American Elephants


U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley by The Elephant's Child

Dan Senor, interviews the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference. The former governor of South Carolina has only been in her new job for two months, but she is making a real difference. This is a very impressive lady. Do watch. Another remarkable appointment by President Donald Trump.



Here’s What Happened Last Fall at Yale University by The Elephant's Child

I don’t know how closely you have been following the general insanity on campus in this country, the violence, intolerance and suppression of free speech. At Yale this all began with, of all things, Halloween costumes. Do watch the whole 12 minutes of this We the Internet documentary, it’s an important part of understanding what is going on.

It’s the language war again. This time it is “cultural appropriation” —obviously a bad thing to appropriate someone else’s culture—like tacos, or Chicken Vindaloo, or French perfume? German beer?

It’s clearly time to return to “in loco parentis” or “in the place of parents”, which was once the way college faculty and administrators regarded themselves as the teachers and supervisors of a big group of kids who didn’t know very much and were there to learn how to be grown-ups. In those days, these kids would have promptly been sent home to reflect and beg for readmission at some point.

But then the Sixties arrived, and Vietnam protests by kids who were scared to death they would get drafted and were therefore virulently anti-war. Without getting into the morality of the war, kids rioted and scared faculty and administrators to death. They invaded offices, did a lot of damage, and proclaimed themselves adults, and not to be bossed around by a bunch of timid eggheads, or something like that.

And so it was. Colleges once had “hours” times when kids had to be in their dorms. Kids not conforming to the hours got longer hours when they had to be in their dorms, were promptly sent home at any offense for readjustment, and might not get back in until the next semester. It was a big deal. 18 and 19 year-olds knew they were not adults, and didn’t expect to be treated as such. A new survey reveals that Millenials believe that you don’t become an “adult” until age 30.

And the children have been running the institutions ever since. A significant part of the faculty were Vietnam protesters who avoided the draft with educational deferments to get their PhDs, and since faculties take part in new hiring decisions, mostly refused to hire conservatives who went off to war and made it back. What will happen to this generation of children who won’t grow up, who need “safe spaces” to protect them from words they don’t like, and consider it their right to act out when someone says words they don’t like? Who will hire them? Who will support them until they reach the ripe old age of 30? Going to be interesting to say the least.



Islamophobia, Freedom of Religion, Free Speech And Hate Speech by The Elephant's Child

The Canadian  House of Commons has passed a motion that singles out the criticism of Islam as a form of “Islamophobia.” Critics condemn it as an attack on free speech. There’s a lot of that going around these days, especially on college campuses. But also in governments, at all levels. The Left has raised any unpleasant speech to the level of “hate speech,” a fuzzy phrase that doesn’t define the speech, but condemns the speaker as a bad person. To be condemned as fascist, racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, sexist, etc, etc, etc.

This is particularly abhorrent for those who have been elected to office, for going around with the bad person label may mean that you lose your next election, but also that your opponent has some real ammunition to destroy you. But there is no such thing as “hate speech.” There are hateful words, or cruel words, or even language intended to incite violence. But let’s try to be accurate with our language.

The fear of being so labeled has everyone ever so careful with their use of language and avoidance of any suggestion that could end up with the BP label. Words get ultra-careful. Obvious things cannot be said or done. It becomes a careful time with everyone tip-toeing around what in an ordinary time would be a straightforward condemnation or disagreement. On the other hand, tweets, comments and social media, are increasingly rude, foul-mouthed, nasty and increasingly unprintable. The increasing prissiness of official-speak is driving ordinary folk quite bonkers.

The picture illustrating the article is a photo of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau behind a placard saying “Diversity is Canada’s strength” (in two languages). This is also nonsense. Diversity is a current buzzword of the Left, who are trying to divide the people by forcing them to readjust any organization or particularly any photo so there is the proper representation of skin tones and ethnicities—none of which have any importance at all. It’s what’s inside that counts. Is there a diversity of thought, of outlook, of knowledge? Are there nice congenial people or only rude and nasty ones? Are these people with whom you have something in common or strangers? Honest and trustworthy?  The minute you start asking real questions the idea of diversity of skin color gets silly. Doesn’t matter.

The more important question is — why has “diversity” suddenly become the top question or issue? I saw a piece recently where someone was questioning Germany’s troubles with “migrants.” And someone responded “But don’t you understand how important the diversity is to Germany”— or something to that effect. That’s just my memory. And of course the Canadian discussion soon got into the freedom of religion issue regarding Islamophobia. It is not a matter of freedom of religion when the proponents of one form of that religion want everyone else to submit or be killed, and keep demonstrating ever gorier ways that they kill dissenters or just those who are out of line.

I wrote something a few days ago about the increasing extent to which people on the right and those on the left were not speaking the same language, and it is true, and intentional. Language is becoming a tactic and a weapon in our increasing division.To suggest that the Left speaks in the language of feelings and emotions is only the beginning of the differences, which are growing ever closer to all-out war. More to come.



Just an Ordinary Wednesday, Like All Wednesdays by The Elephant's Child

Wednesday, an ordinary middle of the week day. Not Spring yet, though there are a few lonely daffodils peeking out here and there. A terrorist attack in London at the Houses of Parliament, Three killed, many injured, terrorist killed. ISIS celebrates. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes reports that Trumps’ personal communications may have been collected by intelligence agencies, details widely disseminated. Hackers claim to have breached 300 million APPLE accounts, Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan warned the European Union that if the diplomatic spat continues, Europeans won’t be able to walk their own streets safely anywhere in the world. The Turks threaten to send 15,000 migrants a month to Europe. Other than some horrendous rapes of underage children, it was just an ordinary almost Spring Wednesday. Sheesch!



Consequences. There Are Always Consequences. by The Elephant's Child

James P. Rubin, a former assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration wrote a piece in Politico Thursday that called German Chancellor Angela Merkel the “leader of the free world,” largely for her role in taking in Middle Eastern ‘migrants.’ Rubin worked in Hillary’s failed 2008 campaign and was an advisor to Clinton.

“Angela Merkel, whether she wants the job or not, is the West’s last, best hope,” was the subtitle. Rubin claimed that by taking in some one million “refugees,” Merkel assumed the mantle of “moral leadership.”

The German chancellor is the only leader in Europe who even has a plausible claim to moral leadership. As a victim of Soviet communism, Merkel was always going to be listened to carefully on the question of morality. And given her longevity she was always going to be respected. But it was her unexpected decision to accept some 1 million refugees that established her moral credentials, especially since no other political leader has taken such a political risk.

At PJ Media, Michael Walsh points out that Merkel,

more than anyone, is the woman who destroyed the notion of European cultural cohesion, the unity of its history, and its Western identity. Her folly in throwing open the borders of the European Union (which is itself a Franco-German political fantasy now coming unglued) to the “migrant” hordes of an invading Islamic world will reverberate for decades to come. In an effort to replace the German population — which, largely thanks to its women, is almost wholly uninterested in reproducing itself — the childless chancellor could only see a mechanical solution to a problem of reproductive biology, without ever once (in true East German fashion) asking herself why.

Iben Thranholm is one of Denmark’s most widely read columnists who focuses on political and social events focusing on their religious aspects, significance and moral implications. She was asked how Denmark views Sweden and Europe’s demographic future? She answered: “With absolute horror.”

The Swedish media, which is quite pro-government and its leftwing policies, does not always report the full extent of the problems in their society. So it is hard to have a very accurate picture of what is going on. But we in Denmark have a good sense. We are very aware of the murders, rapes, riots, violence and the hand grenades that go on there. This does not often make the news but we know it is going on. And we don’t want to go down the same route. 

This is the result of decades of policies promoting multiculturalism in Sweden. And what is left is this hollow house. You know, in the Bible it is said that if a house is left swept, tidied and unoccupied it eventually it will be taken over by evil. And I fear that this is what is happening in Sweden. Far from being a multicultural paradise, the problems can no longer remain hidden.

Every few weeks or days, there is another report of an attack on the public in Europe. Yet nobody admits that there is a problem. Sweden, most of all, seems to be trying to cover up, hide, and neglect to mention things that clearly are going haywire, because if they acknowledged it, they would have to do something about it.

That may be the characteristic that is behind the populism, nationalism and revolt against governments that is moving through all the Western societies. Governments have tried to cover up their own failings, shove things aside till later, fail to address matters directly and eventually it reaches a boiling point.

Yet, yet—Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced he will step down after his anti-Trump vow to hire 10,000 Muslim Refugees because of Trump’s supposed “Muslim ban” backfired substantially. Consumer perceptions of the company dropped by two thirds. Aside from politics, there’s a significant portion of young people who can’t find jobs.  But how interesting that the idea that Muslims from 7 countries cannot be vetted to be sure they are not members of ISIS or alQaeda never occurred to him. They are refugeeees and we have to help them so we will be perceived as good people. That was the Swedish mindset.

Over and over, you will find Leftists changing the dialogue from a straightforward analysis of the issues to one which will allow them to feel like good people, doing good and kind things. Sanctuary cities, jobs for refugees, open borders, welcoming illegal aliens — Howard Schultz is a billionaire and his ‘kindnesses’ will not affect him personally.



We Have Separate Conversations Going On Here, And We Don’t Seem to Speak the Same Language by The Elephant's Child

Early today I watched a video of the first press briefing for the State Department under new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, for the Trump administration. It was over an hour long, conducted by Mark Toner who has been in the job for a number of years, is very competent, and knows most of the journalists present. I’ve seen excerpts of these things before, but this was the first time I have watched the whole thing.

I found it somewhat astonishing, for the liberal journalists trouble in grasping the distinctions among immigrants, illegal immigrants, refugees and the countries involved. They were really having a hard time understanding why some refugees should be turned away at the border, for example—why would we not allow refugees from Iran who didn’t like the government there. Certainly not all Iranians liked the government, why wouldn’t we accept those people? They clearly just didn’t grasp that we cannot tell or vet those who come from a nation that wants to destroy us, nor can we tell who is a jihadi and who is not.

I’ve been mulling over these language distinctions for some time. for it seems that Journalists just don’t grasp that when the Ayatollah Khomeini leads his people in chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”— that is exactly what he really means, and what his government is working for. That there isn’t really any way to tell the good people from the jihadis, and the next terrorist attack may hit their D.C. neighborhood. They are involved with the news, but they don’t grasp the nature of the world.

Rex Tillerson has said that we have been paying the UN for years to monitor and control North Korea’s experimentation with nuclear weapons and it has not worked at all, so perhaps it is time to try something different. I would add that when Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un had his older step-brother executed in another country, and just recently executed five of his supporters who offended him with anti-aircraft cannons, that something different is probably what is needed. I just don’t get the feeling that these journalists get it, and they are still out wandering around in issues of diversity and social justice. But perhaps I am unjust.

A very large issue is the one of religion. Two federal District Judges, one from Seattle and one from Hawaii, have issued stays on President Trump’s Executive Orders, which issued a 90 day ban on immigration from seven countries selected by the Obama administration because immigrants or refugees from those countries cannot be vetted adequately. Why would we have any special concern for Christian refugees?

The First Amendment to the Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… That seem so straightforward and clear. Congress cannot make any laws that establish a state religion. ( No Church of England here) Yet that First Amendment has caused an amazing amount of trouble as people try to overthink and over dissect the words. If a Christian cross is displayed on federal land is that “establishing a religion?” Do the Little Sisters of the Poor have to support abortion for their workers in spite of the fact that their religion prohibits abortion?

So the question becomes—what happens if the religion in question wants to destroy the United States of America because our existence conflicts with their religion. Do al-Qaeda and ISIS represent the Islamic religion, or are they something separate? Do they get to try to destroy us because they don’t believe in our Constitution or religions, and we have to refrain from fighting them because of freedom of religion? When you spell out the questions that arise, it clarifies things, but a full discussion becomes ever more necessary. And the questions that arise are litigated and re-litigated.

The Federal District Judge in Seattle and the Federal District Judge in Hawaii are dragging in casual remarks from the difficult election campaign as if that had anything to do with the President’s Executive Order. They can’t do that. The only thing they have to consider are the exact words of the Executive Order. They cannot drag in extraneous things. Federal Judges get a lifetime appointment and cannot be removed by Congress, though they can be impeached for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” So this will all have to go to the Supreme Court.

Our Founders were a lot closer to the European Wars of Religion 1524-1646, following the Protestant Reformation. That ended with the Peace of Westphalia, which recognized three separate Christian traditions in the Holy Roman empire: Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism and Calvinism.That was followed by the British Civil Wars or The Wars of the Three Kingdoms: England, Scotland and Ireland. The Reformation of the Church of England, begot Presbyterianism, Congregationalism, and the breakdown of state-controlled religious conformity bred an explosion of radical denominations: Ranters, Baptists, Diggers, Levelers and Quakers. The New England colonies were settled by Puritans, Pennsylvania by Quakers, the Carolinas by Presbyterians, and Virginia by the Church of England, and they changed as they were established in America. All fascinating, but necessary to understand at least a little, when we get into simple questions about freedom of religion.

To circle back to where I started, I got no feeling that the reporters at the State Department briefing had any understanding of the real nature of the religious questions involved. Religion is those backwoods people clinging to their Bibles and guns, or something like that. It undoubtedly plays a major part in our current problems with the mainstream media. Our conversations are not about real things, but about social justice, race, diversity, pronouns, race, safe spaces and snowflakes. We’ve got some very real problems out there and they remain essentially unrecognized.

 



It Is Surpassingly Important that Lefties Feel Good About Themselves! by The Elephant's Child

Popular “virtue-signalling” sign. Completely irrational.

A new report from the Ohio Jobs and Justice Political Action Committee says that sanctuary cities are growing and 36 new locales have been added to the list of nearly 500 sanctuary cities. The group has been tracking sanctuary cities for over 10 years. This doesn’t seem  to be anything  that appears on a ballot, but rather the machinations of city councils—what they  are now calling “virtue-signalling” — or “see what a good person I am.”

What I don’t get is why anyone would assume that being a “Sanctuary City” in direct defiance of federal laws is a good thing, nor why protecting illegal aliens is to be considered admirable.  We have immigration laws. If you want to come to the United States to visit, to work, or to live and/or become a citizen, there are rules to protect both the immigrant and the American people.

Sanctuary Cities announce that because they want to be perceived as good people, they want to ignore the rules and regulations and let those who refuse to follow the law be protected from arrest or detention, no matter what they have done or plan to do. Is that stating it baldly enough? Why would you want to protect people, who have already demonstrated that they have no respect for the law— instead of your own citizens?

The Left likes to play with words, in this case attempting to confuse people’s perception of the difference between an illegal alien, an immigrant, a refugee, an H1B worker, and someone here on a visitor’s visa who has illegally overstayed. 

The same thing is being played out in President Trump’s Executive Order halting immigration from 7 countries selected by the Obama administration for 90 days until vetting procedures can be developed to cope with the absence of official sources in those countries to identify the would-be immigrants. This is not a ban on Muslim immigrants—there are far more Muslims in other countries who are not being banned at all.

These are countries where ISIS and alQaeda are prominent and who have announced that they are sending their fighters into our country to kill Americans. Seventy-two terrorists from these countries have been convicted in our courts.

More than 1800 refugees from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen have been resettled in this country in the period since a federal court judge  suspended key parts of an executive order dated Jan. 27 from these 7 nations. Unvetted. But they are refugeeeees! Maybe, maybe not. We can help far more actual refugees if we help them in areas near to their homes simply because it costs a lot more to resettle them here. As usual, what is most important to members of the Left is “a matter of their very flattering vision of themselves as people trying to save the planet, rescue the exploited and create social justice” for all.

President Trump has rewritten his Executive Order, which was due to take effect but a Hawaii judge has issued the same sort of illegal halt that a Seattle District judge issued earlier. In this case it is really astonishing. The Hawaii District Judge said that he didn’t need to read the order, but that because Trump had spoken unfavorably about Muslims during the campaign, clearly he had animus against Muslims. He also included the objections of a local Muslim of Egyptian descent  who felt that he was discriminated against in spite of the fact that there was nothing in the Order that affected him in any way. Whew! The Constitution is absolutely clear that the President of the United States can exclude anyone he wants to from entering the United States. The Hawaii ruling will go to the Ninth Circuit which gets overruled constantly because they are so far left.

This is once again the Left, who are furious that Donald Trump won the election, furious that they have been decimated at every level of government, and so devoid of a “bench” that they are reduced to touting Chelsea Clinton, Al Franken and Senator Cherokee Cheekbones as potential candidates.

Democrats know they are in trouble, and have declared total war, and to heck with the Constitution. They are trying to use refugees and illegals to change the demographics of voting districts in a way more friendly to the Left. Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder plan to file lawsuits across the country in districts where lines have been redrawn, or ‘gerrymandered’ by Republicans, to find cause to flip them in a way more favorable to Democrats.

The idea that you can simply reject the results of an election because you don’t like the winning candidate is completely antithetical to American Law and American tradition. It is not a small matter, and should be taken seriously as an attack on the nation by those who do not care about American Law and American tradition.




%d bloggers like this: