American Elephants


Senator Tom Cotton on the Iran Deal by The Elephant's Child

Screenshot-2015-02-05-14.18.30

Senator Tom Cotton (R–Ark) after Senate Democrats on Thursday used a filibuster to block a vote on a resolution disapproving of the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran:

Political fealty to President Obama’s hoped-for legacy in foreign affairs means this dangerous deal will likely move forward, despite the overwhelming and bipartisan opposition to it in Congress and the clear will of the American people. Obstruction on the part of a minority of legislators is not the foundation on which lasting, consequential arms control agreements are built. A majority of Americans oppose the Iran deal because it compromises the safety and security of not only the United States, but also of the rest of the world.

History will remember this stunning display of partisan loyalty and willful blindness. And it will remember this Senate as the one that—when given the chance to stop the world’s worst sponsor of terrorism from obtaining the world’s worst weapons—blinked when confronted with that evil.

A Quinnipak poll found only 25% support for the Iran Deal. A Pew poll found 21% approval.



Iran, Expecting a Cash Windfall is Already Spurring Attacks on Israel. by The Elephant's Child

An unsettling surge in terrorism by Iranian proxies has many Israelis convinced the release to Tehran of tens of billions of dollars in frozen funds is already putting the Jewish state in danger.

In recent days, rockets have rained down on Israel from Gaza in the south and the Golan Heights to the north, Israeli forces foiled a bomb plot at the tomb of biblical patriarch Joseph, and Gaza-based terrorist groups that also have a presence in the West Bank have openly appealed for aid on Iranian television. Israeli officials fear the terrorist activity is spiking as groups audition for funding from Tehran, which is set to receive the long-frozen funds as part of its deal to allow limited nuclear inspections. They say the international focus on Iran’s nuclear ambitions has left its more conventional methods of attacking regional adversaries unaddressed.

“The nuclear context is just one aspect of the negative Iranian activities in the region,” Emmanuel Nahshon, senior Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, told FoxNews.com. “We can see the demonstration of this on a daily basis in Syria, in Yemen, and in Iraq. We see it also when we see the [Iranian] support of Hezbollah and other groups who operate against Israel.”

Susan Rice, National Security Adviser, admitted last month that some of the money to be released as part of the Iran Deal negotiated by the team headed by Secretary of State John Kerry would go to the Iranian military and could be used for the kind of “bad behavior” that we have seen in the region.

Aside from the release of sanctioned funds, the P5+1 countries are rushing to get trade missions into Tehran, envisioning a horde of major international business.

Hezbollah, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are eager to continue as Iranian proxies, Four rockets were fired into Israel last wee,, from Syria, two into the Golan Heights and two into the Upper Galilee, the first since the start of Syria’s civil war four years ago. There’s a new 2.5 mile tunnel from Gaza into Israel by the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. Israel thwarted an lethal bomb attack by Islamic Jihad on visitors to Joseph’s tomb in the West Bank.



Dick Cheney Speaks on the Iran Nuclear Deal by The Elephant's Child

Former Vice President Dick Cheney spoke at an event at AEI on September 8, a passionate speech about the nuclear deal with Iran and why it is a complete catastrophe. It’s a long speech, but worth every minute. Mr. Cheney explains clearly why it is such a very, very bad deal.

As for me, I was convinced that we were doomed when I learned that President Obama believes that Iran would never actually use a nuclear weapon. If he actually believes that, no wonder he has been such a complete doormat.

He believes that he can turn the problems of the Middle East over to Iran to solve, and get America out of the region entirely. Iran’s quest for intercontinental ballistic missiles does not concern Mr. Obama who envisions himself making a triumphant trip to Tehran to shake the Supreme Leader’s hand.

The Supreme Leader may not be able to bring himself to sign the deal at all, since he hates Americans so much.  Shake hands?  Not a chance.

The speech is about 35 minute long, followed by a question and answer period.



A Civil War Against the “Liberal Ethos?” Yes. by The Elephant's Child

In 1993 after the USSR had dissolved and the Berlin Wall been pounded into souvenirs, Irving Kristol wrote, “There is no ‘after the Cold War’ for me.” Instead, the defeat of Soviet Communism signified only that “the real cold war has begun,” a multi-front civil war against the “liberal ethos,” which “aims simultaneously at political and social collectivism  on the one hand, and moral anarchy on the other.” Kristol explained that he had come to believe that “rot and decadence was no longer the consequence of liberalism but was the actual agenda of contemporary liberalism.”

The fight against collectivism hasn’t been won, but remains hard-fought and competitive. The end of the Cold War signaled the demise of socialism and central planning as ideals people fought for, or even took seriously. In 1997 Richard Rorty chided his fellow leftists for their vague desire to repudiate and move beyond capitalism, despite failing to figure out “what in the absence of markets, will set prices and regulate distribution. Until the left comes up with clear compelling answers to such basic questions, he said, it should limit its ambitions to “piecemeal reform within the framework of a market economy.”

These are the first two paragraphs of an essay by William Voegeli in The Claremont Review of Books, and well worth pondering. Is that what the Left is all about? Political and social collectivism on the one hand and moral anarchy on the other? It seems to me that they talk collectivism and supposedly dream of collectivism, but in action, or in the real world they want to make other people equal but put themselves in charge of doing so. They want to control, regulate, force, and make the necessary laws, just like Stalin who starved millions of Ukrainians to death in the Holodomor to enforce collective farming.

Moral anarchy — yes.  That’s obvious.




%d bloggers like this: