American Elephants


Are You Fed Up? Or Do You Really Want More Information? by The Elephant's Child

Are you completely fed up with the immigrant detention story? Or do you want more clarity? I’m fed up, but keep trying to be sure I understand and can think and write competently about the whole thing.

Daniel Boorstin ( the former Librarian of Congress) wrote a now classic among his many books called The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America, 1961. Steven Hayward called it to mind yesterday. I cannot find my copy, but it’s buried in one of my bookcases. Here’s Hayward:

“Boorstin defines a “pseudo-event” as not merely a fact or real event that happened, but a fact or event that is made into “news” of a certain kind by a deliberate and artificial process. You might think of Boorstin’s analysis as no more than the Deep Theory of Public Relations (or as the first analysis of what we today like to call “fake news”), and many of the examples in the book come from the corporate world. Here is some of his description of the dynamics of a “pseudo-event”—see how many aspects of this you can make out in the present controversy:”

1.  It is not spontaneous, but comes about because someone has planned, planted, or incited it. Typically it is not a train wreck or an earthquake, but an interview. [More on this point in a moment—SH.]

2. It is planted primarily (not always exclusively) for the immediate purpose of being reported or reproduced. Therefore, its occurrence is arranged for the convenience of the reporting or reproducing media. Its success is measured by how widely it is reported. . .

3. Its relation to the underlying reality of the situation is ambiguous. Its interest arises largely from the very ambiguity. . .  Without some of this ambiguity a pseudo-event cannot be very interesting.

Steven Hayward accompanied his article with the shocking photo of an armed federal agent pointing his gun at Elian Gonzalez. That was the Clinton administration.

• Here’s a dandy list of photographs of Obama’s Illegal Immigrant Detention Facilities that the media won’t show you. It’s pretty shocking too.

• From David Harsanyi at The Federalist: “Democrats Have Zero Tolerance For Illegal Immigration Solutions.”

• From American Greatness: “Delusion About Detentions: On Family Separation at the Border.”

• From Quillette: “Zero Tolerance at the Mexican Border.”   Which includes a  graph to show just how many people are locked up in the United States.

• From Daniel Greenfield: “Illegal Aliens Fatally Separate American Parents and Children.”   It’s not just Kate Steinle by a long shot. Way too many children have been ripped from their families by illegal aliens.

Advertisements


From the Center for Immigration Studies by The Elephant's Child

House Immigration Bills Would Produce Starkly Different Results in Green Card Numbers

By Jessica M/ Vaughan on June 20. 2018

The two competing immigration bills up for a vote in the House on Thursday offer significantly different amnesty provisions, and would have very different effects on future immigration flows. The so-called “compromise bill” crafted by House Speaker Paul Ryan would result in a net increase of 2.12 million more green cards through amnesty and chain migration over the next 15 years. In contrast, the bill crafted by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (HR 4760) would result in a net decrease in green cards of 1.23 million over the next 15 years because it offers a much smaller amnesty and makes prompt, deep cuts to chain migration categories.

Here are the details behind the calculations: The Ryan bill offers amnesty and a path to citizenship for an estimated 2.2 million direct beneficiaries. This includes an estimated 1.9 million aliens believed to be potentially eligible for the proposed amnesty, which has the same basic qualifying criteria as President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program (arrived in the United States before 2007 while under age 16, continuous presence for at least five years, and present illegally in June, 2012). This population includes those who could have but did not apply for DACA or who were too young to apply.

Do read the whole thing. They will be voting today. If you don’t like what they are doing, you can go to whitehouse.gov and leave a message for President Trump asking him to veto.



Viral Photograph — Fake News, Fake Pictures by The Elephant's Child

Did you see this image today on CNN emphasizing the “crying child ‘ripped’ from the arms of his mother.” It went viral. It’s a a picture designed to catch at the heartstrings, and apparently, it did.

Unfortunately, as in much of the fake news department, all is not as it seems. As Zero Hedge reported: the picture is being completely taken out of context—and does not show what it is purported to show.

Most of those sharing it claim the image depicts a boy detained by ICE under the new Trump administration policy of referring all people who cross the border illegally for criminal prosecution.

Among them was journalist and filmmaker Jose Antonio Vargas who posted the photo last week on Twitter, saying “this is what happens when a government believes people are ‘illegal.” Kids in cages. ‘favorited’ 38,000 times (and 10,000 more on Facebook)…but it’s a lie.

As CNN is forced to admit, the picture was actually taken during a June 10 protest against White House immigration policies at Dallas City Hall, as first reported by fact-checking site Snopes.

Here’s the whole piece from Zero Hedge, with “the rest of the story.” And the rest of the pictures too, to show clearly how it was meant to deceive. (In the larger photo below, you can see the little kid’s blue shirt and pants at the bottom far right of the cage)



If You Have Been Wondering Why? Here’s the Answer! by The Elephant's Child

The general era of hysteria, one crisis after another that Democrats erupt over, we have usually attributed to “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” But I ran across this video from November of last year of Victor Davis Hanson chatting with Ginny Thomas, and Dr. Hanson explains it all perfectly. So if you are wondering about all the weeping and gnarling of knuckles over “poor innocent children ‘ripped’ from the arms of their mothers” here’s why: Look closely at the county map of the election, and listen to the whole explanation.



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.

 



“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.



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.




%d bloggers like this: