPERATE WITH THE STATE FOR THE GOOD OF THE STATE… [repeat until brainwash complete]

1,000 words were 3 will do

March 2, 2008

In the interests of science I bring this up:

I can’t help it, but reading about such episodes of screaming, gushing and swooning makes me wonder whether women — I should say “we women,” of course — aren’t the weaker sex after all. Or even the stupid sex, our brains permanently occluded by random emotions, psychosomatic flailings and distraction by the superficial. Women “are only children of a larger growth,” wrote the 18th-century Earl of Chesterfield. Could he have been right?

Charlotte Allen has things to say about women swooning for Obama, the Clinton “campaign,” why men are better at things that count etc.

“Vote for me because the racists will…”

January 27, 2008

…seems to be the latest bizarre message from the Clinton campaign.

[cross-posted from Antoine Clarke’s Election Watch]
The Associated Press is not exactly where I normally go looking for dirt on Democrats, but this sums up the situation nicely:

Clinton campaign strategists denied any intentional effort to stir the racial debate. But they said they believe the fallout has had the effect of branding Obama as “the black candidate,” a tag that could hurt him outside the South.

Let’s just remember that we are talking about Democrats choosing their candidate for U.S. President.
How can being “the black candidate” hurt someone’s chances of winning Democratic party supporters votes?
Let’s leave aside the obvious point that one would expect racist bigots, who have “NO N*****s IN THE WHITE HOUSE” car bumper stickers, to come from Alabama (or South Carolina, come to think of it) rather than, say, Colorado, Hawaii or Maine.

Could it be that the party of affirmative action, of civil rights and political correctness likes to have its leaders photographed next to the hired help, but not;, you know, actually let the servants run the country? “The poor dears, they try so hard, but they can’t help it, you know?”
Until last year I would have found it barely conceivable. But the more “liberals” I have met who talk about their moral superiority because they demand that other people pay taxes to provide public transportation (for blacks), public schooling (for blacks), quotas for universities (for blacks) and corporations (for blacks), the more I see something ugly.
This is not “white guilt.” These are white people who have a visceral unease with ethnicity and who project this by blaming “society,” or “capitalism,” or “a right-wing conspiracy” for racism. They remind me of nothing more than those British Conservative Party members who shouted loudest about the evils of homosexuality, demanding that it be outlawed or “all the boys will turn into perverts,” only to turn out to be repressed gay men.
Is this really the Hillary Clinton base constituency? I hope not.
I like the bluff: “Me, a racist? No! no! I voted against having black candidate because I couldn’t let him be humiliated by REAL racists.”
Senator Barack Obama is not (in my personal view) the beautiful orator that Jesse Jackson was 20 years ago. On form, the Reverend is someone I would gladly buy a ticket to hear give a sermon. That’s certainly not true of any candidate this time round for me. Sen Obama is more like a bank manager with the common touch, I like his demeanour and his “winner” outlook, but that’s not the same. In fact, without Bill Clinton’s attempt to not make race an issue, by making it an issue, it would not have occurred to me to compare the two. Senator Obama has plenty of flaws: some of his policies and the dubious Chicago connections. But if it comes to a “which candidate has the worst criminal connections” I don’t see Bill Clinton as offering much constructive help. A list of the crooks he pardoned in his last day of office, and the one whose wife by an AMAZING COINCIDENCE gave a lot of money to Bill’s wife’s 2000 campaign, will make anything Senator Obama is likely to have done look minor.
I’m not impressed with the Republican line-up so far in this election campaign, but if Hillary Clinton wins her party’s nomination by pandering to racism, I don’t see how any decent human being could campaign for her in November, against what is likely to be a fairly moderate Republican candidate.

In pure election terms, we now know how black women voted in South Carolina: they’re misogynistic witch burners, apparently.

How to make friends…NOT

December 11, 2006

A rabbi has decided to force Seattle (Washington state, U.S.A.) airport to cancel Christmas decorations.

I admit, when I first saw the local news headline on the Drudge Report: “Holiday Trees” Removed at Seattle Airport… I jumped to the conclusion that this was either the work of militant secularists or of Islamofascists. I was ready to groan at the nonsense of multiculturalist political correctness and even thought of it as evidence that the U.S.A. is cringing like a beaten dog in the face of its cultural enemies.

At a time when Israel needs every friend it can get and when multicultural relativism is finally being demolished by the evidence that Islamofascists don’t want to co-exist with a “degenerate” homosexual-friendly secular and permissive society, we get this:

SEA-TAC Airport – All 15 Christmas trees inside the terminal at Sea-Tac have been removed in response to a complaint by a rabbi.

A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn’t put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

She said that since this is their busiest time of year and they don’t have time to add a fair representation of all cultures, her department decided to take down all of the decorations, review their policies, and decide if they need to make a change for next year.

It turns out however that the rabbi in question, was “appalled” at the removal of the Christmas trees!

Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky, who made his request weeks ago, said he was appalled by the decision. “Everyone should have their spirit of the holiday. For many people the trees are the spirit of the holidays, and adding a menorah adds light to the season,” said Bogomilsky, who works at Chabad Lubavitch, a Jewish education foundation headquartered in Seattle’s University District.

After consulting with lawyers, port staff believed that adding the menorah would have required adding symbols for other religions and cultures in the Northwest. The holidays are the busiest season at the airport, Betancourt said, and staff didn’t have time to play cultural anthropologists.

The best comment comes from Rabbi Bogomilsky’s lawyer:

“They’ve darkened the hall instead of turning the lights up,” said Bogomilsky’s lawyer, Harvey Grad. “There is a concern here that the Jewish community will be portrayed as the Grinch.”

No kidding!!! They threaten to sue and are “appalled” that the threat works literally.

For once the bureaucrats acted reasonably and the Islamofascists win without even opening their mouths or waving their weapons. Of course, we knew that most Jews in the U.S.A. voted to support the destruction of Israel last month, but I didn’t realize that some of them wanted the equation “Wipe out Jews=We can celebrate Christmas next year” to be put in the minds of most of the children wandering through the gloomy airport building at Seattle. It’s not like Seattle’s Jewish community has nothing else to worry about.

I remember when I was seven years old one one winter afternoon when the trade unions cut the power while I was watching Dr Who on television, an episode the B.B.C. did not repeat. I haven’t forgiven the socialist movement 34 years later. Lucky it wasn’t the Jews cancelled the show!