American Elephants


Free Speech vs. Preferred Pronouns by The Elephant's Child

Well said. Attempting to make what is classified as a mental disorder called gender dysphoria into a casual choice is confusing a lot of parents, who don’t know where to turn. The Left carries things too far.

They hate President Trump, fear his accomplishments, and hope to defeat him with a web of identity politics. With luck they can make those confused parents be afraid of Trump, or find him too mean to win reelection in 2020. The current biggest evil is wrong-think, or offending fearful snowflakes. We had someone, local, I think, who ‘identified’ as a cat, domestic, I believe.  Had whiskers implanted. Dunno what happened.

I fail to understand why those who are confronted with an idea that they do not understand, fail to study up. Researching ideas is why we have computers. But we have somewhere around 24 Democrat presidential candidates spouting ideas that sound good, they think, but have never investigated at all. If they cannot take the time to study up, and know why they are supporting the policies they claim to favor, they should not be wasting our time. I call it doing your homework.



Jordan Peterson Talks About Free Speech in Canada by The Elephant's Child

Here’s another approach to the strange twist our modern societies have taken. Canada’s laws are a little different than our Constitution, and not as old. Very interesting., and very complicated.



Tucker Carlson on Free Speech and How the Left Uses Tragedy For Their Own Ends by The Elephant's Child

Tucker Carlson tackles today’s free speech problem. The problem is that the Left wants to decide what is and is not free speech, and eliminate the speech they don’t like. Which throws the whole idea of real free speech out the window. They are using tragedy to fuel their own ends. There was a mass shooting at a synagogue in Philadelphia. The Left immediately  twisted it so it is the fault of President Trump because they don’t like President Trump. They are offended when he wants to pay his respects at the synagogue, apparently unaware that his son-in-law, daughter, and his grandchildren are members of the Jewish faith. Leftists have said that Trump’s moving the embassy to Jerusalem “doesn’t let him off the hook for this shooting.” That  is absurd.

The man who committed the shooting was an anti-Semite who hated Trump, and is solely responsible, and has been charged and will pay for the crime. The deranged man who shot Steve Scalise at the Congressional Softball Game was a Bernie Sanders supporter. Bernie Sanders had no responsibility for his act. The man who sent pipe bombs to a number of Democrats was solely responsible for his actions.

The woman portrayed in this video, blaming President Trump’s unwelcoming comments on the Honduran Caravan, was incorrect on everything she said. The “Caravan” are not “refugees”. “There is a specific legal definition of a “refugee.” Immigration Lawyers often coach their clients in what to say to get admitted under the refugee laws. Hollywood types have adopted the illegal alien saying “No human being is illegal.” which is a nonsense phrase. We are a country with immigration laws. Those who break the law by trying to enter the country without permission, are by definition criminals. Those who owe their citizenship to another country are by definition, aliens. The Left’s ideas of such subjects are based on ‘feelings’, not on law, and for the Left, ‘feelings’ trump law every time. Unfortunately, you cannot run a government on ‘feelings’.

You cannot have a government nor a country that censors speech, where those in charge decide what may or may not be said. The technology people who dreamed up the ideas and algorithms of social media, with their backgrounds in math and electronics and engineering assumed that people would welcome the opportunity to share their lives with their friends and relatives online. They missed the understanding of human nature that you get from wide reading in history and literature. They expected to learn from what their customers did and said on the internet enough to be able to tell advertisers what they might be interested in. Advertisers jumped at the chance, and the technology people got very rich indeed.

We are seeing something quite new in the reaction to Donald Trump’s election, and it has a lot to do with social media. I would love to see some analysis of how things seem to be “catching”, and get repeated endlessly. The technology people like to feature celebrities, who people follow because they think they know them, because they have seen them on TV.

I thought Kathy Griffin’s severed head trick so disgusting that it should have ended not only her career, but anything in that line. Instead  it started some sort of “can you top this” contest, in which celebrities try to outdo one another in Trumpian insult. The trouble with being a celebrity is that you have to stay in the public eye,  or people might start thinking you are a has-been.

We are gradually learning that social media is damaging for kids. The social media people are gradually learning about the monster they have created, and don’t know how to fix it other than banning people from its use. Which places them in control of what is acceptable speech and what is unacceptable, which is a role that they are completely unqualified to fill.

They talk about “hate speech” which has no real definition, and depend on sources like the Southern Poverty Law Center or Snopes to tell them what is hate and what is false without any recognition that half the people in the country, at least, find that dependence laughable.

There has been an enormous decline in the civility of language. The comments on many popular websites are filled with profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, and scatology that used to be unacceptable, not just in polite society, but in public anywhere. But that speech was not limited by ‘elites’ who have appointed themselves as the arbiters, but by a general recognition that you just didn’t talk that way in public, because it wasn’t nice. That time seems very distant.



The Right-Wing Strikes Back Joyfully by The Elephant's Child
August 11, 2017, 8:10 pm
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Free Speech, Freedom, Politics | Tags: , ,


Liberal protesters set up a 30-foot tall inflatable chicken on the mall in front of the White House. Must have cost a bundle to create this balloon. Trump supporters joyfully appropriated the image for their own memes. Don’t neglect to click on the links.

The conservative folks on the right side of the political spectrum are getting a little fed up with the social justice warriors out there. Tired of competitive victimhood. There are some serious problems in the world, and the left just doesn’t want to discuss them, let alone deal with them.

North Korea is threatening the United States with nuclear weapons. China is building artificial islands in the South China Sea for military installations. ISIS just nearly blew up an airliner heading into Australia. Venezuela is nearing a revolution and its people are starving. More terrorist attacks throughout Europe and boatloads of migrants are streaming into Italy and Spain—those who don’t drown in the attempt. So it’s kind of nice to see the Right gently pointing out the stupidity, and the attempts to destroy free speech.

Right-wing street artist Sabo posted this anti-Google advertisement outside the Google offices in Los Angeles following the firing of former Google engineer James Damore.

On January 12, 2017, the New York Times editorial board claimed that “the grim truth is that concealed-carry permit holders are rarely involved in stopping crime.” That same day a concealed carry permit holder in Arizona used his gun to save the life of a state trooper who was under attack on I-10.Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck’s research shows that the minimum number of defensive gun uses are around 760,000 annually.

Brand new Senator Kamala Harris is calling for more gun control, interestingly enough at the same time that ISIS is giving up on guns and telling their adherents to attack with knives—which has hugely increased stabbing attacks in London and in Europe, and to drive vehicles into crowds to kill the most people possible. Nuclear Weapon Protesters are calling for the “Total Abolition of Weapons”,  but the knives used in stabbing attacks seem to be ordinary kitchen knives for the most part.

Denmark’s second largest city is attempting to tackle terrorism by offering jihadists “empathy” in a programme dubbed “hug a terrorist”.

Whilst Danes who have fought against Islamic State have been threatened with jail on their return from Syria, terrorists are being offered enormous privileges, including apartments, education, and jobs, to encourage them to rejoin society.

Proponents of the police-run scheme in Aarhus say that jihadists are “isolated” and struggling to integrate, and claim that offering them kindness and forgiveness will deter them from their murderous ideology.

Tackling terrorism by assuming that jihadists are victims of a cruel world does seem to be missing the point, but when you look at things seriously the absurdity becomes fairly clear. California wants to secede  from the union, apparently with no historical knowledge of the South’s attempt to secede and the ensuing disastrous bloody war.

Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, had no idea what he was opening up by firing a Google engineer for offering a perfectly reasonable criticism of Google’s social justice policies. Didn’t take long for Amazon to start carrying the tee shirt.



A Small Lesson in American Exceptionalism. by The Elephant's Child

2d1f368305fccf3ce5a208289b8c1e78
In Holland, a 44-year-old man  has been sentenced to 30 days in jail for intentionally insulting King Willem-Alexander, according to a court ruling. The man, from the city of Kampen, had posted a message on his Facebook page in April, 2015 calling the king a murderer, rapist, “oppressor” and thief.

“Hereby the defendant damaged the dignity of the King,” wrote judge Sylvia Taalman in her decision. “This behaviour is not acceptable in our society.”

Many Dutch consider the law “Insulting the Majesty” to be an antiquated relic that should be scrapped, but it has never featured high on the country’s political agenda.

The crime carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of 20,000 euros.

The royal family is generally popular in the Netherlands. Willem-Alexander ascended to the throne in 2013 when his mother Queen Beatrix abdicated. She had reigned for 33 years. The King is not yet as highly regarded as his mother.

It seems worthwhile reminding Americans that free speech isn’t free everywhere, and that our Constitutional rights are worth fighting for. Democrats, naturally, oppose any free speech that criticizes them, or disagrees with their ideas—which are, of course, right, and should be recognized as correct.

Just think how many people would be in prison here, if our comments on social media were monitored for “offensiveness.”esson in



Quotation of the Day: How Times Have Changed! by The Elephant's Child

trumanpicBOnce a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.

–Harry S. Truman, Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, 8 August 1950
(h/t: The Global Warming Policy Forum)



Schooling the FDA On The Meaning of the First Amendment by The Elephant's Child

_78425952_517716225I’m afraid I’m becoming something of a crank, grumbling constantly about the depredations of bureaucracy. The Food and Drug Administration has believed its powers so encompassing that it can even prohibit drug companies from making true statements about their products unless they are approved by the FDA.

A federal judge has just called this political control a violation of the First Amendment. Once the FDA has approved a new drug for FDA specified uses, physicians often repurpose them in other doses, or for other diseases, or for entirely different patient populations. A drug designed for breast cancer might prove effective against tumors in other parts of the body, or a medicine for adults may prove effective for pediatric care. About one of every five U.S. Prescriptions is for non-FDA approved uses.

In a small miracle, these off-label experiments are legal, and they drive innovation. The artificial conditions that the FDA demands for clinical trials are increasingly divorced from how medicine is practiced, and modern care advances far faster than the FDA’s regulatory molasses. Off-label use is vital for complex conditions like cancer and psychiatric disorders that require trial and error for individual patients, who can’t wait years for the FDA’s blessing.

But the FDA and Justice Department are targeting off-label prescriptions as a threat to their hegemony. Their goal is to force drug makers and physicians to seek FDA approval for every new real-world use, as if it were an entirely new drug. Until recently, drug makers were banned from making off-label claims backed by solid evidence or even from distributing peer-reviewed journal articles.

Prosecutors have also become increasingly aggressive. In 2012 GlaxoSmithKline paid $1 billion for encouraging doctors to use Paxil to treat depression in patients under 18, which research shows helps although the FDA has not endorsed this conclusion. The FDA construes some forms of off-label promotion as crimes, and people are serving jail time.

The nature of a bureaucracy is to grow, prosper, be better rewarded monetarily and extend its reach. Was there ever a bureaucracy that thought that much that they did was unnecessary, and they should probably downsize for the benefit of the taxpayers? I rest my case.

Judge Paul Engelmayer explained to the FDA that if they believed that a different use of a drug gravely undermined the drug approval process, it should have sought review of that decision, not tried to liken distributing information to an assault on their drug-approval authority, and tried to compare it to illegal speech such as blackmail or insider trading. Free speech wins one!

 




%d bloggers like this: