American Elephants


The “Ripped From Their Mothers’ Arms” Meme Is Sheer Bunk! by The Elephant's Child

I frequently say something about “doing your homework”, by which I mean that you can no longer count on the information from our national media to be either true nor accurate. You have to make an effort to find out if what you are reading is actually true. If you just repeat the talking points, you are not only dishonest yourself, you are aiding a program specifically designed to make you support a lie.

The current line of attack is that the Trump administration is “ripping vulnerable children from the arms of their mothers” at the border, because of Trump’s demand for a border wall. Obviously if you want a big wall to keep citizens of other countries from entering our country, you must be racist, homophobic, xenophobic, Hitler, and just plain mean.

We have just had a chorus from the former first ladies, who think it’s perfectly awful that we are “ripping vulnerable children from the arms of their mothers.” Let’s clear this up a bit.

If you are a nation, you have a right to decide who you will allow to move in. William Voegeli in The Pity Party explained;

“In contrast to America, countries like Canada and Australia treat immigration the way Harvard treats college admission or the New England Patriots treat the NFL draft as a way to get the talented  that can benefit the institution and keep out the untalented. Here in America we increasingly treat immigration as if it were a sacred civil right possessed by 7 billion foreigners.”

We allow asylum seekers to enter the country, but ‘asylum’ has a strict meaning. It means that you are escaping a government that wants to harm you for your religion, politics or ideas. It does not mean that you want to get away from an abusive husband, it’s about the government.  We have embassies  and consulates all over the world, where one can apply to immigrate to America. There are legal procedures and a long wait list, which is made long by “chain migration.” A citizen can currently “sponsor” all of his or her relatives. Mother, father, adult children, brothers. sisters, uncles, aunts, cousins. Our country believes that we can currently handle about a million new immigrants a year, who we help to find a residence, learn English and learn American History, find health care, get help in getting settled and help with their needs. Those who have legally applied, paid their fees, have often been on the wait list for years. Most of the numbers are used up by chain migration, and there is little room for those who just want to make their home and life here.

Contrary to our first ladies (who should have done their homework) children are not being “ripped from the arms of their mothers”. If the parent has entered the country illegally, they have committed a crime. They are detained. We have a law that says you can’t put a kid in prison with their parents. They are moved to facilities designed to help the children.  I have described this thoroughly in a previous post, 4 posts back beginning “the evil Donald Trump.” It is the law, and the Trump administration must obey.

The Obama administration, ignoring the law, admitted many “parents” and their children without checking them out, only to find that the “parent” was a trafficker, and what were really unaccompanied children were turned over to egg farms to work in slave conditions, chicken packing, and even sex work. And yes, the Obama administration did park kids in cages. Democrats were trying to use the photos against Conservatives, but the photos were clearly from the Obama administration, so that claim quickly vanished, and we moved to the “ripped from the arms” bit.

The Center for Immigration Studies (cis.org) is the most reliable source for information about immigration. They describe themselves  as pro-immigrant, anti-illegal immigrant. They work hard at providing accurate information for the public and for public official. Unfortunately, we have a lot of public officials who don’t do their homework either.

Advertisements


Globalization: The Dream and the Nightmare by The Elephant's Child

climate-change

Here I was, posting Jonathan Haidt’s commentary on Globalization, and I turned to American Greatness, and conveniently, there was Victor Davis Hanson, writing even more extensively about globalization.

After World War II, only the United States possessed the capital, the military, freedom, and the international good will to arrest the spread of global Stalinism. To save the fragile postwar West, America was soon willing to rebuild and rearm war-torn former democracies. Over seven decades, it intervened in proxy wars against Soviet and Chinese clients, and radical rogue regimes. It accepted asymmetrical and unfavorable trade as the price of leading and saving the West. America became the sole patron for dozens of needy clients—with no time limit on such asymmetry.

Yet what would become the globalized project was predicated on lots of flawed, but unquestioned assumptions:

The great wealth and power of the United States was limitless. It alone could afford to subsidize other nations. Any commercial or military wound was always considered superficial and well worth the cost of protecting the civilized order.

Only by piling up huge surpluses with the United States and avoiding costly defense expenditure through American military subsidies, could the shattered nations of Asia and Europe supposedly regain their security, prosperity and freedom. There was no shelf life on such dependencies.

Do read the whole thing. This is a major contention point with the Democrats in their current mental and moral breakdown. If we are going to fight back, we have to know what we are talking about.



The Globalists Have a Major Blind Spot by The Elephant's Child

Here is Jonathan Haidt, talking on globalism and nationalism and why they are incompatible. There are some real problems with global thinking, and Haidt exposes them, one by one. We get remarkably confused as to what human nature is all about, and shifting psychology and changing generations and just where we get off track. It’s an interesting talk. Just slightly over 10 minutes. Big audience. April, 2018.

Jonathan Haidt is an American social psychologist and Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University’s Stern School of Business. His academic specialization is the psychology of morality and the moral emotions. Haidt is the author of two books: The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (2006) and The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion (2012). He is also the founder of the Heterodox Academy to support viewpoint diversity in academia: https://heterodoxacademy.org/ In this talk from Apr 2018, he talks about the generation after millennials,



If America Is So Awful, Why Are They So Eager to Increase Immigration? by The Elephant's Child

macdonald-630x400

Heather MacDonald addresses “America the Horrible?” Progressives say the the United States is racist and misogynist. Why then do they want everyone in the world to come here? Nancy Pelosi just stumbled through a response to a question that said that asylum seekers were different, and immigrants brought wonderful gifts to the country. So why are they so eager to increase immigration if America is such a dreadful country?

American women live under a suffocating patriarchy. Rape culture flourishes in the United States. Toxic masculinity stunts the emotional and professional growth of American females. Sexual harassment and predation are ubiquitous in American workplaces. College campuses are maelstroms of sexual violence. Female students need safe spaces where they can escape abusive male power.

These propositions are self-evident to a large, interlocking establishment of government bureaucrats, progressive politicians, college administrators, faculty, “activists,” professionals, and journalists. Yet this same establishment is up in arms over a recent declaration by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that female aliens caught trying to enter the country illegally will no longer be automatically considered for asylum by dint of claiming that they are victims of domestic abuse. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accuses the Trump administration of “staggering cruelty” in condemning “vulnerable innocent women to a lifetime of violence and even death.” The American Bar Association charged that Sessions would “further victimize those most in need of protection.” The executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Benjamin Johnson, denounced “this shameful chapter in our country’s history,” and promised a lawsuit.

Sessions was right to return asylum law to its original intent: offering protection to individuals persecuted by their government for membership in a socially distinct group. Domestic violence is a private crime, not a public one, and does not reflect general persecution of the sort that international law has codified as appropriate for asylum petitions. Asylum petitions have mushroomed 1,700 percent from 2008 to 2016, according to the New York Times, driven in significant part by domestic-abuse claims, often underwritten by extensive coaching and encouragement by hard-left advocates.

But why should social-justice warriors want to subject these potential asylees to the horrors of America? In coming to the U.S., if you believe the dominant feminist narrative, the female aliens would simply be exchanging their local violent patriarchy for a new one. Indeed, it should be a mystery to these committed progressives why any Third World resident would seek to enter the United States. Not only is rape culture pervasive in the U.S., but the very lifeblood of America is the destruction of “black bodies,” in the words of media star Ta-Nehesi Coates. Surely, a Third World person of color would be better off staying in his home country, where he is free from genocidal whiteness and the murderous legacy of Western civilization and Enlightenment values.

Do read the whole thing. Heather MacDonald is a reliable author and always has something important to say. She can usually be found at city-journal.org, where she is a fellow.



The Evil Donald Trump Is Yanking Innocent Children from the Arms of Their Parents, and other Fables from the Left. by The Elephant's Child

childhood-immigration-flood-620x396

A leading Democrat spoke out this week to say that they needed Obama because they didn’t have anyone else — I assume meaning anyone else who was so popular, or perhaps anyone who could defeat Trump—I have no idea. The Obama administration is not coming off too well in the wake of the FBI and the Inspector General’s report.

But clearly, the Trump administration is in deep trouble. They are yanking innocent little children from the arms of their parents at the border, depriving them of their parents and putting them in detention for no reason except that Trump is Hitler reincarnated. Or at least that is what most Leftist websites are shrieking. Forgive me, but we’ve heard this “innocent little children” vocabulary before, applied to the DACA children who were brought here “through no fault of their own,” “against their will,” eager for “a chance at college.” Pure propaganda to arouse emotions.

The requirements were only that they came to the U.S. before their 16th birthday, be under 31 by June 15, 2012, enroll in school or get an honorable discharge from the military. The fraud rate for these simple requirements is estimated to be 40 to 50%. Only 49% have a high school education, 24% are functionally illiterate, another 46% have only “basic” English ability, and the rest are school dropouts. For every DACA recipient who joined the military (about 1 in 1,000), 2 have committed serious crimes. At least 1,500 are gang members (as of Feb. 2017, but by August 2017 the number had increased to 2,139. American taxpayers have already funded “resettlement” of 13,000 unaccompanied minors who managed to enter the United States. Those who claim to be age 17 and under must be accommodated in staying here while their cases wind their way through a years-long process of evaluation.

But Democrats are told to be up in arms about Trump taking innocent little children away from their loving parents and putting them in prison. Fact: Illegal immigrants are criminals, breaking immigration laws by entering the country illegally. There is a legal way to become a citizen. Criminal illegal immigrants are detained. It is not acceptable to imprison their children as well.

HHS took news media on a tour of a facility in El Cajon, California where migrant children are being sheltered while separated from their parents. (follow the link for pictures) The facilities are comfortable, providing lodging, meals, clothing, medical care, They get English lessons, trips to the zoo, museums, parks. No, they are not being put in “cages,” that was the Democrat charge last week, when they rounded up pictures of children in cages. Turned out the pictures were from the Obama administration, which actually did put kids in cages, and New York magazine also reports the Obama Administration handed child migrants over into the custody of human traffickers after neglecting the most basic checks on these “caregivers,” failing to discover if they were relatives or sex traffickers.

Democrats count heavily on the “talking points” they are given, which are meant to rouse up emotions, but to provide just barely enough information to allow them to know anything real about the situation. This is the source of much of the “fake news” which is unfortunately all too pervasive. Nancy Pelosi cleared it all up with her statement to CNS News. (short video here) Which is an unintended gift to the GOP. “She informed the world.” to quote Tom Lifson “that she doesn’t care about Americans. “That is not the point. ” The point is the hurt feelings of illegals when they are called “Illegal.” You have seen the signs in the pictures of protests “No Human Being is Illegal.”

It really simplifies the world when you can just rely on the talking points that you are given by your betters, and don’t have to do a lot of tiresome reading or thinking. Keeps life delightfully simple, and when the talking points really arouse you to action, you can go to a protest with your friends and shout and feel important.

 



The Big Singapore Meeting: Big Breakthrough or Waste of Time? by The Elephant's Child

President Trump has gone to Singapore, had a good meeting with Kim Jong Un of North Korea, and returned home to the utter consternation of the media. They were eager for some kind of catastrophe. Trump is too new, too ill-informed about international affairs not to have made a complete mess of it. Here, from the White House, is the joint statement of President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at the Singapore Summit. (You might find it fun to look up the Democratic People’s Republics of the world and see just who they are, and how they’re doing.)

The agreement is not all that much. They agree to try to make peace. They agree to try to commit to de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and they will commit to recovering POW/MIA remains. Nancy Pelosi threatened that the Senate would have to confirm it. It’s not a treaty, Nancy, there’s nothing to confirm. They had a meeting and agreed to try to do a little more.

President Trump said that the entire effort was dedicated to Otto Warmbier, the young American who made the mistake of taking a propaganda poster in Korea, whereupon the Koreans threw him into prison, brutally mistreated him and when he was released, he barely got home before he died.

I’m including links to some articles that capture some of the ideas that explain what is going on. The first is “How Twitter Diplomacy Works” by Thomas Farnan. He begins:

President Trump this week will bust 68 years of diplomatic white paper inertia and meet the leader of a nation with which America has been at war since 1950. President Trump this week will bust 68 years of diplomatic white paper inertia and meet the leader of a nation with which America has been at war since 1950. …

Do read the whole thing.

The White House prepared for the meeting carefully. They learned that Kim was a big movie fan with a huge library of movie videos, and they prepared their own—which Trump played for the Chairman on an iPad. Scott Adams (Dilbert) discusses the video brilliantly here:

There has been some angry objection from Conservatives that Mr. Trump buttered up Kim, said he cared about his people, (but he doesn’t and he;s a brutal dictator and murderer. ) Yes, but refer back to the simple statement that we have been at war since 1950.

There are some underlying things that we just don’t know about. North Korea has been a subsidiary of China, and China’s Xi has ambitions. How North Korea fits into that we don’t know. Useful or annoyance? When Kim shot off this last batch of nuclear tests, something happened to his test site, and the mountain collapsed, but we don’t know how bad it was or what it means.

Our media wants to portray the whole thing as a colossal failure of one sort or another. They want Trump embarrassed, disgraced (TDS kicks in here) so you can’t rely on much that they have to say. They’re already going on about the failure of Trump’s G-7 meeting and how he insulted the Canadians etc. ,etc. Here’s some useful commentary on that: American Greatness: “Trump is Right: G7 Needs a Wake-Up Call on Trade.” From Investor’s Business Daily: President Trump Didn’t Sigh G-7’s Leftist Agenda—Smart Move”.

From The Wall Street Journal: Why Trump Clashes With Europe” (subscription barrier), and THE WEEK: “If Europe is serious about challenging Trump, it should actually challenge him” by Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry.

This is not all that much reading, you will find it valuable. There are some important insights here. And keep that one phrase in mind: “68 years of white paper diplomatic inertia.”

 



Victor Davis Hanson on the First Six Months of Trump by The Elephant's Child

A very odd and unappealing opening visual. Here is Victor Davis Hanson speaking at Hillsdale College about the Trump Administration and what is working and why and why not.  It’s a little long, but worth every minute. I am a great admirer of Victor Hanson. He thinks clearly, informed deeply by his studies in history and the classics to consider the big picture and how the little events of our times fit in.

It seemed to fit nicely with the absurd New York Times article posted just above. An excellent view of where we are and why. Enjoy.




%d bloggers like this: