Unfortunately, something I
predicted recently has already come to pass…much quicker than even I expected.
A number of academics and publishing professionals have come together to demand
that companies refuse
to publish books by Trump administration officials. (At least the ones who
still support him.)
Leftist thugs also recently successfully
pressured Simon and Schuster into cancelling the publication of Sen. Josh Hawley's (R-Mo.) book
after he had the temerity to object to the certification of election results in
a couple of key battleground states.
More than 550 members of the
publishing industry, including several professors, recently signed a letter averring
that
“our country is where it is in part because publishing has chased the money and
notoriety of some pretty sketchy people.” Ergo, they sniffed, "As members
of the writing and publishing community of the United States, we affirm that
participation in the administration of Donald Trump must be considered a
uniquely mitigating criterion for publishing houses when considering book deals.”
If they were truly worried about
“pretty sketchy people” being allowed to write books, they would bemoan the
fact that Al Gore, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Al
Sharpton, and Michael Moore all wrote books the publishing industry gladly
published. (As have several serial
killers.) But the First Amendment wouldn’t mean much if “pretty sketchy
people” were not allowed to speak or write.
The letter writers continued: “Consequently,
we believe: No participant in an administration that caged children, performed
involuntary surgeries on captive women, and scoffed at science as millions were
infected with a deadly virus should be enriched by the almost rote largesse of
a big book deal. In that spirit, those who enabled, promulgated, and covered up
crimes against the American people should not be enriched through the coffers
of publishing.”
“Performed involuntary surgeries on
captive women?” That sounds more like China, eggheads. But you don’t care, as
you wouldn’t ban books by Chairman Mao or Xi Jinping, and most of your
universities are rife with Chinese spies and infiltrators. “Caged children?”
See also, Obama administration. “Scoffed at science?” Trump was right about Hydroxychloroquine, UV light’s ability
to kill the coronavirus, and several other things science related, while Dr. Fauci,
the W.H.O., C.D.C., and other assorted experts kept changing their message to
fit a predetermined narrative…behavior that is utterly unscientific.
Tania James was one of those who
signed the letter. She is an associate professor at George Mason University, and
a novelist who has won awards from the New York Times, NPR, and the San Francisco
Chronicle. (Imagine that.) I don’t think these academic and
publishing industry insiders should have been permitted to publish their
letter. Furthermore, the New York Times has published demonstrably false
and hurtful articles such as those on the “1619
Project.” Articles that are nothing less than libelous against the United
States and its founders…and which present a clear and present danger to the
nation. Many other newspapers have, as well.
I don’t think these “monsters” should
be allowed to enrich themselves through the coffers of publishing. Do you?
No comments:
Post a Comment