American Elephants


Former First Ladies Join In The National Emotional Collapse Over Illegal Immigrant Children by The Elephant's Child

The Democrats are quite sure that they have a good one this time. The good one in question is Donald Trump and “innocent little children ripped from their mothers’ arms.” The talking points went out, and emotions were roused and before you know it they even had a bunch of former first ladies chiming in. And if you think that was a coincidence, I have a bridge….

As Don Surber explained:

The facts show 10,000 parents sent their children north unaccompanied and illegally. Another 2,000 accompanied their children as they tried to cross our border illegally.

The facts also show the husbands of Laura and Michelle enacted and followed this law. Not policy, law. Hillary supported this law in 2014.

The law includes this provision: “As used in this section — (1) the term ‘placement’ means the placement of an unaccompanied alien child in either a detention facility or an alternative to such a facility; and the term ‘unaccompanied alien child’ means a child who —
(A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States;
(B) has not attained 18 years of age; and
(C) with respect to whom — (i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.”

That is the law.

Laura Bush wrote a column for Bezos’ Trump-hating Washington Post, advocating for privileging foreign law-breakers over Americans. I was disappointed, I thought better of Laura Bush. These celebrated women who are famous because of their husbands’ presidencies, are forgetting that their husbands had to obey these laws (not policies) as well and did so.  Hillary conveniently forgets her own past role, but she has always been a compulsive liar, she’s not ready to give up the limelight either.

 

Advertisements


“Virtue Signaling” Explained and Demonstrated by The Elephant's Child

This new era when everybody is a victim and everybody else has to prove how virtuous they are by emoting with the proper passion is getting remarkably tiresome. Tucker Carlson discusses “virtue signaling” which is one of those recent additions to the lexicon, in this audio from his program. Other than those who are doing the “virtue signaling” I don’t know if anyone is actually impressed.



It’s Not About Your Feelings. It’s About the Facts and Solutions. by The Elephant's Child

Now I’m getting irritated. This entire problem of illegal aliens and their children is getting warped far beyond any resemblance to facts. Did you know that the Canadians have sent people down to our southern border to inform illegals that they are not welcome in Canada, and to not even think of trying to cross the U.S. northern border into Canada. Surely you saw all the newspaper headlines explaining how cruel and inhumane the Canadians are, didn’t you? Comparing Prime Minister Trudeau to Hitler, Canadian border guards to concentration camp guards? Hmmnn?

We do not yet have a wall on the southern border with Mexico. Mexico is at its very widest at the border with the United States, at about 2,000 miles. Nobody is proposing to build a wall along the entire border. We have some fencing, but an athletic young man can scale the fence. Some parts of the border are inaccessible.  A good portion of the problem is not border crossers from Mexico, but people from other Central American countries, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. But the current problem about illegal immigration is not about people crossing the border illegally, avoiding the legal crossing stations. It’s about the emotional horror of innocent little children being “ripped” from the arms of their mothers. Democrats must rely on emotional language to persuade, to enlist compassion,  for they are terminally short on actual facts or useful ideas.

It has been explained that illegals who cross the border uninvited are breaking the law, and committing a crime. They will be detained. It is against the law to imprison children with their parents. The law must be changed, the Democrats insist. Just how it must be changed is not clear. Do we want it made legal to put the kids in prison with their parents? O.K. that solution is out. Do we want to just admit the illegal aliens with their children? Insist they return for an immigration hearing when called? Unfortunately that doesn’t work either. They don’t turn up for their hearings, they have already melted into the general population. Many adult illegals steal real or  buy fake Social Security cards so they can get above the table jobs. What is it that you want Congress to change? Just make our Southern border open to all? If you think the taxes your city or state have imposed on you for building homes for the “homeless”, try to conceive of 70,000 or more illegals a year swarming into our cities, and the changes that would make.

How do we determine if the adults with children are actually their real parents or are traffickers? The Obama administration could not figure out how to vet them, and many children ended up in horrendous circumstances. You want the law changed so that children are not “ripped from their mother’s arms”—to what? Show up with a child and you get in? Really? That’s why Democrats have talking points designed to elicit emotions of compassion. Lately we have had large groups of Bangladeshis illegally crossing the border. President Obama’s illegal 2012 DACA amnesty meant a big increase in the numbers trying to cross the border for another amnesty.

If you have a real good idea about how we should fix all this, you might pass your ideas on to your representatives. They seem a little short on good ideas too.



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.



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,



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.”

 




%d bloggers like this: