American Elephants


Out of the Past: A Reminder of What Democrat Control Can Mean by The Elephant's Child

Donald J.Trump is doing a marvelous job of doing away with excess regulation. We got into an odd discussion tonight about the amount of TSP in dishwasher soap, how it meant that the dishes were not really getting clean because of regulations imposed by greennuts who were concerned about the fish in the nation’s rivers or something like that.

It was pointed out that I used to rant, online, about unnecessary regulation especially in dishwashers. I had forgotten, and had to look it up. And I certainly did! I had forgotten just how far the zealous regulators had gone. So I’m reprinting one. It’s worth reminding us of the nature of zealous regulating Democrats, and just how far they will go. They want control. It’s not even a matter of what it is they want to control. They want to fix things because they are morally superior, and know better what should be done.

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S REGULATORY NIGHTMARE
by The Elephant’s Child
April 21, 2011, 4:12 pm

It’s hard to keep up with the regulatory proposals coming from government agencies. The Foundry, a Heritage Foundation blog, is trying to keep track of the more noxious ones. Today, they are pointing out the excesses of the U.S. Department of Energy.

They already regulate the design of air conditioners, battery chargers, boilers, ceiling fans, dehumidifiers, dishwashers, dryers, freezers, furnaces, heat pumps, light bulbs, refrigerators, toilets and washers. We now have washing machines that are several times more expensive and literally do not clean your clothes. Dishwashers no longer clean your dishes, and after the Volt fires in Connecticut, the regulations for battery chargers may need a second look.

The addition for today concerns a return to the shower.  The Energy {Policy Conservation Act of 1992 prescribed a measly 2.5 gallons per minute (gpm) at 80 pounds per square inch of water pressure.  This was quite a dramatic reduction in showering pleasure from the 5 gpm or even 10 gpm of previous showerheads. The Department stated that: “It has always been the Department’s view that when Congress used the term ‘any shower head’ it actually meant ‘any shower head’.”

Now they want to make it clear that the regulation applies to the total from multiple shower heads in any one shower. The department recently fined 4 showerhead makers $165,104 for failing to demonstrate compliance with the shower head mandate.

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 prohibits even minute levels of lead in any product intended for children 12 years of age or younger. That includes millions of children’s books printed with leaded ink.  Lead in ink was phased out in the late 1970s, but the CPSC deems any children’s book printed prior to 1986 to be potentially toxic and thus unfit for library circulation , the Goodwill store, or your neighbor’s garage sale.

The EPA is now hard at work increasing fleet-wide fuel efficiency standards for cars, and at the same time expanding the amount of ethanol in gasoline from 10% to 15%, (an amount damaging to the engines of all but the newest cars) which will dramatically decrease fuel efficiency.  Corn-based ethanol has been shown to nearly double greenhouse gas emissions over 30 years.  The spike in food prices from more ethanol will increase government spending by $1 billion a year, according to studies.

Obama policies are destroying jobs as fast as new jobs are created. Regulations accomplish nothing but unnecessary interference in peoples lives, and often simply make things worse.  There are always consequences, often unintended ones, and they seldom improve anything.

Consider this a warning.



What is Social Justice? Is There Any Such Thing? by The Elephant's Child

One wonders at the rise of enthusiasm for Socialism. Where does this come from?  Do people know nothing about the history of Socialism and how it works out? No understanding of the crisis of Venezuela? Or how the people there are literally starving in a country that was once the richest in South America?

Are they misled by talk of “social justice”? There is, by the way, no such thing. We humans are a quarrelsome lot, and you can’t overcome the difficulties of being a member of the human species easily. Democrats, with Bernie and Elizabeth Warren pushing socialism, seem to fail to recognize just where that path leads.

The human search for perfect social equality has gone on since the beginning of time. Do people actually rise in the morning hoping that might be the day when they are finally equal? Equal to what? Or Whom? I simply don’t buy it. Not everyone even wants to be rich. People want to care for their family, to have a good job that they like, at least part of the time. They want to have a nice home and be free of debt, and raise their children to be good citizens and succeed at whatever profession they choose. Some do want to be rich and some achieve it. But is it the overarching dream of many? I suspect not. People do want accomplishment, and success, and arriving at goals.

Democrats seem particularly driven by the idea of equality. They want to make everyone equal, and their policies move in that direction. They talk a lot about social justice, and more about the rich who do not deserve to be rich, and big corporations and their CEOs who do not deserve to be rich. I have wished for some things I do not have, that I cannot afford, as I’m sure you have as well. Did you get out of bed this morning yearning to be equal?  Didn’t think so.

Even for those who do want to be rich, and are working to create a business that they hope will succeed and make them richer, I suspect it is the succeed part that drives them, not the riches. Building a successful business is a worthy endeavor, and building it  is the scary and exciting part rather than the arrival at the finish.

So what is all this social justice? the social equality? Democrats’ push for equality sounds good in the abstract, but makes no sense whatsoever as a real goal. Think about that when those campaigning for an office ask for your vote. What they want is to be in charge, and have the opportunity to control your lives.



The Concept of “Diversity” is Sheer Bunk! by The Elephant's Child

What do you call it when a word or a concept rises out of the ordinary to become a phenomenon that becomes all-encompassing and everywhere, and the center of all ideas. I write of diversity. It has somehow arisen from an ordinary word describing differences, to the ruling order of business at corporations, organizations, pictures,  classrooms, hiring and firing, it’s everywhere. It’s the goal of all human resources departments, wherever they are, college admissions, agency staffing, advertising, commercials, from school pictures to the annual reports of giant corporations. Diversity is a must, and the organization will be condemned if diversity is not obvious.

We just had another flap over the Democrats most recent debate, because with Kamala Harris no longer in the group, and Cory Booker also, there were complaints about the lack of diversity among Democrat candidates. Come to think of it, it was Cory Booker complaining.

I was reminded because I ran across one of my books today, which is titled “Diversity, The Invention of a Concept” by Peter Wood, who at the time was a professor of anthropology at Boston University. Excellent book. Ask for it at your public library, or look for it used at Amazon. You’ll be glad you did.

The whole idea, of course, is based on skin color — that is the obvious, visual, proof of ‘real’ diversity. And be very sure you have someone very black in the group, or it will not be diverse. It’s more a talking point for Democrats because Democrats believe they are entitled to be in charge because they are morally superior. They are morally superior because they care, and because they care they are carefully diverse, and try to demonstrate that characteristic at every opportunity, because they divide their voters up into groups.

Those of us who think the whole “diversity” thing is bunk continue to believe that skin color or national origin is not really the most important thing about a person. You can undoubtedly come up with a fairly long list of things that are more important about a person than their skin color. Think back over the national news of recent months and how important diversity is in the national conversation. Why? It’s Democrats demonstrating their superiority by showing how Trump is ‘racist’ because some encounter was not diverse, or diverse enough.

We think of America as a great melting pot, and it is. Peter Wood looked into the diversity in food in Boston, where he lived, from 1900 on, by restaurants’ cuisine and what was offered. It’s an interesting survey. There is a new Afghan restaurant next door to the salon where I get my hair cut.

It is obviously all political in nature, trying to appeal to a particular population by race, to appeal to voters of a particular race. I just think it’s important to understand what “diversity” is all about. The dust jacket of Wood’s book notes:

But the current cult of diversity is no laughing matter.  Wood shows how the elevation of this concept to the highest social good marks a profound change in our cultural life. Diversity as it is practiced today is anti-individualist and at odds with America’s older ideals of liberty and equality.

Where did this all come from? Justice Lewis Powell, in June 1978, in his stand-alone opinion in the Supreme Court case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. He asserted that the goal of “attaining a diverse student body” provided a “constitutionally permissible” reason to allow racial preferences in admissions to a medical school. Thus the goal of achieving diversity overrode the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

Addendum: Breitbart notes today that “Red State Governors Approve More Refugees in Their States” Refugees will usually vote Democrat, or can be persuaded to do so.

Democrat governors representing red states such as Kentucky, North Carolina, Montana, and Kansas have approved more refugee resettlement in 2020 for their states.

For Fiscal Year 2020, President Donald Trump will continue cutting refugee admissions by reducing former President Barack Obama’s refugee inflow by at least 80 percent. This reduction would mean a maximum of 18,000 refugees can be resettled in the U.S. between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020. This is merely a numerical limit and not a goal federal officials are supposed to reach.



Speaker Pelosi and Her Democrats Embarrass Themselves by The Elephant's Child

Ms. Pelosi and the members of the House have gone on home, so the impeachment spectacle is apparently over until the New Year. It’s important, I guess, to keep it in the public eye as much as possible until the next election.

It is beyond bizarre to listen to some of the Democrats trying to come up with reasons for this absurdity.  The Media is blathering on about Donald J. Trump being the third president to be impeached, but he has not been impeached. The House of Representatives has voted to impeach, but as Nancy Pelosi knows well, it is not an impeachment until it is confirmed by the Senate, who will not confirm it, so the best she can do for the angry, angry Hollywood celebrities is to drag it out so the media can talk about impeachment to make it as big a deal as possible.

Something to remember is that being a celebrity means that some people know your name and/or your face as well. It also means that to continue to be a celebrity, you have to stay in the news. For the media,  getting a celebrity to say something, is a way to fulfill your requirement to come up with news, and if you get them to say something nasty, it will actually make news. Think Robert De Niro for example. Always ready to spout off on the horrors of Donald J. Trump.

The problem is that there is no actual crime. They had to make something up. The charge is Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress. Of course that’s what a president is supposed to do — Obstruct Congress when they get out of order. The Abuse of Power relates to his phone call with the Ukraine President.  In his phone call Trump asked for help investigating corruption issues in the country. Since come of the corruption touched on the family of Joe Biden, Democrats say Trump abused his power because Joe Biden might be his opposition in the 2020 election. As Mollie Hemingway explained at the Federalist:

Biden was the Obama administration’s point man in Ukraine when his son, Hunter, who had no expertise in the region or industry, was being paid $80,000 a month to sit on the board of an energy concern there. Setting aside that charge, the second charge is more troubling.

Democrats say that Trump’s decision to exercise his constitutional privilege to protect executive communication means he should be removed from office. That’s their second charge — obstruction of Congress. Many presidents have battled with Congress over their executive privilege and what it covers, but the idea that the debate is cause for impeachment is remarkably weak. If President Trump had defied a court order to turn over documents, that would make for a stronger case. But that hasn’t happened.

The initial plan was to spin up a special counsel that would deliver a report on collusion with Russia to steal the election. That dream fizzled with the inability to find a single American, much less anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign, who had done so.

Do read Mollie Hemingway’s 4 Reasons Trump’s Impeachment is the Weakest in U.S. History.

 



The Left Have Become a Bunch of Ideological Extremists by The Elephant's Child

Fascinating article today at The Federalist: “25 Reasons Today’s Left Has Become A Bunch of Ideological Extremists” with the subhead “Anyone who denies the existence of an influential, mainstream, radical left in America today doesn’t have any idea what the word ‘radical’ means.”

They went from, “Ask not what your country can do for you” to demanding a universal basic income provided by your neighbor.

They went from, “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” to “speech is violence.”

They went from talking about a crisis at the border to saying anyone who believes there is a border crisis is a racist.

It’s 25 reasons, and interesting and unfortunately true.  How about “They went from working to get drugs out of schools to working to get drag queens and Planned Parenthood into schools. Do read the whole thing. It’s an eye-opener to see how they are changing our understanding of the way things work. Nobody seems to really care about what is true any more. There is a radical left, and what they do in the guise of being ‘nice: and ‘kind and generous’  isn’t exactly what we had in mind.



Absolutely Entitled to Be In Charge! by The Elephant's Child

It is certainly clear that Democrats believe they are entitled to run things, to be in charge. Three years later, and they still have not gotten over it. “Entitled” seems to be the key word. They should be in charge – because they are morally superior. They are compassionate. They care.

Republicans clearly do not care. They make it clear every day. Desperate people looking for a better life, and Republicans want to build walls to keep them out. They want to send people to prison just for smoking a joint. They have this cruel police force called ICE that wants to track down immigrants living quietly in this country and deport them. They want to tell women what they can do with their bodies, and deny them health care when they need it most. They clearly do not really care about the people at all.

The earth is facing a horrible doom because Republicans won’t face facts and move to clean renewable energy, and stop the evil oil pipelines that are despoiling the planet, because they favor Big Oil companies instead of clean natural wind and solar energy. It’s very clear that Republican care far more about budgets and big corporations than they do about the American people.

If you just keep their moral superiority in mind, everything will become clearer and less argumentative. They are really trying to improve things. Just see what they are offering to do to improve your lives. Rein in those big corporations that are polluting the planet. Medicare for all, not just the old folks. Compassion for all.  Social Justice for all. More equality. More fairness. What more could you ask?



The Unrecognized Perils of Running For the Presidency by The Elephant's Child

You have probably noticed that people who have run unsuccessfully for the presidency of the United States don’t fade quietly away after their unsuccessful run. Immediate example is, of course, Hillary. She seems to have convinced herself that she actually won the election, and through some nefarious trickery, the horrid Trump got the nod, but he didn’t actually win. Everybody cheated, including the now famous “Deplorables.”

Hillary is not alone. Mitt Romney is now in the news for his secret Twitter account where he is accused of being a Twitter ‘Lurker’ under the name “Pierre Delecto” for keeping up with the news. I think if you have seriously competed and lost, you are bound to look at each new event with the consideration of how you would have handled it and what you would have done, and how much better your ideas are. Human nature. I think it extends to those who dropped out early as well.

Every act of a new president will be put under a magnifying device, and certainly Donald Trump has had more nay-sayers than most. Past presidents will feel they have the authority to chime in, and of course present events may suggest the correctness (or not) of their actions in office. Lots of people are suggesting that Hillary may jump in at the last minute.  We’ll see. Wouldn’t take much to convince her that she should.




%d bloggers like this: