Actor Simu Liu is begging Hollywood studios for more race-based casting — specifically, his race.

The Chinese-born, Canada-raised Liu recently took to social media to share a collage of screenshots of some of his fellow Asian actors lamenting how hard it is to land leading roles.

“Put some asians in literally anything right now,” Liu added as commentary. “The amount of backslide in our representation onscreen is f**king appalling.”

‘We’re fighting a deeply prejudiced system. And most days it SUCKS.’

White on rice

Citing Hollywood’s apparent fear that Asian-centric films are “risky,” Lui pointed out the success of movies like his 2022 Marvel debut, “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings,” as well as 2018’s “Crazy Rich Asians,” which grossed $174 million in 2018 against a $30 million budget.

“No asian actor has ever lost a studio even close to 100 million dollars,” Liu ranted. “But a white dude will lose 200 million TWICE and roll right into the next tentpole lead. We’re fighting a deeply prejudiced system. And most days it SUCKS.”

RELATED: ‘The Acolyte’ star: Asians need a Tom Cruise of their own

Chinese checkers

Liu’s cries of systemic discrimination did not receive the eager welcome they might have just a few years ago.

On X, investigative journalist Robby Starbuck noted that the film industry in Liu’s native China largely employs Chinese actors.

“Almost none are White. Is that some kind of unfair prejudice too?” he asked. “No, it’s not.”

As Fandom Pulse reported, others mocked Liu’s apparent recycling of “woke talking points from 2018.”

Another reader stated, “Speaking as an asian: representation does not matter. Good stories matter. The right casting for the roles matter. Good acting matters.”

Asian persuasion

Back on Threads, however, Liu received a plethora of support from women who agreed that more Asian men should be in lead roles.

“The stories of Asians in the US go deep … the stories deserve to be told,” wrote Karen Johnstone.

While Jayne Nelson added, “I swear it’s slipping back to ‘third henchman from the left in a big fight scene’ and COME ON. It’s not the 1980s anymore.”

One of the actors cited in the original post Liu shared was “The Good Place” star Manny Jacinto, who complained about being cut out of a Tom Cruise movie in 2024.

“It’s up to us — Asian-Americans, people of color — to be that [for ourselves],” Jacinto said at the time. “We can’t wait for somebody else to do it. If we want bigger stories out there, we have to make them for ourselves.”

The other actors cited as making remarks were John Cho (“Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle”), and Daniel Dae Kim (“Lost”).

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Racism, Align, Hollywood, Asian, Production, Studios, Representation, Woke, Entertainment 

The 45-year-old male accused of slapping a New York University student’s backside and knocking her to the sidewalk while she was on her way to class earlier this week is a repeat sex offender who was paroled in September.

James Rizzo was arraigned late Wednesday night in Manhattan Criminal Court, WCBS-TV reported.

‘I let NYU security know to let students know that this man is going around doing this to other women.’

Rizzo — a Level 2 sex offender with 16 prior arrests and a history of violence against women— was paroled in September after serving time for sex abuse, the station said, citing the New York State Department of Corrections.

Police told WCBS that Rizzo kept on attacking women while he was out on parole.

RELATED: Illegal immigrant repeat offender arrested for rape — just days after his early release from jail for indecent exposure

The station said Rizzo appeared emotionless while pleading not guilty to three new assaults — all the victims women — at his arraignment. WCBS said the judge remanded Rizzo and that he is scheduled to appear in court again next week.

The station said the most recent alleged attack occurred Monday in Greenwich Village; surveillance video shows NYU student Amelia Lewis walking to class when the suspect slaps her backside and shoves her to the ground.

RELATED: Homelessness official melts down after board member objects to having ‘repeat sex offender’ who allegedly touched her inappropriately on their committee: ‘This is about equity!’

Lewis, 20, spoke about the incident on a Wednesday podcast, WCBS said.

“I wanted to report this, and after I did tell the cops I let NYU security know to let students know that this man is going around doing this to other women,” Lewis said, according to the station. “They also told me they were already aware of the man in the blue towel around his neck running around the city.”

Officials told the New York Daily News that Rizzo’s criminal history stretches back to the 1990s, when he stabbed a 74-year-old woman in the face during a burglary in Brooklyn.

The Daily News said Rizzo cut through a screen window at a home on East 83rd Street on June 13, 1997, and punched and stabbed his victim in the head before ransacking the residence. The paper, citing police, said a neighbor found the bloodied victim lying on the floor.

Cops arrested Rizzo and charged him with attempted murder, the Daily News said, adding that he ultimately pleaded guilty to burglary and was sentenced to up to 54 months in prison.

More recently investigators told WABC that Rizzo randomly punched a 59-year-old woman on Mercer Street in December 2023. That same month, Rizzo was arrested for forcible touching when police said he groped a 33-year-old woman on Greene Street in Greenwich Village and asked, “Oh, you want more,” WABC-TV reported.

On Thanksgiving Day last week, Rizzo allegedly attacked 68-year-old Dianne Brazell from Houston as she was walking in Midtown Manhattan, WABC said, slamming her into glass.

“I have a laceration in my forehead that required six stitches,” Brazell said, according to WABC. “I have a bruise on my left leg from my knee to my ankle. I have a bruise on my left shoulder. I bit my tongue.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Sex offender, New york university, College student, Slapping backside, New york city, James rizzo, Amelia lewis, Repeat offender, Arrest, Parole, Long criminal history, Violence against women, Crime 

“Peak oil” isn’t real. “Energy transition” isn’t happening. And the people claiming otherwise can’t even tell you the difference between a man and a woman.

Everything, everywhere, has become upside down. Wind on, wind off. Coal out, coal in. Up is down. Down is up. And the loudest activists insist we are seconds away from climate Armageddon unless we obey their every whim.

But whether anyone wakes up or not, the reality is the same: Fossil fuels will lead the energy future because no alternative can meet human need.

A political scientist calls this polarization. A driller and fracker like me would call it something else: BS.

Energy isn’t political. The world runs on it. And whether the professional hand-wringers like it or not, the world still needs us. So let me spill the beans.

Truth No. 1: The world needs more oil, and only we can deliver it

Under Joe Biden’s administration, oil and gas became the national punching bag. The Inflation Reduction Act jacked up federal royalties by a third. Banks and hedge funds blacklisted producers. Universities, churches, and even the pope lectured the industry.

Meanwhile, Ivy League dilettantes wrote policies so dumb they managed to create debt without decreasing emissions or improving the environment.

The same people who shriek “climate denialist” invented their own version of denial — blind faith in renewables and a refusal to acknowledge battery production’s ugly realities: strip mining, deforestation, acid rain, toxic sludge, heavy metals. All the things they accuse us of, they are doing at scale.

The irony is unbearable. And the truth they hate is simple: Without oil and gas, there wouldn’t be a tree or whale left alive.

Natural gas displaced coal and drove down atmospheric carbon dioxide. High-rate fracking kept lights on, raised life spans, and offered Sub-Saharan Africa its only shot at prosperity.

But the sniveling green fussbudgets? They don’t care about prosperity. They care about performance art. How exactly do they think humanity survives without fossil fuels? How do they think poor families can afford electricity under California-style economics and the onslaught of artificial intelligence?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told us the world ends in 2030. We’re halfway there. But Bill Gates now says we’re cool. So which is it?

Truth No. 2: Even ‘clean’ energy pollutes

I know fossil fuels pollute. So does every other energy source. Prospecting, drilling, producing, transporting, refining — yes, there is impact. That is Big Oil’s dirty truth.

But Big Shovel’s “clean energy” comes with its own filth: strip mines, solar dead zones, toxic smelting, and oceans of waste. Those industries just hide it better, with political cover from bought politicians and media stenographers who won’t touch the cons.

Humans need energy. Energy creates pollution. So the question isn’t whether we pollute.It’s how we keep 10.3 billion people alive in the next 50 years.

And right now? Renewables are a rich man’s game.

Africa proves it. Over 20% face hunger every day. Cheap, abundant energy could fix it. But activists want to force the people into windmills and solar panels whose components are dug out of slave-run mines.

Look at our southern border. Millions are pouring north not for “equity,” but because America has the best quality of life on Earth — which exists because we consume more energy than anyone.

Energy means survival, prosperity, and dignity for billions of people.

Truth No. 3: The haters suddenly need us again

Oil producers aren’t hated as much now — we’re just disliked. I’ll take it.

Even Silicon Valley is crawling back. Its AI data centers run on natural gas. Funny how the moral sermons stop the moment the servers start overheating.

Remember Engine No. 1, the ESG crusaders who infiltrated Exxon’s board to “transition” it? Four years later, they’re trying to take over Chevron … to buy natural gas.

Money talks. Ideology walks.

Truth No. 4: Oil is hurting, but opportunity is coming

Prices are descending. Layoffs are beginning. At $60 oil, we’re stuck in neutral. At $50, we hit reverse. And if we go down, so does steel — each horizontal well uses five miles of it.

But downturns create opportunities. Out-of-favor assets become bargains. And I’m betting on growth now, not later.

Because within a year, oil may flip into contango — where future prices rise above today’s. Why? No spare capacity, underinvestment, poor exploration results, the coming twilight of U.S. shale, and low reserves will finally move prices up.

Even with short-term builds of 2 to 4 million barrels per day, prices are holding. In real demand destruction, we’d be in the 40s. We’re not. Because the world still needs more oil.

RELATED: Bill Gates quietly retires climate terror as AI takes the throne

bymuratdeniz via iStock/Getty Images

China’s demand is climbing. India’s demand is just beginning. U.S. consumption is higher this year than in recent years. Europe is crawling back to coal, oil, and gas.

OPEC and the International Energy Agency — some of the greenest bureaucrats alive — both agree: The world will need 123 million barrels a day within 20 years. That’s up from around 105 million barrels today.

And don’t forget: Oil declines 5% per year if not replenished. You need over 5 million barrels per day just to stay even.

Truth No. 5: Reality always wins

In a world with rising demand and shrinking supply, something’s got to give. Maybe the ideologues will finally admit we need every energy source. Maybe the public will tire of being lectured by activists gluing themselves to asphalt. Maybe logic returns.

Maybe — just maybe — we stop treating oil like a villain and start treating it like civilization’s backbone.

But whether anyone wakes up or not, the reality is the same: Fossil fuels will lead the energy future because no alternative can meet human need.

You can deny reality. But reality won’t deny you.

​Opinion & analysis, Energy, Energy prices, Green energy, Fracking, Shale, Oil and gas, Oil and gas prices, Climate change, Bill gates, Opec, International energy agency, Whales, Trees, Prosperity, Economy, Economic growth, Supply and demand 

ChatGPT has dominated the AI space, bringing the first generative AI platform to market and earning the lion’s share of users that grows every month. However, despite its popularity and huge investments from partners like Microsoft, SoftBank, NVIDIA, and many more, its parent company, OpenAI, is bleeding money faster than it can make it, begging the question: What happens to the generative AI market when its pioneering leader bursts into flames?

A brief history of LLMs

OpenAI essentially kicked off the AI race as we know it. Launching three years ago on November 30, 2022, ChatGPT introduced the world to the power of large language models LLMs and generative AI, completely uncontested. There was nothing else like it.

OpenAI lost $11.5 billion in the last quarter and needs $207 billion to stay afloat.

At the time, Google’s DeepMind lab was still testing its Language Model for Dialogue Applications. You might even remember a story from early 2022 about Google engineer Blake Lemoine, who claimed that Google’s AI was so smart that it had a soul. He was later fired from Google for his comments, but the model he referenced was the same one that became Google Bard, which then became Gemini.

As for the other top names in the generative AI race, Meta launched Llama in February 2023, Anthropic introduced the world to Claude in March 2023, Elon Musk’s Grok hit the scene in November 2023, and there are many more beneath them.

Needless to say, OpenAI had a huge head start, becoming the market leader overnight and holding that position for months before the first competitor came along. On a competitive level, all major platforms have generally caught up to each other, but ChatGPT still leads with 800 million weekly active users, followed by Meta with one billion monthly active users, Gemini at 650 million monthly active users, Grok at 30.1 million monthly active users, and Claude with 30 million monthly active users.

Financial turmoil for OpenAI

Just because ChatGPT is the leading generative AI platform does not mean the company is in good shape. According to a November earnings report from Microsoft — a major early backer of OpenAI — the AI juggernaut lost $11.5 billion in the last quarter alone. To make matters even worse, a new report suggests that OpenAI has no path to profitability until at least 2030 or later, and it needs to raise $207 billion in the interim to stay afloat.

By all accounts, OpenAI is in serious financial trouble. It is bleeding money faster than it makes it, and unless something changes, the generative AI pioneer could be on the verge of a complete collapse. That is, unless one of these Hail Marys can save the company.

RELATED: GOD-TIER AI? Why there’s no easy exit from the human condition

Photo By David Zorrakino/Europa Press via Getty Images

The bid to save OpenAI

OpenAI is currently looking into several potential revenue streams to turn its financial woes around. There’s no telling which ones will pan out quite yet, but these are the options we know so far:

For-profit restructure

When OpenAI first emerged, it was a nonprofit company with the goal to improve humanity through generative AI. Fast-forward to October 2025 — OpenAI is now a for-profit organization with a separate nonprofit group called the OpenAI Foundation. While the move will allow OpenAI’s profit arm to increase its earning potential and raise vital capital, it also received a fair share of criticism, especially from Elon Musk, who filed a lawsuit against OpenAI for reneging on its original promise.

A record-breaking IPO

Another big perk of its new for-profit restructure, OpenAI now has the power to go public on the stock market. According to an exclusive report published by Reuters in late October, OpenAI is putting the puzzle pieces together for a record-breaking IPO that could be worth up to $1 trillion. Not only would the move make OpenAI a publicly traded company with stock options, it would also give it more access to capital and acquisitions to further bolster its products, services, and economic stability.

Ad monetization

Online ads are the lifeblood of many online websites and services, from Google to social media apps like Facebook to mainstream media and more. While AI platforms have largely stayed away from injecting ads into their results, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently said that he’s “open to accepting a transaction fee” for certain queries.

In his ideal ad model, OpenAI could potentially take a cut of any products or services that users look for and buy through ChatGPT. This structure is different from how Google operates, by letting companies pay to bring their products to the top of search results, even if the products they sell are poorly made. Altman believes that his structure is better for users and would foster greater trust in ChatGPT.

Government projects and deals

While Altman recently denied that he’s seeking a government bailout for OpenAI’s financial troubles, the company can still benefit from government deals and projects, the most recent one being Stargate. As a new initiative backed by some of the biggest players in the AI space, Stargate will give OpenAI access to greater computing power, training resources, and owned infrastructure to lower expenses and increase the speed of innovation as they work on future AI models.

If OpenAI fails …

While OpenAI has several monetization options on the table — and perhaps even more that we don’t know about yet — none of them are a magic bullet that’s guaranteed to work. The company could still collapse, which brings us to our question at the top of the article: What happens to the generative AI market if OpenAI fails?

In a world where OpenAI fizzles entirely, there are several other platforms that will likely fill the void. Google is the top contender, thanks to the huge progress it made with Gemini 3, but Meta, xAI, Anthropic, Perplexity, and more will all want a piece.

That said, OpenAI isn’t the only AI platform struggling to make money. According to Harvard Business Review, the AI business model simply isn’t profitable, largely due to high maintenance costs, huge salaries for top AI talent, and a low-paying subscriber base. In order to keep the generative AI dream alive, companies will need a consistent flow of capital, a resource that’s more accessible for established companies with diverse product portfolios — like Google and Meta — while the new companies that only build LLMs (OpenAI and Claude) will continue to struggle.

At this stage in the AI race, there’s no doubt in my mind that the whole generative AI market is a big bubble waiting to burst. At the same time, AI products have been so fervently foisted on society that it all feels too big to fail. With huge initiatives like Stargate poised to beat China and other foreign nations to artificial general intelligence AGI, the AI race will continue, even if OpenAI no longer leads the charge. If I were a betting man, though, I would guess that someone important finds a way to keep Sam Altman’s brain child afloat one way or another, even as all signs point toward OpenAI spending itself out of business.

​Tech, Openai, Ai, Economy 

In an age when government grows with the regularity of the sunrise and the humility of a bonfire, Dan Mitchell’s “20 Theorems of Government” land not as abstractions but as reminders of truths America’s founders understood almost instinctively. The theorems, devised by the co-founder of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, capture the recurring failures of centralized authority and the virtues of free people operating in free markets.

These theorems are not predictions. They are explanations of what government always does when left unchecked and how society always suffers when the state’s reach exceeds the citizen’s grasp.

The problem is not the quality of the people in government. The problem is the nature of government itself.

Mitchell’s First Theorem, which describes how Washington actually functions, could be carved above every federal agency door. Politics rewards the spending of other people’s money for other people’s benefit. The entire system is designed to avoid accountability and to maximize political reward. Once you accept that incentives drive outcomes, the rest of the theorems follow naturally.

The Second and Third Theorems make this point bluntly. Any new program will grow, metastasize, and waste money. Centralization magnifies inefficiency because bureaucracies face no competition, no profit-and-loss constraint, and no personal consequences for failure. When the private sector gets something wrong, it pays for its mistake. When government gets something wrong, it demands a larger budget.

Theorems Four through Seven widen the gap between political rhetoric and economic reality. Good policy can be good politics, but incentives push politicians toward superficial fixes and short-term gratification. Even strong ideas rot inside bureaucratic execution. And the larger the government becomes, the more incompetent and unresponsive it grows. Bureaucrats answer to political pressure, not consumer choice, and the results are inevitable: waste, rigidity, and indifference.

The Eighth through 10th Theorems confront the moral dimension of government overreach. Politicians who obsess over inequality rarely seek to lift up the poor; they seek justification for more control. Crises — real or imaginary — become tools for expanding that control. And politics almost always overwhelms principle. This is not cynicism. It is observation backed by centuries of evidence.

Theorems 11 through 15 dismantle common misconceptions. Big business is not the same thing as free enterprise. In many cases, it is free enterprise’s most persistent enemy. Corporations often work hand in hand with government to protect themselves from competition. Meanwhile, anyone who opposes entitlement reform is endorsing massive, broad-based tax hikes, because arithmetic leaves no other option. You cannot fund European-style welfare states without European-style taxation. And history shows voters resist paying for the bloated government they claim to want.

RELATED: Free markets don’t need federal babysitters

Afry Harvy via iStock/Getty Images

This leads naturally to the 16th and 17th Theorems. Economic progress becomes a race between private innovation and public consumption. When government grows faster than the private sector can produce, stagnation follows. Worse, when dependency becomes a norm, the cultural foundations of liberty erode. A nation that forgets how to rely on itself cannot long remain free.

The final three theorems complete the picture. Climate policy becomes hypocrisy when elites demand sacrifice from others while refusing it themselves. Politicians operate under incentives that reward short-term benefit at long-term cost. And the fiscal results — from rising deficits to ever-multiplying promises — are exactly what those incentives predict.

Taken together, Mitchell’s 20 Theorems point to a conclusion Milton Friedman drew decades ago: The problem is not the quality of the people in government; the problem is the nature of government itself. A government that grows without limit will, eventually and inevitably, burden the citizens it claims to serve.

If Americans wish to preserve both prosperity and freedom, they will have to internalize these theorems as practical truths, not relics of libertarian theory. The path forward is not mysterious. Limit government. Unleash markets. These principles are old — and their urgency has never been greater.

​Opinion & analysis, Politics, Power, Centralization, Incentives, Government waste, Taxes, Spending, Debt, Waste fraud and abuse, Milton friedman, Welfare state, Europe, Politicians, Liberty, Self-government, Freedom, Big government, Policy, Tyranny, Free markets