CDZ Understanding Trump

Ame®icano

Platinum Member
Jul 8, 2008
24,750
7,531
350
Michigan
Watch these to understand Trump's rise to power much much better, from first the republican perspective with Newt then the Classic Democrat perspective with Webb.

Newt Gingrich goes into much more detail about how Trump started before Bush II, and Jim Webb covers the fall of the Democrat party into the anti-white, socialist, progressive elite party.



 
Trump exposes the corruption of our government which puts the Hapsburg Empire to shame.
 
Trump exposes the corruption of our government which puts the Hapsburg Empire to shame.

Actually, Habsburgs were not corrupted, they had very well functioning, respected bureaucracy that created great trust in government institutions. Unlike our government...
 
Actually, Habsburgs were not corrupted, they had very well functioning, respected bureaucracy that created great trust in government institutions.

LOL, tell that to the Serbs. And don't forget to mention that great civil servant Alois Schicklgruber.
 
Watch these to understand Trump's rise to power much much better
"Understanding Trump" and "understanding his rise to power" are two very different things. The latter isn't at all hard to comprehend. The former can be done only after having obtained a doctoral awareness of the machinations of mental midgetry and tottery.
 
.
Well, I guess we have a new data point for understanding Trump. Dropping chemical weapons on civilian populations is a no no.
 
Actually, Habsburgs were not corrupted, they had very well functioning, respected bureaucracy that created great trust in government institutions. Unlike our government...

Frankly, the U.S. government strikes me as pretty trustworthy when one makes the effort to fully understand the situations the government addresses and the range of alternatives that were/are available at any given instant. Of course, there often will be multiple courses the government can chart, and different individuals will prefer one or some over others.

Standing from outside of many of the matters the government must address, one isn't well positioned to know whether the tack the government takes is a better or worse.one at the moment decisions are made. Sure, with hindsight, one can tell and others can and will say "I told you so." That's of no use. If one had such brilliantly prescient ideas, and saw/understood things nobody else did, why didn't one step up when the time was ripe for doing so?

As for trusting government, it really comes down to character, most especially that of the President. It's very hard to trust a POTUS who isn't clear, precise, unequivocal and consistent. The POTUS whom I trust most is the one who will openly say things like "I don't know" and "there is no good solution." The ones who tell me "everything's coming up roses" and nothing's awry are the ones I trust least. Why? Because I know better than that, and I know it without even knowing specifically what's amiss. I, like everyone, face challenges in our lives for which there are no good solutions and for which I must simply make a decision and run with it. There's no way the same cannot be so in government affairs. So when we have a POTUS who tells us differently, anyone with half a brain knows he's putting on a show.

So do I trust the government? Well, I trust the career civil service people to do the best job they possibly can. I trust the people who are experts in their fields and how hold positions of influence related to their respective disciplines. Whom I don't trust, in addition to our current POTUS, are the other political appointees and elected officials. I don't trust them because at least half of their raison d'etre is to make themselves and others in similar roles look good. Those people are more interested in saving face than they are about saving the nation.

What's the solution? We elect,and POTUSes appoint, people who are actually experts at something that's relevant for running their respective branch of government: change management professionals for POTUS, psychologists or cultural anthropologists for SecState, historians for SecDef, geologists for SecInt, SecEnergy, EPA Administrator, doctors or sociologists for SecHHS, etc.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top