American Elephants


President Donald Trump Being Presidential by The Elephant's Child

trumpgeneric1It was a very good speech. Donald Trump was at his presidential best, clear, straightforward, positive and offering his hand to his opponents in Congress, inviting them to think first of our country. He began with a tribute to Black History Month and the work that still needs doing for civil rights, and the threats to Jewish Community Centers. He reminded us all that “we may be divided on policies, but we are a nation that stands together in condemning hate and evil in all its forms.” After scanning the state of the country, he turned our attention to a strategic effort to improve the lives of all Americans. And the heartfelt applause! Be a bit difficult to keep up with the silly ‘Nazi’ bit after this.

If you were watching, perhaps you noticed that many Democrat women were wearing white. After all the talk of how they would disrupt the speech, find nasty ways to protest, walk out, or just do something to acknowledge their fury, members of the House Democratic Women’s Working Group decided they would channel the suffragette movement when they wore white to President Trump’s joint address to Congress. I didn’t even notice them until near the end of the speech.

In a statement, Rep. Lois Frankel, D-Fla., said they will be wearing white to “unite against any attempts by the Trump administration to roll back the incredible progress women have made in the last century.”

Frankel chairs the Democratic Women’s Working Group, which said their commitment to women’s rights includes affordable healthcare and Planned Parenthood, equal pay, paid sick and family leave, affordable child care, secure retirement and “lives free from fear and violence.”

I’m not sure in what alternate universe this bunch of women assume that the Trump administration is trying to deprive them of their progress. The women of the House don’t have ObamaCare for their health insurance, so they really don’t know how expensive it is, nor why it is such a failure.  The Federal government has no business either supporting or attacking Planned Parenthood. The right to an abortion has been guaranteed by the Supreme Court, but a large portion of the country opposes abortion, and should not be forced to support it with their taxpayer money. Equal pay has been settled law since 1963, and this blather about 70% of mens pay is and has been totally false. Republicans passed the vote for women’s suffrage in 1920 in spite of Democrats opposition, just like they passed the Civil Rights Act in spite of Democrat opposition. A little late, Democrats are once again attempting to capture credit for something they historically opposed. This gets tiresome.

President Trump’s speech to Congress was truly presidential and a very good speech as well. Democrats were clearly not expecting that, and were totally unprepared for it to be anything even acceptable. In their current unhinged state they were expecting something they could really get their teeth into (so to speak) and were ready to take him on, but gracious, well-meaning, kind,  and celebrating our country and its history—the women in white slunk out of the chamber before anyone could notice, without a sound, utterly defeated.



We Apparently Paid A Really Big Ransom To Iran For Our Hostages. by The Elephant's Child

The truth will out, as Shakespeare said. It doesn’t always become clear when it should, but sooner or later it does. Back in September, AEI’s Michael Rubin “testified before the House Financial Services Committee on the allegation that the Obama administration had paid Iran a ransom—at the time it was believed to be $400 million but it was later revealed that the figure was more than three times that amount—in cash for the release of American hostages held by Iran.”

At the hearing, it is now clear that State Department officials lied outright to the committee. But, lest there be any question about how the Iranian government perceived the payment received from the United States, Hossein Nejat, deputy Intelligence Director of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps yesterday bragged that Iran forced the United States to pay $1.4 billion ransom to win the release of imprisoned Washington Post correspondent Jason Rezaian.

What does this mean for the United States? Unfortunately, the damage is already done. The cash the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps received (for they were the entity which took possession of the ransom) will fuel greater terror as well as Iran’s campaigns in Syria, Yemen, and perhaps Bahrain as well. In 2010, the United States busted the Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador in Washington because the US intelligence community was monitoring bank accounts known to be operated by the Qods Force. Cash makes it far easier for Iran to move money without risk of detection.

There is a reason why the United States customarily does not pay ransom for Americans taken as hostages. Giving in puts the life of anyone else in reach of terrorist forces at risk, leaves the impression that the United States is weak, and puts our allies at risk as well. Michael Rubin says the hostage agreement should be published. Obama promised he would preside over the most transparent administration in history. Well, yes. Promises, promises. “It is now clear that State Department officials lied outright to the committee,” Rubin added. And you wonder why President Trump speaks of draining the swamp.



Beware of the Progressives’ Language Games. by The Elephant's Child

300ffe5afe1869d89f5ff69874d39187_f1595

One of the things that is hardest to understand today are the language games being played. We’ve all become familiar with the previous administration’s not just reluctance, but refusal, to utter the words Radical Islamic Terrorism, or any similar reference. With major attacks in Paris and Germany the terrorism part is hard to escape, but the problem is any insinuation that terror is connected to religion, in spite of the fact that the Koran makes it fairly clear. Refusing to name things accurately is a political tactic.

We are now in a middle phase of the immigration game. Yesterday was supposed to be “A Day Without Immigrants” proving that we just can’t get along without all the things an immigrant does for us. It was pretty much a flop because nobody paid attention, but the attempt is just one small item in a much larger program.

In all the ranting and ravings, nobody seems to clarify the difference which is huge, immense and important between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. The Left’s attempt to suggest that anyone who opposes illegal immigration hates immigrants is ridiculous, but that’s what they are doing. Obama has effectively left the border wide open. Executive orders offered amnesty to immigrants. Refugees were placed in districts where a distinct change in population numbers would be advantageous to Democrats at the polls. Since new citizens, or those who vote illegally usually vote Democratic, they were put in those states and counties where it would affect the vote most. Except, of course in the case of Cuban refugees who could be counted on to vote Republican, and they were returned to Cuba for reeducation.

You have surely heard the phrase “We are a nation of immigrants” repeated endlessly. Well, sure, in one sense even the Native Americans are immigrants from Siberia, but in actuality, we are a nation of citizens. Immigrants are here either legally or illegally, and legal immigrants can eventually become citizens with full constitutional rights when they have passed the citizenship test and gone through the naturalization ceremony where they forswear their allegiance to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty was before a citizen.

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

The important thing to notice is the attempt to conflate legal immigration and illegal immigration by suggesting that all immigration is good and illegals are entitled to the same benefits, same regulations and same rewards. Those who have crossed the border illegally, or who have overstayed their visas or student visas are taking unfair advantage of those who have applied legally and are waiting patiently for their turn— around 4.4 million people.

The idea seems to be to make everyone believe that America is the great benefactor of all mankind with open borders and welcome for all those who are unhappy with their present circumstances. It has reached the point where anyone who utters the words “illegal immigrants” is likely to wonder if that makes them a bad person. That is the purpose of these word games.

The refusal to utter the words “Radical Islamic Terrorism” is part of the effort to install “Islamophobia” high on the list of personal sins, and to make Obama’s disastrous Iran Deal somehow palatable, which it is not. You can ask yourself why Iran is working so hard to develop nuclear weapons, and intercontinental ballistic missiles? A look at a map of the Middle East makes that fairly clear. They mean those shouts of “Death to America”. Obama believed that the intransigence in the Middle East was entirely  because of our interference in the region (Bush’ s fault) and if he just made nice and turned the Middle East over to Iran to manage, all would be well, which is ludicrous. If you are cowed by societal disapproval, afraid to be labeled Islamophobic, they have accomplished their purpose.

There is a reason why protesters and their signs scream ‘Fascist’, ‘Nazi’,’Racist’,’Islamophobe, Homophobe, ‘Deplorables’, ‘Obstructionists’,”Tea Baggers’,’Deniers’ and other similar epithets. The Conservative response is often  tax cuts or some other economic fact, often long and confusing.  Republicans or Conservatives are not so much interested in calling names, but in principles. They are usually talking about free markets or free people, Liberty — the Constitution, that sort of thing. Democrats do not talk about principles because they just don’t think that way, and they don’t have any.

Obama will return to Washington D.C. to oversee the operations of OFA, (Organizing for Action, formerly Obama for America) his 30,000 strong army of young community organizers in training. Paul Sperry has been writing at the New York Post about Obama’s plans for sabotaging the Trump presidency. So far they have been ordered out to disrupt every Republican office holder’s Town Halls as “enraged constituents” terrified that the Republicans are going to take away their ObamaCare. The press obligingly covers it as enraged constituents without any idea that they are being had. It’s easy, sabotaging the Trump presidency.

Just don’t assume that any of this hooplah is spontaneous righteous indignation. All is carefully planned, and most is well subsidized. I only recently realized the reason why all these leftist groups have significant names, and organization. You can’t write a check to an unnamed or spontaneous group.  And they do have sponsors who write significant checks.

 



Innocence, Foolishness, Stupidity and Which is Which? by The Elephant's Child

eu

There are loaded words out there. Words that have been given meaning far beyond their normal weight, if one can call it that. Refugees is such a word. It is far more loaded than other words in the same family, like immigrants, or migrants. It seems to outrank citizens. Europe has largely surrendered to refugees. The word carries along with itself—ideas of empathy, pity, caring, welcome, fugitive, displaced person, asylum seeker, boat people.

Here’s the bit from Wikipedia. The refugee, of course, is a small child of indeterminate nationality. .

RefugeeA refugee, generally speaking, is a displaced person who has been forced to cross national boundaries and who cannot return home safely. Such a person may be called an asylum seeker until granted refugee status by the contracting state or the UNHCR if they formally make a claim for asylum.

What brings all this up is a post from  Gatestone Europe that contained these pieces.

The foreign minister of the European Parliament said, to justify the EU’s position on migrants, in the session of migration and Trump’s executive order, “If we had to live without migrants, in all our societies and all our economies, we would suffer a lot of negative consequences.”

Second piece: “Gangster Islam: The Problem Europe Ignores” featuring the Dutch-Moroccan rapper Ismo stating “I believe nothing blindly except the Quran””I hate the Jews even more than the Nazis: and “I won’t shake hands with faggots.”

For over a decade, Europe’s struggle to successfully integrate its Muslim population has been evident. But throughout the years a new and distinctly European phenomenon arose, which is as significant as it is underreported: Gangster Islam. It entails the conflation of the seemingly a-religious street culture of youths from a Muslim background on the one hand, and elements of the Islamic religion on the other.

Then, a report that “Hamas Organises Dutch Conference, Intelligence Agencies in Full Denial.”

And a video clip of the Chief of Police of  Östersund, Sweden, Stephen Jerand, warning women to adjust their behavior to protect against a spate of violent attacks” (avoid getting raped by gangs of young men)

There’s lots more. They are apparently far more concerned by President Trump than by the Muslim refugees in their midst that are not interested in assimilating, but only in establishing Sharia law and taking over.  But perhaps I exaggerate.

On the Left, “refugees” is indeed a loaded word, and we must all care deeply and admit all refugees, and continue to have sanctuary cities, counties, towns and universities, in defiance of federal law.  Because if we don’t care then we will be bad people. And we don’t have to worry about future effects because, well, that isn’t now and it will probably all be better anyway when we are in charge again.  Is that the mindset? Or is it all just George Soros‘ open borders and Open Society  or like Scarlett O’Hara’s plan to go home to Tara and think about it all tomorrow?

We have been told that Europe will be Muslim by 2050, simply because the Muslim birthrate is so much higher, and Europe’s is close to negative.



Michael Ramirez Captures the Media by The Elephant's Child

trump-promises



The Spontaneous Demonstrations at Our Airports Were Carefully Planned. by The Elephant's Child

edit5_travel_013017_newscom

Those “Spontaneous Anti-Trump Airport protests weren’t Spontaneous at all,” reports Investors Business Daily. They were carefully planned by hard-core left-wing activist groups. Professional organizers have been waiting for, and planning for Trump’s orders on deportations, bans and detentions. Trump made it clear early that he planned ‘on day one’ to issue a temporary ban on visas and refugees from countries where terrorism was rampant. All these groups had to do was be ready when he made good on his campaign promise.

The news media was astonished, and rushed to report every last sign, shout, shouter, bullhorn and count the crowds. Yet the groups planning the “spontaneous” protests had been eager to share , and claimed to be in “constant contact with lawyers’ associations, lawmakers and reporters.” So how much was fact and how much was made up or wildly exaggerated? How many times did you hear that it was a “Muslim Ban?” It was not. There was no Muslim Ban.

The protests are absurd. Trump’s orders are clearly within his executive powers. The Washington State judge who granted a federal stay suggesting that the executive orders were unconstitutional was out of line, and his suggestions that the orders were harming the people of Washington, silly.

The executive order instituted a 90 day suspension (not ban) of immigrants from countries listed by the Obama administration as having a significant presence of foreign terrorist organizations. It also suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days to give Homeland Security and the DNI time to determine how to make sure that terrorists weren’t slipping in as refugees—something ISIS has said they are doing. It also sets a slightly lower cap on refugees this year  than has been the norm for the past decade.

The countries concerned were listed by the Obama administration, not by Trump. President Obama barred large groups of immigrants at least six times out of national security concerns. But then his most recent executive order was to ban any refugees from Cuba—sending them back to the Castros’ communist Cuba.

Catholic Archbishop Bashar Warda of Irbil in Iraq plaintively asked:

“Where were all those protesters when ISIS came to kill Christians and Yazidis and other minority groups? They were not protesting when the tens of thousands of displaced Christians my archdiocese has cared for since 2014 received no financial assistance from the U.S. government or the U.N. There were no protests when Syrian Christians were only let in at a rate that was 20 times less than the percentage of their population in Syria.

I do not understand why some Americans are now upset that the many minority communities that faced a horrible genocide will finally get a degree of priority in some manner.

The Center for Immigration Studies suggests that we can help far more refugees if we help to settle them close to home, where they can more easily return home when the current danger passes. Most refugees don’t really want to move to a new country and an unknown new life. but would rather remain at home where everyone speaks their language and their relatives live, if it was safe.



Totallly Unrelated, of Course, But Food for Thought by The Elephant's Child

eu-refugeesA huge raid by about 800 Austrian police officers in Vienna and Graz, have rounded up fourteen Islamists, including three women and a handful of Imams connected to ISIS, after a two-year long investigation into the radical Salafist network. They will be charged with membership in a terrorist organization and the creation of a criminal organization.

The head of the criminal justice department of the Ministry of Justice said the Islamists spoke of creating a “State of God” or an Islamic Caliphate theocracy. Police also allege that the group had recruited at least 40 people to engage in jihad. Previous reports indicate that around 270 Islamists were under active observation by Austrian intelligence services.

The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) and the Austrian government reported last November after the attack at the Bataclan theater in Paris that hundreds of ISIS fighters have been smuggled into Europe as “refugees.”




%d bloggers like this: