Archive for the ‘Tea Party’ Category

Perennial plant of the year has long lasting blooms, attracts pollinators – Bend Bulletin

February is a good month to dedicate a small spiral note pad, one that fits in your purse or your pocket, to start a plant shopping list. You know my favorite saying: good memory but short.

The Perennial Plant Association announced the 2021 Perennial Plant of the Year. It is calamintha nepeta subsp. nepeta, or the common name of calamint, lesser calamint.

Calamint has two important qualities that appeal to gardeners: bees and other pollinators work the long-lasting bloom period, plus the aromatic foliage is deer-resistant. One fact sheet described the foliage as being mint-scented, oregano-like foliage.

Calamint is rated as hardy. It is probably less well-known in our area due to its plant hardiness rating of Zone 5. Preference in plant selection for Central Oregon is usually for up to a Zone 4.

The blooms differ from the blue tones of the more common walkers low catmint.

Calamint blooms with plumes of tiny, tubular lilac to white flowers. The perennial needs full sun and soil that has good drainage. The low mounding or bushy habit is ideal for the front of a border or in rock gardens according to the Perennial Plant Association.

The National Garden Bureau has declared 2021 to be The Year of the Monarda. Monarda has a history of being used as a medicinal herb.

The Oswego Indian tribe used the plant to make an herbal tea. They taught American settlers how to make it, which came in handy following the Boston Tea Party in 1773. The settlers revolted against the British tax on tea so the settlers thumbed their noses at the tax and drank monarda tea instead.

The native plant was named for Nicholas Monardes, a physician from Seville. Monardes conducted trade between Seville and American, part of which included receiving medicinal plants. Monardes wrote about his findings in the publication Joyfull Newse out of the Newe found World in 1577. The plant was thought to soothe stings and bites from various insects resulting in the common name of bee balm.

Monarda is cold hardy in plant hardiness Zones 3 to 9, plant in full sun with moderate moisture. Monarda is considered a pollinator magnet. Each one of the flower heads is a cluster of long tubular, nectar-filled blooms. The shape of the bloom makes it easy for butterflies and hummingbirds to take a drink. Magenta or red varieties draw in the most pollinators to the garden. Bloom time is from mid-summer to fall.

Monarda is a member of the mint family but it wont take over the garden. The foliage is minty scented and unappealing to deer and rabbits. Some monarda varieties are more susceptible to powdery mildew than others. Jacob Cline, also spelled Kline, variety shows excellent resistance to mildew. Wide spacing between plants is advised to promote good air circulation to prevent powdery mildew.

Most monarda are listed as a growth height of 3 to 4 feet tall and 2 to 3 feet wide. The height and width of this size make them valuable as the back of a garden bed. Newer cultivars grow 8 to 12 inches tall and 12 to 24 inches wide. Make sure when you are shopping you are aware of the mature size of the variety.

Companion plants could include oxeye daisy, blanket flower and the native white yarrow.

If you are a trendsetter, you will be interested in the latest announcement from Pantone for the 2021 Colors of the Year.

The colors are Pantone 17-5104 Ultimate Gray plus Pantone 13-0647 Illuminating (a vivid yellow). The color combination is intended to send the message of strength and hopefulness that is both enduring and uplifting.

The bright yellow flower selections would be easy to choose. The gray plant pallet for us would be more limiting. Dusty Miller, artemesia varieties and Tanacetum come to mind.

Pantones Color of the Year has influenced product development in multiple industries from home furnishings, fashion and landscaping.

Keep your notepad handy, we have lots to talk about in the coming months.

Read the rest here:
Perennial plant of the year has long lasting blooms, attracts pollinators - Bend Bulletin

Fish: Rescue us from QAnon ‘Congressteers’ and their space laser conspiracies – Brattleboro Reformer

Well, weve arrived! This is the year that we look back fondly on the likes of George W. Bush, Michelle Bachman and the sense and sensibility of Sarah Palin. 2021 will prove itself to be that year when we long for days Michelle Bachman would pop off and we could just ignore her. I personally long for the days when Sarah Palin couldnt answer the simple question about what she read. And of course, Mission Accomplished, nuff said. As this year presses on, well look back at these simpler times and well miss and long for them. Because now, we have Space Lasers! Jewish Liberal Space Lasers setting California on fire. That was actually said out loud by a highly elected official!

When will it stop? How will it stop? Who will stop it? Because it needs to stop! Some rational people need to lead the charge and crush this line of speak. It cannot be allowed to present any faction of our government. Yet it now has a place on the Education Committee. Lets not even start to mention the other crazies that have entered into our political realm that represent what most dont want represented. Its a ground swell, those little wins I keep talking about, where one by one idiots get installed into higher positions of influence. It started with the Tea Party, and now we have headlines that read QAnon goes to Congress.

Okay lets reverse the lens on this for a moment to see how it exactly happened. Lets dial it back to 2015-2016. There were two clear cut front runners for the Democratic nomination. All the polling showed that Bernie was the peoples choice, leading in head-to-head polls with Trump by double digits Bernie by 14 points, Hillary by 9 points (just one of the poll samplings). So how did Hillary get elevated to be the Democratic nominee? Shenanigans and games played out by the Democratic National Committee. Those games opened the flood gates for a lot to go wrong, and it did. The Trump and Vlad contingent rose to power. So, we watched passively while this happened until it was far too late to do anything truly actionable about it. Now, were doing it again. Only the QAnon Congressteers (think Mouseketeers, only operating with 20 percent of the brain function and more heavily armed) are chasing victims of school shootings down the street proclaiming shes packing (Marjorie Taylor Greene). Say whatever you want about Hillary and what happened, but both you and I know that would never happen on her watch.

Fast forward to what we have now in the likes of Taylor Greene, which even has the most calculating GOPer Mitch McConnell calling her a cancer. So, what do you do? Between Lucy Laser Beam and Lauren Boebert we can add an asterisk to the hashtag The Future is Female. Ive only covered the crazy female contingent; I dont have enough words for the likes of Matt Gaetz, who seems to have a little bit of support these days from the aforementioned crazy twins and Josh Hawley, who wasnt even on the job yet when he goose-stepped into the chemically unbalanced pool. So, thats four fairly new to brand new Senatorial and Congressional leaders who can slowly bend the narrative. Now, all of a sudden Ted Cruz (who was always an oily snake) seems to have had his battery changed and has bought into the conspiracy that his dad did shoot Kennedy, all while the puppeteer Mitch McConnell pulls the strings guiding the weak and dumb to their demise. Then the rest of the folks with an R in front of their names follow suit, and now you have National Nightmare 2.0.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again, the cream does not rise to the top in this country. Over and over again weve seen it. From The Rent is too Damn High Party to whatever is going on right now! Somewhere we need to pull the plug because even though Jimmy McMillan (Rent Party) didnt win, he got plenty of attention, and attention creates traction. Now, Boebert, Taylor Greene, Gaetz and Hawley all have a national platform to continue to feed lies to the American people and walk them right off a cliff. Its time to rise up; dont knit a hat this time, grab a hammer!

Peter Fish Case is a man with an opinion. He offers up a weekly podcast discussion that can be heard at http://www.theearspoon.com. Questions, compliments and complaints can be sent to him at fish@theearspoon.com. The opinions expressed by columnists do not necessarily reflect the views of the Brattleboro Reformer.

Read more:
Fish: Rescue us from QAnon 'Congressteers' and their space laser conspiracies - Brattleboro Reformer

COVID-19 relief bill brings Biden face to face with potential limitations of ability to work across the aisle – KTLA

He was an arm-draping pol as a senator. He hung out in the Senate cloakroom chatting up legislators as vice president. He pitched himself during the presidential campaign as someone who could get people working together and lower the temperature in a Washington overheated by Donald Trump.

Now, after his first full week as president, Joe Biden is coming face to face with the potential limitations of his ability to work across the aisle as he pushes for a $1.9 trillioncoronavirus relief billthat is the first big test of his tenure.

Republicans are balking at the price tag and Democrats are sending signals that theyre willing to push the bill through without GOP help as Bidens campaign pitch to be a deal-maker appears to be giving way to the reality of a Senate that does not resemble the one he once inhabited.

In a nod to reality, Biden told reporters on Friday: I support passing COVID relief with support from Republicans if we can get it. But the COVID relief has to pass no ifs, ands or buts.

The White House has not given up hope of landing some GOP support for the package, and Bidens call list bears that out. But some of Bidens courtship is also directed at members of his own party to make sure a deal gets done.

He has called Sen. Susan Collins of Maine several times since his inauguration, and the moderate Republican says she has a closer relationship with Biden than she did with Trump.

Biden has made repeated calls to senators in his own party, including two centrists Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona who have expressed some concerns about the package, according to three people familiar with the calls who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the private conversations.

A retail politician who never misses a chance for small talk or schmooze, Biden has been penned in somewhat by the pandemic, which limits the face-to-face interactions on which he thrives. But theres still his peerless phone book, built over four decades of dealing with senators on both sides of the political divide.

When he decides to make one of those calls, he doesnt really require a call sheet, a sheet that tells him exactly what to say to a member of Congress and how to outline the bill, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in an interview on MSNBC. He knows. Hes known a lot of these people for decades.

Claire McCaskill, a former Democratic senator from Missouri, says Biden is workman-like in terms of his outreach and it was not unusual for me to run into Joe Biden in the Senate cloakroom when he was vice president to Barack Obama.

He burned up the phone lines, McCaskill said. Obama was terrible at that part of the job, while Biden was good at it, to both parties.

Having spent 36 years in the Senate and eight as vice president, Biden made bipartisan outreach a central promise, even when many in his party argued that Republicans no longer were interested in working across the aisle.

Bidens most notable deal-making success came in the Obama-era fiscal showdowns during the rise of the tea party Republicans. The landmark agreements locked in tax and spending cuts for a decade and soured some progressive Democrats on Bidens brand of compromise.

As vice president, Biden was a trusted emissary to Capitol Hill for Obama, who had served just four years in the Senate.

Biden arrived as a presence in the halls of Congress at several critical junctures. He helped cut a 2010 deal to prevent the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts, then negotiated on the landmark Budget Control Act of 2011 that slashed spending and walked the country back from the 2012 fiscal cliff of looming tax increases and budget reductions.

Bidens chief virtue as a negotiator is the understanding that Look, you have politics on your side, I have politics on my side, we both have to live within our political constraints, said Rohit Kumar, former deputy chief of staff to Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. His pitch: I know there are certain things you cant do and I am not going to make them deal breakers. We have to get a deal I can sell, a deal you can sell.

As senator, Biden also prized his relationships with colleagues, even though his nightly commute home to Delaware cut into his ability to socialize with other lawmakers.

Well, I dont want to ruin him, but he did work with us on occasion, said former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss.

Lott said Biden was not someone he recalls as often being in the room when Senate leadership was trying to work out a deal on major bills. But Lott pointed to two major instances when he was: the 1994 crime bill and the 2002 Iraq War resolution, a pair of measures for which Biden has since expressed regret.

Still, Lott said Bidens relationship with McConnell was real and could pay dividends again.

They worked out an agreement that basically is what theyve been working off ever since, Lott said. Somebody in the media referred to Biden then as the McConnell whisperer.

Still, the Senate has changed markedly since Biden first joined decades ago, with different skills now in currency as senators gain status on social media, raise money beyond their home states and spend less time socializing with one another in Washington.

Bidens style of old-school, one-on-one cajoling may be less persuasive for senators from either party who cultivate their own brands and dont necessarily rely on proximity to presidential power to raise their profiles.

And, of course, policy matters. The parties are more split than ever over the legislative remedies for the nation, a partisan divide that political scientists see as on par with the rifts of the Civil War era.

Biden aides worry that Republicans will continue to balk no matter how many personal phone calls they get from the president or post-pandemic invitations they receive to high-profile events at the White House.

Their boss may be the last one to buy in to that.

Theres people who say you cant work with the other side, Biden said a year ago. And if thats the case, prepare your children for a totally different U.S., a totally different world. I dont believe it.

More here:
COVID-19 relief bill brings Biden face to face with potential limitations of ability to work across the aisle - KTLA

The Dumb Obama-Era Law That Might Force Democrats to Slash Medicare if They Add to the Deficit, but Probably Wont, Explained – Slate

At the moment, Senate Democrats seem ready to push ahead with a rather large coronavirus relief bill, using procedural tactics that will allow them to pass it on a party-line vote instead of haggling endlessly with Republican moderates who would prefer a much more modest package. But already, some Washington budget wonks are warning that this hard-nosed approach could lead to unintended consequences (cue lightning, blood-curdling screams, and a synthy, pulse-pounding John Carpenter soundtrack).

What sorts of accidental repercussions, you ask? If the Democrats aid bill adds to the deficit, it could theoretically trigger massive, automatic spending cuts to popular programs like Medicare and farm subsidies under an obscure law known as the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010. The cuts would be huge, said Paul Van de Water, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, recently told NBC. Its a critical issue, which, at some point, is going to have to be dealt with.

I personally doubt any of this will come to pass, since there are a couple of obvious ways that Democrats could scoot around these cuts. But some of are more straightforward than others. And since well probably have to talk about this dumb law nowand I cannot overemphasize how dumb it truly isheres what you need to know.

Why the heck is there a law that automatically cuts Medicare if we arent careful about the deficit?

I want to transport you back to a time in American politics that feels unrecognizably alien to those of us living in 2021an era known as the early Obama administration. This was a moment when Democrats desperately wanted to paint themselves as the true party of fiscal responsibility. They had spent years hammering George W. Bush for ballooning the national debt by cutting taxes while launching a pair of wars. Many Democratic House members belonged to the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, which was genuinely concerned about the countrys red ink. Whats more, the president himself had promised to bring some budgetary responsibility to Washington while campaigning for the White House.

The financial crisis and economic collapse complicated those plans, but didnt halt them entirely. The president passed an unprecedentedly large stimulus bill that triggered all sorts of nasty backlash from deficit fanatics (Rush Limbaugh, who actually mattered back then, liked to call it the Porkulus). The Tea Party, which was nominally (I repeat, nominally) a grassroots small-government movement focused on cutting government spending, started gaining momentum and dominating headlines.

And so, in June of 2009, even as the economy continued to groan under the rubble of the Great Recession, President Obama decided to get ahead of deficit concerns and called on Congress to restore what was known as Statutory PAYGO. This mechanism for fiscal restraint had been created in 1990, but lapsed in 2002. Advocates believed that reviving it would force Washington to pay for big new tax cuts or spending proposals in the future. Later, the Blue Dogs threatened to vote against hiking the federal debt limit unless PAYGO was enacted. By February, it was law. Now, Congress will have to pay for what it spends, just like everybody else, Obama said during a web address, thus perpetuating the classic, false analogy between a sovereign government with the power to print money and a financially constrained household.

Im confused. I thought I read somewhere that PAYGO was just a rule Congress made for itself. Is this different?

Youre right to be confused. The House and Senate set their own, separate PAYGO rules, which are also controversial, but include some big exceptions and can be pretty easily waived. Statutory PAYGO is different. Its a law were stuck with for now.

You sound unhappy about that.

I am. Its dumb. Its all very deeply dumb.

OK. But before you go on a rant about how much you hate this thing, how does it actually work?

The basic idea is that whenever Congress passes legislation that either increases or decreases the deficit, the money gets added to a PAYGO scorecard. At the end of each year, the White House Office of Management and Budget is required to tally up the net total. If the deficit rose, it must then impose across-the-board spending cuts within 14 days, known as a sequester, to balance out the new red ink.

In theory, Congress can exempt spending from the scorecard by designating it as emergency legislation. But that requires 60 votes in the Senate. Since Democrats are most likely planning to pass their COVID relief bill through the budget reconciliation process, which essentially requires a bare majority, thats not an option.

What programs could be cut?

The biggest program on the chopping block, which headline writers tend to focus on for obvious reasons, is Medicare. But its important to read the fine print there: The PAYGO sequestration can reduce the programs spending by no more than 4 percent, and the cuts only affect payments to doctors; patient benefits would remain the same. Plenty of hospitals and physician groups would go ballistic if the axe actually fell, but in the grand scheme of things, it probably wouldnt lead to a lot of human suffering or dysfunction.

Another bit of good news: Most of the governments crucial safety-net programs for the elderly and poor are actually exempt from the cuts. Social Security, Medicaid, the Childrens Health Insurance Program, food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Supplemental Security Incomenone of those get touched, mercifully.

All of that said, lots of important budget items would be subject to devastating cuts. Farm support programs; U.S. Customs and Border Patrol; the risk-adjustment payments to insurers that help keep Obamacares insurance exchanges stabilized; the Social Services Block Grant Program, and more would all be in danger.

How big would the cuts be?

Quite big! Other than Medicare, these programs would have to be completely eliminated. Just zapped out of existence, at least for the time being.

Heres some basic arithmetic. If Democrats jack up the deficit with their coronavirus bill, the White House will have to spread the money over a five-year and 10-year scorecard, then calculate the size of the sequester based on whichever is larger come January. So, lets assume Biden signs a $1.9 trillion aid package, and the government spends most of the money immediately. That would average out to $380 billion per year allocated over a half-decade period. Thats how much wed have to slash from the annual budget when it came time to PAYGO the piper in January of 2022.

The problem? If you took 4 percent of Medicare spending and combined it with all of the other programs covered by the sequester, they only added up to about $92 billion in 2018, which was around the last time anybody was kind of worried about this issue. Today, Ive been told the total would probably be somewhere in the $100 billion to $110 billion range. Thats obviously a lot less than $380 billion, which means the Biden administration would be obligated to zero out all the programs fully subject to sequestration.

Which is absurd. We would just, like, no longer have a farm subsidy program or border agents (I guess the customs line at airports would move a lot quicker?). Obamacare would once again be in trouble; so would the student loan program, since the White House would be required to increase origination fees on borrowers. Itd just lead to a bizarre grab bag of cuts thatd leave certain crucial functions of our government in chaos. I honestly laughed the first time someone explained it to me, because the whole thing sounded so preposterous.

Thats nuts. Why have I never heard about this before?

Because sequestration has never actually happened under Statutory PAYGO. Every time it has come up, Congress has just decided to waive the cuts, because doing anything else would make everybody extremely unhappy. (The Obama administration did have to deal with budget sequestration back in 2013 after the deficit reduction supercommittee flopped, but that was due to a different law and landed on a different pot of spending; Washington just really likes the word sequester.). Back in 2017, for instance, there was a lot of chatter that the Republican tax cuts would force automatic spending reductions; instead, Congress just averted the issue by quietly inserting a waiver into some end-of-the-year spending legislation. When Democrats and Republicans passed their big coronavirus relief bills in 2020, they also just waived the PAYGO requirements, for obvious reasons.

Of course, now that Democrats are in office, people are concerned that Republicans might choose not to cooperate.

Are you worried?

Not especially.

How come?

Mostly for two reasons. First, my guess is that in the end, Republicans will actually agree to stop the sequester. Democrats will probably try to attach a waiver to some sort of must-pass, year-end spending bill like defense appropriations or government funding, and if Republicans want to filibuster it, theyll be forced to either defund the military or shut down the government. What are they going to say? We sold out the troops and closed the national parks in order to force Democrats to cut Medicare and blow up the farm subsidy program? Their voters are older, rural Americans. That doesnt seem like itd end well.

Second, even if Democrats somehow fail to make Republicans pass a waiver, they might still have a another out. Its a stupid, silly, groan-inducing outa legislative Rube Goldberg device jerry-rigged into a perpetual motion machine. But it could work, at least temporarily. Basically, if we get to next January and Congress is facing sequestration, they could pass another party-line reconciliation bill adding back all the funding theyd be required to cut. That spending would end up on the next PAYGO scorecard, so theyd have to do the same trick the next year, and the year after that, and the year after that, on into infinity until everyone got exhausted by the routine and agreed on a permanent solution.

Yeah, that sounds dumb.

Indeed. All of this would be a lot simpler and less stressful if Democrats just nuked the filibuster so they could just repeal this silly law and stop having to worry about it. Instead, were doomed to watch them shoot these weird legislative bank shots, like theyre in a game of HORSE. (From Joe Manchins office, off the Senate parliamentarians desk, onto the backboard, and into the net, money for the unemployed!) Maybe, one day, theyll get sick of this preposterous game.

Readers like you make our work possible. Help us continue to provide the reporting, commentary, and criticism you wont find anywhere else.

Read the original post:
The Dumb Obama-Era Law That Might Force Democrats to Slash Medicare if They Add to the Deficit, but Probably Wont, Explained - Slate

11 Beloved Inventions That Were Almost Canceled – Entrepreneur

February2, 202113 min read

Many of the staples we now take for granted almost fell victim to early cancel culture. But were those early fears of evil, immorality, or danger based in reality? Or were our predecessors simply overreacting?

The podcast Build For Tomorrow explores why people freak out when exposed to new things, from refrigerators to teddy bears. Read on to see how todays daily must-haves once generated angst and angry letters and to think about what were overreacting to today.

(Naturally, it all starts with coffee.)

Image Credit: Hulton Archive | Getty Images

Coffee brewed centuries of widespread suspicion. In 1511, it was banned in Mecca for fostering radical thinking. A century later, Venetian clergy saw something more sinister and condemned the bitter invention of Satan. When asked to weigh in, Pope Clement VIII surprisingly enjoyed it so much he granted papal approval, even declaring, this devils drink is so delicious we should cheat the devil by baptizing it, opening the door for todays Italian coffee culture.

Anyone caught caffeinating in the 17th-century Ottoman Empire faced dire consequences: second-time violators were to be sewn into a bag and thrown into the waters of the Bosporus.

Meanwhile, coffee gradually replaced wine and beer as the breakfast drink of choice as drinkers realized it was a more energizing way to start the day. But when the beer industry complained in 1777, Frederick the Great of Prussia ordered his subjects to ditch the coffee and resume drinking their breakfast beer.

At the same time, though, London coffee houses became popular with artists and merchants. The Boston Tea Party solidified Americas allegiance to the bitter brew. As the coffee trade flourished, Thomas Jefferson proclaimed coffee as the favorite drink of the civilized world, and we never looked back.

Image Credit: Buyenlarge | Getty Images

Big business tried to ice the modern refrigerator, calling it unnatural and unhealthy. After all, the 1800s-era ice industry employed 90,000 people and was worth $660M (in 2010 dollars). Ice was second only to cotton as Americas most valuable export.

Thats why door-to-door ice delivery men of the early 20th century mounted a fierce campaign to freeze out the technology and protect their livelihoods. They did have a legitimate beef: the earliest electric refrigerators occasionally leaked toxic methyl chloride. Plus, the first modern refrigerator debuted in 1927 at a whopping $520, while a brand-new Model T cost only $360!

But the ice industry just couldnt compete with the dripless convenience especially when Freon soon made the appliances cheaper and safer. New Deal programs that brought electricity to rural America further froze out the icemen. By 1940, 44% of homes had a fridge. By 1950, they were in 90% of urban homes.

Since then, the icemen no longer cometh, and our relationship with food has completely transformed.

Image Credit: Topical Press Agency | Getty Images

Is your sunny afternoon bicycle ride a sign of fitness, leisure or something far darker?

The public worried about the mental fitness of early velocipede riders. By 1894, the New York Times reported that increasing lunacy in England points directly to bicycle riders there is not the slightest doubt that bicycle riding leads to weakness of mind, general lunacy, and homicidal mania.

Wheelwomen were warned that this somewhat violent form of recreation left its unmistakable traces upon the delicate feminine frame, including an enlarged waist, more masculine hands and feet, and the terrifying bicycle face.

These physical ailments were nothing compared to the bicycles effects on propriety. The New York Times declared, a large number of our female bicyclists wear shorter dresses than the laws of morality and decency permit, thereby inviting the improper conversations and remarks of the depraved and immoral. And that was decades before spandex was invented.

But as cities paved roads, cycling clubs and races helped spread the sport. And the ladies? They influenced new step-through designs that accommodated skirts, while also seizing on the personal mobility offered by a bicycle. Many came to see biking as faster and easier than dealing with horses until the automobile took over. After that, for many decades, the bicycle was treated only as a kids toy.

Image Credit: Museum of the City of New York | Getty Images

Wont you think of the children, and the terrible corrupting effects of birthday parties?

After millennia in which people didnt recognize (or know) their birthdays, birthday parties became popular in the 1800s. But many worried that these cake-and-presents parties corrupted the very children they were intended to celebrate. Indeed, one 1864 article suggested that children should celebrate by being a present to anyone that has taken trouble with them, giving gifts to the important adults in their life and supplying a meal to a poor family.

The danger extended beyond the celebrant. Ladies Home Journal warned in 1913 that the birthday party habit sows dangerous seeds for the future in child character and habits. The games and nervous excitement'' encouraged children to participate in rivalry that is poor preparation for any potentially successful body or mind. And lets not talk about the sugary cake.

But emerging marketers saw opportunity. Party-planning books of the 1920s instructed parents on throwing the right type of party, complete with cake, presents, and games and they overlooked the risk of corruption. Soon it was simply a matter of peer pressure. Post-war miniature golf courses, swimming pools, and McDonalds further entrenched the tradition, while todays parents can rent out trampoline parks, inflatable bounce houses, and stores dedicated to letting kids build their own sundaes or teddy bears.

Image Credit: cjp | Getty Images

Have you ever worried that the teddy bear might kill off natural motherly instincts? As the toy tribute to President Theodore Roosevelt spread, pearl-clutchers warned that if teddy bears were not stopped, the result would be race suicide.

The leader of the anti-bear movement was a priest named Rev. Michael Esper of St. Joseph, Michigan. In a fiery 1907 speech to his congregation, he warned, It is a monstrous crime to do anything that will tend to destroy [maternal] instincts. That is what the Teddy Bear is doing and that is why it is going to be a factor in the race suicide problem.

After that, word quicky spread. The Idaho Recorder warned that the teddy bear is keeping the children from the pleasure of caring for a doll. He cant wear pretty frocks and dainty underwear, and the little girl who has him for a pet gets no incentive to make these things. Hence she loses the education involved in dainty garments. The Teddy bear is all right for boys, but not for girls.

Who knew the innocent teddy bear was so destructive?

Once again, popular culture helped ensure the teddys survival. The Teddy Bear Two-Step also hit dance halls in 1907, just as teddies appeared on jigsaw puzzles, greeting cards, and automobile accessories. Sewing companies sold patterns so girls could fashion tiny outfits for their bears thus nurturing their motherly instincts. More than a million bears were sold that year, and todays global stuffed animal and plush toys market is worth nearly $8 billion.

Image Credit: George Marks | Getty Images

Mirrors have long been feared for feeding sinful vanity that can shatter a person. After all, one of the seven deadly sins stems from vanity. And lets not forget that Narcissus downfall began when he saw his own reflection. Mirrored cabinets are called vanities for a reason.

Plus, there were centuries of worry about mirrors serving as supernatural portals.

Thats why it was so concerning in the mid-1800s, when modern manufacturing made mirrors affordable. As mirrors began appearing in umbrella tops and powder cases and restrooms, many feared that vanity run amok would halt societys progress altogether. People would be so caught up in themselves that they would fail to connect with their fellow humans.

Mirrors were cited as the cause of pedestrian accidents, as people wandered into busy streets while staring at their reflections. Elevator operators complained that women spent so much time admiring themselves that they slowed down operations.

Luckily, people learned to coexist with pervasive mirrors in lobbies and pockets, and we even began paying attention to each other again. Well, at least until the smartphone entered our pockets...

Image Credit: Mario Tama | Getty Images

You know somethings dangerous when the U.S. Senate gets involved. In 1954, the brand-new Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency investigated the link between comic books and crime. This followed a decade of comic book burnings, state bans, and hand wringing as a tidal wave of juvenile delinquency spread throughout the country.

What was in these terrible books? In truth, they werent targeted at kids. They were made for young men, especially soldiers, were the primary audience. Circulation tripled during World War II as soldiers bought ten times more comics than traditional magazines. When those soldiers returned home, they kept demanding comics with a bent towards horror, crime, and the supernatural and publishers complied.

Naturally, children got a hold of them. Comics were seen as a national disgrace linked to heinous crimes, and many worried that glamorizing fictional characters would pollute the hearts and minds of young readers.

Soon after the 1954 hearings, the industry established its own self-censoring Comics Code Authority to sanitize the more violent art while targeting younger, more innocent readers.

Image Credit: Universal History Archive | Getty Images

As the first skyscrapers rose, elevators quickly became widespread as did fears of elevator sickness. Physicians of the 1890s warned that the rising motion could trigger brain fever, plus nausea and faintness. Habitual descents were thought to cause a disordered condition of the nerves, particularly when an elevator fell too quickly.

Although passenger elevators had been around since the 1850s, the early ones lacked many of the modern safety features we take for granted, leading to fears of broken cables and falling into open shafts.

With time, elevators got faster and safer. Automatic doors closed to prevent people from stumbling into the shaft. Speed controls and better hydraulics made rides safer and smoother. Bumpers stopped doors from closing on people.

Today, elevators arent just a convenience. Theyre often essential for multi-story buildings to provide equal access to everyone access that no longer causes brain fever.

Image Credit: Print Collector | Getty Images

Remember when reading was considered bad, unless it was the Bible or another ancient text? No? Well, lets take you back to the 19th and early 20th centuries when the battle against novels was very real.

In the 19th century, some viewed the novel as a national enemy sapping the minds of our youths of all that is manliest and noblest. Popular dime novels clogged the mind, distracting readers from more important, serious books, like the Bible.

Worse, novels were associated with hooliganism and crime, with newspaper accounts warning of the dangerous powers of suggestion.

Even in the 1930s, some still worried that there was something wrong with children who chose to read. In 1938, the St. Petersburg Times suggested that parents reduce the number of books available to children and make reading inconvenient except for the set time.

Sounds a lot like screen time, doesnt it?

Luckily, the morality types soon became more concerned about comic books, which made the novel look far less dangerous.

Image Credit: Bettmann | Getty Images

Once upon a time, people believed that the Earth was hollow, which meant that hell was directly beneath their feet.

That lingering fear helps explain why early subway systems got so much bad press.

One Boston religious leader warned that the subway was a project of Lucifer himself, while others warned that the subway disturbed the dead as excavators stumbled on unmarked graves. And wasnt that below-ground air dangerous to breathe?

To allay these fears, early subway stations were whitewashed and brightly lit with the newest electric lights. As people ventured into the stations, fear turned to awe of the engineering marvel. Word spread. The convenience certainly helped, too especially since the nations first subway system helped riders bypass the terrible Boston traffic.

Decades later, subways were trusted as shelters for air raids and potential nuclear attacks. And today, 180 subway systems serve billions of riders each year.

Image Credit: ClassicStock | Getty Images

Did you know that pinball made it all the way to the Supreme Court in 1974, when they ruled that the game involved more skill than chance?

By then, pinball machines had been banned for decades, hidden in seedy bars and basements. Since early machines lacked flippers, the game relied on chance and thus constituted child-corrupting gambling.

Authorities feared that pinball encouraged children to ditch school and skip meals. In a filing for that Supreme Court case, New York Mayor Fiorello La Guardia wrote that pinball machines robbed the pockets of schoolchildren in the form of nickels and dimes given them as lunch money.

Not to mention the mafia connection.

Dramatic Prohibition-style raids followed, with police rounding up machines for Mayor La Guardia to smash with hammers.

Two years after the Supreme Court ruling, the industry made the same argument to the New York City Council with a live demonstration by Roger Sharpe, the best player they could find. The last big ban was overturned, much to the delight of the city department that would bring in $1.5 million through license fees.

Though you still cant (legally) play on Sundays in Ocean City, New Jersey.

Want more examples of things our ancestors tried to cancel? Check out the podcastBuild For Tomorrow. And hear the story of banned teddy bears below!

Read more here:
11 Beloved Inventions That Were Almost Canceled - Entrepreneur