Trump Presidential Fantasy
from the article:
"Deal making. Respect. These are what Trump proposes above all else, not just in this interview, but in other comments and interviews he has done in the past.
But deal making is a tactic and a skill; it’s not a principle of leadership. Deal making is a good skill to have, but the question remains: What deals will you be trying to make? What ideas will you be trying to put into practice when you propose a deal, and why?"
and:
"The beautiful and timeless thing about the United States of America is that it was founded on ideas. You can read those ideas for yourself in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Those ideas are timeless, and they respect the facts of human nature — our identity as thinking, sovereign, self-responsible and individual human beings who require liberty to survive and flourish."
well said Dr. Hurd
"Deal making. Respect. These are what Trump proposes above all else, not just in this interview, but in other comments and interviews he has done in the past.
But deal making is a tactic and a skill; it’s not a principle of leadership. Deal making is a good skill to have, but the question remains: What deals will you be trying to make? What ideas will you be trying to put into practice when you propose a deal, and why?"
and:
"The beautiful and timeless thing about the United States of America is that it was founded on ideas. You can read those ideas for yourself in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Those ideas are timeless, and they respect the facts of human nature — our identity as thinking, sovereign, self-responsible and individual human beings who require liberty to survive and flourish."
well said Dr. Hurd
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
But Hurd makes the same statement that irritates me every time I hear or read it--"We need an assertive leader to get the government..."
We don't need to be led, we don't need a President to 'free' us.
We need to assert and lead ourselves.
The USA tended toward a soft touch approach having an armed population and used incrementalism a great deal. The others were more liberal and less conservative in their fast paced approach to the ultimate goal. The all vied with each for the top spot. But it was still a socialist oriented country by the time WWII rolled around
The use of statist corporatist, and union leaders in the USA like the others puts the union leaders as the kick stand more than as one of the wheels and more under control of the Democrats than not. Republicans tend to represent and deal with the corporate entities. Democrats tend to cling to the 240 or so year old idea of representing the people but ended in the same mold as the Marxist-Leninists We work tirelessly for the people so deserve more..
The difference is the Russians used no union but the party itself claiming no need they already owned the means of production. That was true if the meaning was the party owned the workers. That from a royalty and serf society which had never known anything else. The Democrats are even more than the Republicans control freaks and aspire to the party line more diligently. Anything done that supports the party is the truth no matter if it's different tomorrow. Yet they also have a rigid caste system and a privileged class with perhaps more millionaires and billionaires than the Republicans that believes and practices control by any means.
Under the facade all three branches support each other and follow the main philosophy.For different reasons. Some see it as a return to a new form of feudalism.where the Barons and royalty owned everything including the workers. Some probably live in a dream world of this and that future outcome for everyone IF ONLY they are given enough time and enough power. Only real difference is the methodology. AND all of them are moving incrementally the last step being establishment of the protective echelon to eventually supplant if not take over the military.
I would expect a new military oath of office with something about loyalty to the President and a downplay on loyalty to the Constitution. So no they aren't statist in the sense of Russia, China, Germany, Italy but they are none the less statist because that is the one branch that invariably rules the roost.Penny Farthing Bicycle. Kick stand, little wheel and big wheel. They are also corporatist as their wealth shows they just don't like it talked about.
The common factor is all three of the triumverate believe unreservedly in government control of the citizens and that over the last two hundred and some years has- become the position of the left. Joined by many of the citizens true.
The right - the old space for the King who ruled by divine right or ultimate source of power now belongs - only in the USA to those who believe in citizens, constitution, country, and their employees the government in that order.
Fact Check. What they say and what they do is the proof in the pudding. They are not hard to understand at all if you use the correct definitions
they are for law - their law and their order.
Not ours.
Which leaves a small minority holding down the source of supreme power - the people and the true center of political discourse the Constitution. Not the center of the left but the center of the nation.
Sleep well your Directorate of Internal State Security is on the alert.
And for the really old timers. Neither one are the party of Abraham Lincoln or FDR any more so how grandpa voted is not germane
I have a different view of the political parties. Democrats' philosophy isn't statism. Statism may be the result of their offering govt solutions for a long list of little problems, but their philosophy is "Something's bothering you? Ooh, ooh, govt could do something about that. And that will improve liberty bc you how can you be free with that problem hanging over you?" Republicans OTOH hardly even pretend to support liberty. Even if we spend as much on war as all other countries it wouldn't be enough. Govt can never be big or intrusive enough for them. At home they can tell you why you should fear or hate your neighbors for petty or imagined reasons. Respecting their rights is supporting criminals and terrorists, they say. We're for law and order, okay actually just order but it sounds better to say we're for law too.
Then a goofy caricature of Republicans appears. I actually wonder if it's an intentional parody on Trump's part. We get articles like this one that seem surprised. It points out telling people "there are enemies everywhere to fear or hate, but don't worry; I'll show 'em who's boss," isn't conducive to law and liberty. No kidding. I agree completely.
This is because they define "Idea" as a proposed government program. Therefore, if you don't have any programs to expand the government you plan to implement, you have no ideas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4V-g_OV...
:)
Good article. Yes, Trump is all about rhetoric. I have yet to see a specific solution. Still he is quite entertaining.
"Democrats, on the other hand, have very clear-cut ideas... " Almost all bad ones.
Regards,
O.A.
I actually agree with something a psychotherapist said. There is (at least) one psychotherapist in the world who can apply his knowledge and rationally analyze a public figure's words and actions without name calling.
Thanks, Dr. Hurd.
Thanks, kh.