American Elephants


Charles Krauthammer: Build the Wall by The Elephant's Child

Charles Krauthammer nails it. As the Center for Immigration Studies says —they are anti illegal immigration and pro immigrant. We have around 4.4 million people who want to immigrate to the United States and become citizens. They are obeying our immigration laws, waiting patiently, and hoping. I see no reason why illegal immigrants of questionable integrity, who are flouting our laws should take precedence over those who are doing it correctly.

President Obama wanted more bodies and believed that illegals would be more reliable Democrat voters. No actual care for the people —he just wanted to win and defeat Republicans. He ordered the Border Patrol to pay no attention and flooded the country with illegals, violent gangs—MS-13—the international criminal gang, diseases we thought were gone, like smallpox, measles, and Mexican drug gangs and traffickers, who are responsible for the current opioid crisis, sex traffickers and criminal activity in general. All that, and he managed to decimate the Progressive party in the course of his efforts. Nice going.

Dr. Krauthammer is correct about Amnesty. Any time you offer amnesty to illegals—it is an open invitation to the next influx who will expect amnesty in their turn. Doesn’t matter if we claim this is the very last time.

CIS has also established that the wall would pay for itself if it prevents a  significant number of illegals. Illegal immigrants cost a lot, whether in police work, Border Patrol and the courts, health care (emergency rooms) or benefits.  Most who are rounded up and given hearings for deportation never show up for the hearings, and just disappear into the population. That all costs a lot. We welcome legal immigrants and wish them well. The Seattle area is home to a lot of high-tech with Microsoft, Amazon, and lots of others, and we have new residents from all over.



Everything You Have Thought About Today’s American Journalism is True by The Elephant's Child

The new issue of Imprimus  features a piece from long time journalist Michael Goodwin, chief political columnist for The New York Post, based on a speech that Goodwin gave at a Hillsdale event. It is a raw and intensive look at contemporary journalism by a long time practitioner who knows his way around the media. It’s just as bad as you thought.

I’ve been a journalist for a long time. Long enough to know that it wasn’t always like this. There was a time not so long ago when journalists were trusted and admired. We were generally seen as trying to report the news in a fair and straightforward manner. Today, all that has changed. For that, we can blame the 2016 election or, more accurately, how some news organizations chose to cover it. Among the many firsts, last year’s election gave us the gobsmacking revelation that most of the mainstream media puts both thumbs on the scale—that most of what you read, watch, and listen to is distorted by intentional bias and hostility. I have never seen anything like it. Not even close. …

During the years I spent teaching at the Columbia University School of Journalism, I often found myself telling my students that the job of the reporter was “to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” I’m not even sure where I first heard that line, but it still captures the way most journalists think about what they do. Translate the first part of that compassionate-sounding idea into the daily decisions about what makes news, and it is easy to fall into the habit of thinking that every person afflicted by something is entitled to help. Or, as liberals like to say, “Government is what we do together.” From there, it’s a short drive to the conclusion that every problem has a government solution.

Goodwin goes on to explain how today’s journalism has gone astray,  how it came about, and how bad it really is (Just what you thought, and even more).

I knew all of this about the media mindset going into the 2016 presidential campaign. But I was still shocked at what happened. This was not naïve liberalism run amok. This was a whole new approach to politics. No one in modern times had seen anything like it. As with grief, there were several stages. In the beginning, Donald Trump’s candidacy was treated as an outlandish publicity stunt, as though he wasn’t a serious candidate and should be treated as a circus act. But television executives quickly made a surprising discovery: the more they put Trump on the air, the higher their ratings climbed. Ratings are money. So news shows started devoting hours and hours simply to pointing the cameras at Trump and letting them run.

A study, Goodwin says, estimated that Trump had received so much free airtime that if he had to buy it the price would be around $2 billion. Executives realized that they had helped Trump’s rise, which made them furious, and soon they were gunning for him.

It’s a fascinating look at a failed media that can no longer perform its assigned task in the American political landscape. Do take the time to read it if you can. It has changed how we search for information. I have long believed that in the new electronic age, students need to be taught how to look for information, how to judge the quality of the information, and enough history to understand why it is important to search carefully, to be informed, and why their vote is important and needs to be well informed. We’ve been watching the education establishment disintegrate before our eyes, and the evidence from college students that they need safe spaces where they can refuse to listen to ideas that might disagree with their own.

With journalism no longer a viable source for accurate news, we have turned to blogs, judged their information and veracity, and the trustworthiness of the provider. Others have turned to social media, and Twitter has assumed an outsized role as a potential clue to future trends, currency, reach, and yet it may not have that significance at all. Combine that with our ordinary human shortcomings — impatience, laziness, reluctance to read anything long— and I suspect we are becoming less and less informed. But then I was an English major and a glutton for reading. Do any of us currently have a hunger to know and understand in an age when sheer entertainment is so pleasurable and so readily available?

Do read the Imprimus article. It will give you a deep understanding of where the media is and why, and give you armor and a nudge towards knowing more and to hell with the “journalism” profession.

(To subscribe to Imprimus, just go to the Hillsdale College website and sign up. It’s free and always informative.)

 



Tucker Carlson Goes All In on DC by The Elephant's Child

I have enjoyed Tucker’s take on all sorts of subjects, but I had not heard him before in a speech, a fairly long and absolutely brilliant speech to the International Association of Fire Fighters. He explains Trump, the Republicans, the Democrats and the atmosphere, habits and situation in the nation’s capitol. It’s not pretty. And Tucker is very good.

This just seems to be a day when videos offer more than the written word. I guess nobody has written anything brilliant at all today. Some days are like that.

The Democrats’ role is to drum up enthusiasm for voting in what they consider their base. This election has really scared them. They are slowly realizing how much power they have lost and how empty their bench is, how old their leaders are, and how much it all went wrong when they were expecting another triumph. Did you see any mourning by Democrats at the shooting in Alexandria at a supposedly bi-partisan baseball game for charity? Did you see Twitter after Scalise was shot? Many felt that he deserved it because he was a racist and KKK enthusiast, I guess because he is from Louisiana? They all deserved to have been shot because they were Republicans. That is simply not sane. It’s not even American. It like something out of Stalin’s Gulag. And alarming.



Does Alphabet/Google Want Conservatives’ Business? Well, No, No They Don’t. by The Elephant's Child

Justin Danhof of the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Free Enterprise Project challenges executives of Alphabet – Google’s parent company – about the company’s tolerance of political diversity. Does a company that routinely and publicly supports liberal causes take into account its conservative employees, investors and consumers?

Well, no, no they don’t.The smartest men in the universe, who hire only the most intelligent people publicly flunk science, flunk diversity (Not interested in diversity of ideas) flunk public relations, and have no problem with insulting nearly half the people in the United States,and the majority of the Congress and the state houses, and are so oblivious that they don’t even know that their positions are hard left, and don’t realize that they are suggesting that the rest of the people might just prefer to use some other search engine.

DuckDuckGo doesn’t track every click of your mouse.  Brilliant presentation, fellas. They don’t want your business. Don’t give it to them.



Dr. Roy Spencer’s Keynote Address to Ninth International Conference on Climate Change by The Elephant's Child

Dr. Roy Spencer  is the climatologist who runs, with Dr.  John Christie, the only real measures of earthly temperatures by satellite from the University of Alabama at Huntsville. He gave the keynote address to the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas on July 9, 2014.

I’ve managed to make this sound dull—”keynote address”—but it isn’t at all. He’s funny! Non technical, and even though he shows a few graphs, you will come away duly enlightened and better informed, and you will have enjoyed it. If you don’t, let me know.

Dr. Spencer clearly explains the state of Climate Science, and why nothing much has changed in the past three years. He is a delightful speaker, funny, entertaining and will clear up more than a few misconceptions about the state of the climate.



Lightening the Burden of Excessive Regulation by The Elephant's Child

President Donald Trump has made a good beginning on the immense burden of excess regulation on the U.S. economy and on us personally. Experts believe the cost is close to $2 trillion a year on the economy. Eager progressives believed that the way to fix everything would be strong regulations from the wise elite in Washington D.C. Well, you and I know that the elite don’t seem to be exceptionally wise, and in many cases are definitely deficient.

There was a better way of regulating, according to Steve Forbes, back in (of all places) the Clinton administration. Regulators should state the goals, and let the industry figure out the best way of achieving them.

Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., recently asked the right question in a hearing on improving our infrastructure: “Can performance-based regulations be more effective than command-and-control regulations in achieving safety goals while imposing less of a burden on industry?”

The answer, of course, is yes and there is now a bill before Congress that would codify this common sense approach, The Revamping American Infrastructure Act of 2017. The proposed legislation would call on federal bureaucrats to “identify those regulations, guidance and policies that in current form establish prescriptive requirements for regulated entities; and are able to be replaced, consistent with Federal law, with outcome-based performance standards.”

Thanks to deregulation in 1980, the [freight railroad] industry morphed from an inefficient, loss-ridden system into the finest, most efficient in the world. Nonetheless, the industry is still weighed down unnecessarily by countless, archaic operational mandates. It is ready to deploy new technologies for inspections such as drones, trackside detection systems and sophisticated X-ray machines that would provide crucial information in real time. Yet the industry must abide by a rigid set of procedures established by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) that seems to think the world is still dominated by those legendary steam engines of yore.

Federal regulators wanted to address the problem of accidents caused by human error. To fix it, they wanted to dictate to the railroads the number of of persons  in a crew,  without any data that supported the notion that a second person in the cab would actually reduce the number of human-error accidents. (You remember the goofy regulation that all ingredients,with their calorie count in all pizzas, had to be included in the big sign back of the cash register in all pizza parlors.)

The EPA’s jihad against fossil fuels resulted in their so-called haze rule, supposedly to improve visibility. The rule would have forced the closure of several coal-fired power plants and killed many jobs, with no noticeable improvement in visibility.

Sensible removal of excessive government regulation should be a boon to the economy, and perhaps even reduce the number of government regulators. So far, so good. The Trump administration has made a good start.

 



President Trump Was Right to Withdraw from the Paris Climate Accords by The Elephant's Child

CXaeNM4UwAELrMU

The Climate narrative insists that the globe (the whole earth) is warming (not just regional warming), and the warming that has occurred sine 1950 is remarkable, frightening, unnatural and unprecedented. It is the people’s fault—human impact. We did it with our reluctance to shut down all pipelines and rely on gentle wind and soft, warm solar rays, instead of something that would actually power a vast economy.

In 2016 a search of the peer-reviewed scientific literature has found dozens of paleoclimate reconstructions that show that modern “global” warming hasn’t been global in scale at all, for there are many regions on Earth where the climate has been cooling for decades. And even if the warming was on a global scale—the evidence shows that the modern warming is not unusual or even much different than it has been in the past.

Today’s warm temperatures don’t even come close to the maximum temperatures achieved earlier in the Holocene, or as recently as the Medieval Warm Period, 1000 years ago, when there weren’t effluents from modern transportation, factories, dreaded fossil fuels. The warming in recent decades is not even unusual within the context of the last 80 years. The warmth in the 1930s and 1940s matched or exceeded the warmth of the late 20th and 21st centuries in many of the world’s regions. There was even a widely publicized period in the 1960s and 1970s when there was substantial cooling – 0.5º C in the Northern Hemisphere and -1.5º C in the Arctic. Back then they were calling it “Nuclear Winter” and the Club of Rome got all excited about it.

Scientists have kept on publishing their work, and it has been peer-reviewed. The thing is that ordinary people don’t dig into the evidence, and a great many ordinary people just accept what they have been told by Al Gore (who is not a scientist) and others without even trying to understand the reality themselves.

You surely would not be surprised to learn that not everyone’s motives are pure, and that the aim of the Global Warming Panic crowd is political and not scientific at all. The aim has been a vast redistribution of wealth from the rich nations to the poor nations, and the destruction of Capitalism as the engine of growth and wealth on the planet that has helped to raise the poor people of the world out of hunger and poverty. (They are still, in spite of all evidence, just sure that socialism will make everybody equal and get rid of all those nasty bankers.)

Here is a collection of 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers  published within the last year that undermine the “consensus” position that modern warming is unusual, global in extent, or that today’s slight warming is unusual or unprecedented. (There is, by the way no 97% consensus. That’s a talking point, not reality.)

Also, I just ran into a June 9 post from Climate Depot headlined “Unusually Thick Arctic ice pack traps boats, triggers rescue operation off Newfoundland” If you follow this link, there’s a dandy picture of boats trapped in heavy ice off La Scie, Newfoundland, and the rescue operation to save them.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, California’s endless winter still has 8 feet of snow on the ground in the central Sierra — rivaling the massive winter of 1982-83. Mammoth Mountain will still be open daily for skiers into August.

You might consider the possibility that President Trump knew what he was doing when he withdrew (to screams of agony from the Left) from the unratified Paris Climate Accords.




%d bloggers like this: