Repeating Myself

I share what I share about Donald Trump because he doesn't need any more sycophants.

Is there anything to be gained by avoiding information?

There are concerns about Trump along many reasonings, maybe some can be over looked, but probably many should be closely followed.

Isn't it obvious? I mean, his career before now was riddled with dubious legal shenanigans, who would know that and not be suspicious today?

Ever follow his tweeter feed?

So yeah, I follow Trump with a jaded eye, always on the sly. Why shouldn't I?

I share what I share about Donald Trump because he doesn't need any more sycophants.

Is there anything to be gained by avoiding information?

There are concerns about Trump along many reasonings, maybe some can be over looked, but probably many should be closely followed.

Isn't it obvious? I mean, his career before now was riddled with dubious legal shenanigans, who would know that and not be suspicious today?

Ever follow his tweeter feed?

So yeah, I follow Trump with a jaded eye, always on the sly. Why shouldn't I?

Yesterday the Trump Tax Cut passed, finally.  I've provided a bland google search result page link,  it may be interesting to notice over time how the results  may change.  My query was "trump tax cut" and that is how I will say it in conversation.

Take a moment of reflection, this is historic and courageous.  No, outrageous.  That's a better term for what it is.

Before I beg for understanding of how much I am enjoying the Trump presidency,  I must declare that an ideology, i.e. liberal or conservative, has no role in interpretting simple accounting and  the modus operandi of budget edits over the recent past.

What I mean is the Trump Tax Cut is not revenue neutral, and that simple fact is a deviation of the recent workings of congress over the last few sessions.  It's the concept that any changes in the rates etc., have to produce the same revenue, or more, as before the changes took place.  Or find cuts on the spending side for the cuts in rates to pay for themselves.   Either way, it falls under being revenue neutral.

Both sides, ideology neutral as it were, agreed.  The intent was not to retreat on the deficit.

There is no liberalism here,  there is no conservatism here.   It is as simple as math can be when you are dealing with so many zeroes, changes to the budget have to be only positive, or neutral at worse.

Well, that's all out the window now.  Its not a hidden fact either!  But its awfully brazen.

Am I saying anything wrong here?

Well anyways,  while I'm reflecting and explaining, it may bear mentioning that I am really enjoying Trump's Presidency.  Certainly there are times when the man has really screwed things up, at least in my opinion, and I express my thoughts, but typically I'm  laughing all the way to 2020.

It may be a coping strategy,  but as I've said,  Gettysburg was so much worse than what Trump has put us through.

There are ways to remove a President from office, and if the people around him aren't that concerned,  then I'm not that concerned either,  believe me.

But I will watch him, and watch it all as closely as I ever watched national politics.  Don't hope for that to change.  Well, fact is power does corrupt and Donald wasn't an angel in his previous career.

I'm really being generous here, to simply say he wasn't an angel.  I know,  I've done the research.  Some haven't,  haven't a clue.

Power and corruption,  there's another one of those classic ideology neutral concepts.

Wasn't America great when that was one of our FIRST concerns about who to vote for in this country?

Who am kidding,  it probably wasn't ever much but lip service in history books, and today a real estate "mogul" just orchestrated his own tax cut.

The affront to the better nature of our angels only reaches its crescendo when the audacity of hiding one's own tax returns from scrutiny is accomplished as well! 

I can't imagine rationalizing this ignorance away, so I won't.

For this interpretation, I come off as hating the man.   I don't.  That's how Sean Hannity puts words in people's mouths,

I'll chat more later,  Happy Solstice everyone!

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+tax+cut&oq=trump+tax+cut&aqs=chrome..0j69i57j0l4.13559j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

From a thread on healthcare:

I don't think it is possible to talk on any subject without erroneously inferring what the other side is thinking, based on limited information.

In many cases, i take the inference as gas lighting -- tell me how reality is based on opinion of what others must be thinking.

If just one gas light burned rightly, it still does not, in itself, justify the tact of the gop.

Fixing problems is an answer, repeal and replace, or repeal only, or undermine as a last resort are not answers.

Why?

Because social good might sound liberal, subjective, and immeasurable, but it is a reality with a gas light all its own.

Social good is what presumably drives myself, and everyone else with a political opinion.

Here is the kernal of truth, if the gop plan does not promote MORE social good than what they oppose, i.e the ACA, then they will be swept from power and the past model will return with vehemence, and all of todays efforts will be squandered.

My lighting suggest to me, that the gop hardly pays mind to long term consequences outside of the satisfaction of ending a program that in their gas light reveals only gloom.

Some people dont see the ACA as gloom, the answer to the ACA should include these people, but it doesnt seem like the gop cares.

I like to anchor these missives of mine with a news story, but as I sit down to write this, no one story focuses my thoughts, for I have many thoughts, but not a cohesive story to tell.

I have a nice beginnings of a patriotic polemic, basically my opinion of citizenship and what the heck it means any more, but I'd rather talk about the long march of Western Civilization that the white man endured which also came to define the rights which we only selectively cherish and honor, more or less depending, in practice, on birth. Which is exactly the opposite of the text book meaning. So how does the text book and reality differ, and is that important?

I also think about what I said 100 times already, and I'll say it 100 more before President Trump's term is over, that elections have consequences. Its basically a coping mechanism, along with not taking much too seriously even while realizing how consequential some of these issues really are.

I've also said, "there will be catastrophe, but as long as we survive its will be fine in the long run, looking at history." Only to be rebutted, "there wasn't always nuclear bombs, either." Good point.

The annual "War on Christmas" began in earnest on Friday the 13th, when President Trump boasted we will all say "Merry Christmas" again. I'm sure he means it, but its those damn freedoms Western Civilization has gotten us into only standing in his way at this point. Certainly not self restraint.

I push back on President Trump, not out of hate, but out of self interest. I'm a tax payer, and I could prove it. I've been scolded I don't do anything but complain and share "hit pieces." I certainly won't deny that, but maybe this is my true calling? More importantly, unless proven otherwise, I have to say I've given back more to government and my fellow citizens, than Trump, who has much to over come, including his punitive nature. By my reckoning, his on going expenses serving this country now, along with a lifetime of tax breaks, bankruptcies, and other financial obfuscation have cost us more than he is worth. Prove me wrong. Without his tax records, you can't.

Back to the war that matters, the one on Christmas, a great line I picked up recently: The paranoid mind is more coherent than reality.

Speaking of paranoia, am I the only one that finds this conspiracy paranoia after every fiasco a bore? Especially so considering, generally speaking, the same buffs haven't paid much mind to the Russian angle, which started early last year. Its a judgment call, but its as if every smart, professional, in the know voice surrounding Russia-gate has been discredited not so much without scrutiny, but without concern. Categorically dismissed with prejudice. But I'm to believe the non-christian liberals are winning some sort of duel over Christmas?

I think the point is, not everyone is christian, and "Happy Holidays" is no less a commercial endeavor for their money, as "Merry Christmas" is to get your money. I haven't found much commercialism in the bible, but I'd swear some would have me believe so.

MORE LATER

From a thread:

My thought on wealth, in general.

Ill contribute these thoughts and perspectives.

I once was a Republican,  though never a loyal one, i thought was more conservative than the party.   But when the tea party gain notice i gained awareness of just how little i had in common anymore and i went independent, where i happily dwell to this day.

I once bought into this trickle down b.s.  but as my mind liberated itself from the tyranny of ignorance i burdened myself to read smart people,  not limiting myself to an echo chamber.

I found this book by an author i read way back in 1993.  This guy happened to be the budget director under reagan.

Long story cut short,  i agree with you John Cacurak, and so do a lot of people,  but your polemic falls short, way short,  of how wealth is distorting our society....but thats ok,  you mean well!

If someone does not agree with john, and by extension me,  they can read this book and get a fuller understanding of the economy around them and how they are getting screwed.

If they dont agree with us,  and they dont want to learn,  i dont have time....

The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America https://www.amazon.com/dp/1586489127/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_6l05zb8FPE6XB

I think we all need to start talking about samuel chase and the precedent that was set.

As was said above, liberals haven't made him tweet...although his croonies seem to think i can only understand the english language if filtered.

From a thread 9/29/17

Cynicism after the President stoked the passions of his base with tweets about NFL players and the anthem, respect the flag, etc.

"Lookit, im a little cynical at times, and I try to see the good in people, but that all of a sudden trumps crowd is offended by a silly gesture and demanding that material objects have feelings after spending a better part of the year trampling and disrupting the actual lives of actual people is a juxtaposition that i find laughable."

"This vehement patriotism isnt a disease either,

Its aboundandly proven that many vets have no objections. So even if vets were the only opinion that matters, many are living quite unharmed lives over this."

Why not write a little something about my opinion on the opinions that surround the topic of Anthropomorphic Global Warming I asked myself.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and being tolerant of another's opinion goes a long way toward peaceful coexistence, but certain opinions in regards to the environment can be argued to be counter productive to peaceful coexistence, and is absolutely ignorant in any event.

The United States' influence in the world is quite large, which is to understate the case, so when I stop to consider that less than half the voters, who in turn tally only about half the eligible voting population have usurped from the majority the lead here, I react in a way that irks me to question the wisdom of American style democracy. I can't imagine what folks in Vanuatu or Fiji might think, because its our ignorant minority that restrains a more robust global action on climate.

It wasn't that long ago that global warming was a far off in the future dire prediction, but with Irma to hit Florida tomorrow, about ten days after Harvey hit Houston, and before Jose hits next week, the future is now for us in the states, but the Pacific Islanders, who really never benefited from the primary cause of global warming in the first place, were the first to experience the reality of it years ago.

I can't read anything anymore that does not have a tie in to climate change, and its ill effects on the status quo. The U.S. military comes to mind quite quickly as one huge topic and example of a studied approach to the very real perils that rising water levels are to, consequently, global peace.

Many argue, and I along with them, that this is also an opportunity for business, and indeed many companies, many American companies are engaging in commerce created by the threat, but our government is not so much, and that's the tamper on the economics of it all. Again, the touch of climate is everywhere.

I really can't "see" the religious dogma that many here have toward this scientific fact. Global warming is real, its not an opinion, its not a liberal conspiracy, its not democrats wanting power over me. Its the yin to the yang, the equal and opposite reaction to pollution caused by humans.

In the year of 2017, the milepost of decades stretch behind us in terms of measuring how long data has been collected, studied, researched, and vetted. To be a denier now isn't so much as quaint anachronistic behavior as it is intentionally ignorant, and arguably malicious.

As I said, I can't read anything anymore, outside fiction, that doesn't come with climate change caveats, which also compels me not to furnish any facts here, nor salient arguments, for if dear reader hasn't exposed oneself at last to true and meaningful discussions on the whole gambit of Anthropomorphic Global Warming, my doing so here will be of no concern either. Which is the shame of it all -- such a small number of people are like a dead weight on progress.

Just thinking out loud, and can it be this transparent that Donald Trump rescinds DACA wants Congress to basically codify it as law then he'll be able to sign it and he'll take a victory lap on the work that Barack Obama did when the GOP Congress would do nothing

I realize that I can be a smug asshole when it comes to politics, and take my word for it, I used to be a lot worse. While I still hold opinions, and am not afraid to share them, for the most part I keep them to myself, and burden only a small sub-community of friends and friends of friends here on Facebook.

Believe it or not, although I'm quite egocentric in my comments, I'm more open to other opinions and thoughts than my writing may suggest. I really don't think I'm smart enough to have all the answers, nor even a few, but I am on the look out for intelligent ones.

I'm just as curious as to who all these constituencies I read about and see out there in America are going to partner with to get their answers accomplished?

But let's be frank, I really want to know who the Trumpets are looking to partner up with to get their answers done, because in politics and our government they will need to partner up with someone. Look what happened to Healthcare -- nothing!

Fine, mock the people who are so offended by a hundred year old statue, but don't be surprised that they oppose a pipeline running through Indian territory.

Absolutely, All Lives Matter, but at some point Your Life Matters Less when you too become a minority and authority treats you like something less human.

If it moves you to shun the immigrants and applaud the punitive nature of Trump to everyone but you, have a blast. But when the other 7 billion people on this planet align in some other way without us, don't blame the liberals.

We all have opinions, like assholes, so while we are busy expressing them because the passions of the day's events get the better of us, maybe take a moment and wonder aloud if its worth the effort, or if in fact counter productive.

Finding common ground with people does need to happen to affect change. That's not being better than anyone, that's being smart.

I thought I had something interesting to say, and then I got distracted on Facebook...

Today Steve Bannon, Trumps Chief Strategist walked away, or got fired, but what everyone is talking about is the ramifications and fall out from Charlottesville, VA where protesters and anti protesters clashed.

I've seen so many memes that I found utterly ridiculous, and many of the same that, I mean, why are decent people going out of their way to be cruel?

By the way, the Statue of Liberty has no relation to Robert E. Lee. Sometimes, because I'm not a "liberal democrat," I think I see their hidden mockery inside memes that "conservatives" readily share. I believe the Left makes foolish memes just to witness the Right blithely sharing them. Some of these memes don't pass any logical rules, and beyond sharing a sense of disregard for a fellow human being thoughts and sensitivities, they only serve to proclaim that an inert glob of raw material, molded into some semblance of a past traitor and slave holder carries the greater social good. At least that's what I'm perceiving.

What about protesters and counter protesters? What about them. Its been going on for years. Centuries even. Its not that I don't care about the sensitivities I just referenced above, its that I'm busy, and anyone counter protesting Neo-Nazis have my prayers but not my counsel.

It sounds like a dangerous thing to do. I don't care who the other side represents. It could be the Sisters of Mercy, and its still dangerous.

My rule is if your side killed someone, you lose the power of persuasion. You lose the argument. But I don't think I'm under any onus to get too far involved with protesters, I got things to do myself.

Outside of learning who these groups are via media compulsion, I've also learned Trump is who they said he is.

Which is absolutely the last time I trust that source -- anyone who told me Trump is not a racist, but just an old man with clumsy language, has just lost status with me. I dunno, sounds like a good idea to me. After Trumps first statement, I said he was a rookie, the next day he showed us something, but the day after that he really did show us who he is. Really. He did.

However, with all that being said, I'm still left wondering about Trump's answers to infrastructure questions that he never got to answer...lets not forget too, that his horrible performance was at a press conference for his infrastructure plans.

The press does have to get on with itself at times, its getting ridiculous. We know trump is a nut, incompetent, and a con man. But he is still the man, and stuff is happening everyday we all should be aware of.

Can we cover that for a little?

Thank you.

Knowing more about Obama's pastor than the past of Donald Trump is a problem.

As I sit here with my morning cup of coffee, keeping up with what I think is worth while, my mind wandered over, around, to and from the interlocking web that is politics and government.

More particularly I went to responsive governing, then to egalitarian stewardship, and then wrapped it around the idea of distraction, code words, and good policy.

There is always something going on, and I don't consider myself expert on any of it. I follow and generalize, just like everybody else. But I also deep think, because I got the time and obviously I'm taking great delight in following Trump.

Trump presents himself as responsive government, and give him credit, he put himself there. There is also the great lament that government is unresponsive, and I'm not going to argue the point.

The Senate, in particular, is considered the the most unresponsive of governing bodies, and the argument utilizes also the gross years many Senators have persisted in that chamber to bolster that notion. Which altogether form the impression that they are more removed from understanding directly what ails common society than any one else with like power, i.e. the House or the President.

Distraction is really not a singular object. Consider instead distraction more of a portfolio, metaphorically speaking a distraction is nothing more than a successful rhetorical device. It's doesn't matter how factual or apt the rhetoric is, the use of distraction conspires toward less attention on what matters should be attended to. Distractions, as is said, are all around us.

Code words trigger distraction, in the intellectual sense. Once I got turned onto the idea that party politics is more distraction than policy, I've began to recognize more code words than policy. Perception is reality, they also say. But I've been triggered less as a result, and am enjoying politics all the more.

In my opinion, an egalitarian chamber such as the Senate, full of long serving and far removed members isn't necessarily a bad thing. At base we are people, and there is no evidence that I've seen that suggest a rule that people at the opposite ends of a senator's experience are necessarily a good thing. How, why, and what decisions are made could be a more suitable criteria than tenure.

In fact, I can support the Senate and seniority in any number of ways, but suffice to say my opinion is that it's more important to know who is empowered than what number of years an empowered person has to his or her credit.

Removing people based more on seniority than merit seems like more distraction than good policy, and also seems "un-American." Electing someone who doesn't know what he is doing is turning out to be ______. (Fill in your own code word here.)

I have some thoughts meandering around my cranium, but I will defer to Niels Bohr:

"Within any community it is only possible for the citizens to strive together for common welfare on the basis of public knowledge of the general conditions of the country. Likewise, real co-operation between nations on problems of common concern presupposes free access to all information of importance for their relations...The very fact that knowledge is itself the basis for civilization points directly to openness as the way to overcome the present crisis."

http://amzn.to/2gSWJUU

I don't feel that I have to go to any lengths to talk positively about a man who I think is a fraud, but I do like the idea of accepting what you can not change, and looking for the good in the bad.

That, and I got some time to burn on a Wednesday.

I've said repeatedly that it is not possible for someone in the office of President, whose ultimate responsibility is that of making decisions, to perform for 4 years and not do something right.  So I use that as my anchor. 

Regarding Donald Trump, its not that I hate him.  That's ridiculous, I don't even know him personally, and not until January of this year has he ever cost me anything except the money to buy his ghost written biography in the late 1980's.
No, I don't hate him, I just don't trust him.

By the way, to get it out of the way,  his "Made in America" theme is something I find no fault with.  Outside the fact that he himself doesn't live by his own nationalism rhetoric.

What I thought to write at first was in defense of Donald Trump Jr., and now that I'm sufficiently on the record as not hating Trump, and decidedly not against everything he does, I realize that I don't have to do this to compensate for my belief that Sr. is not only a fraud, but also likely treasonous too.

As the article I'll share conveys, and I surely have empathy with, Donald Trump Jr. reportedly hates being a part of this whole presidential gambit of his father and wishes it all to be over.

I thought, I bet his mother is very disappointed in him right now too.   Ivana got out of the marriage to the elder Trump, that is not only quasi heroic, but  it should indicate higher morals and ethics on her part too.    She raised her kids, not Donald,  Sr. just corrupted them.  Maybe you disagree with my opinion, but I feel more confidence in my assumptions than anyone who would defend Trump today, and who is also at the same distance I am from him.

I'm not making excuses for Trump Jr. though, but if (and I'm going to love writing this) liberal teachings apply to everyone, even wealthy sons of billionaires, then young Donald is a victim.

Of course the mitigating force on compassion is that Jr. is not a child, and this isn't the Presidency of his boarding school, and because of that, I don't hope he goes to jail, but that Sr. does what's right for a change, and resign for the sake of his family.

But that's unlikely to happen, and so life goes on....

http://people.com/politics/trump-family-russia-scandal-donald-trump-jr-miserable/

Thirty years ago, and not long after I got into reading vigorously, I bought a book entitled, "The Art of the Deal." A biography by Donald Trump. Which turned out to be neither a biography in the sense that a life was not nearly fully lived yet so it didn't measure up to the traditional notion of biography, nor was it written by Donald Trump.

I lost interest in Donald Trump after a run of bankruptcies and ugly divorces, but not before I bought his board game, "The Art of the Deal." That was 25 years ago, but though I say I lost interest in the man, I continued a casual continuation of following his escapades.

After Donald Trump won the Presidency, I read "The Big Agenda" which is billed as "Trump's Plan to Save America." Unfortunately it was neither a big agenda, nor can I say that it has much to do with a plan to save America, unless you really buy into that kooky and paranoid world of conservative talk radio, but it is a small book, and more of a polemic by David Horowitz than an agenda.

If like me, you've read both of the above books, maybe like me, you'd be interested to know about another little book titled, "The Case for Impeachment" by Allan J. Lichtman.

Like the previous two books, this too has a title barely suited to the contents it provides. Although Lichtman's book does provide a learned opinion and well documented narrative on how an impeachment of Donald Trump could very well come to pass, a more suited title to this book would be, "Donald Trump, a Biography" for it really does more to tell the reader who Trump is via his own lived life, than the biography from the 1980s. I thought I had a notion of who Trump was, as a man, by just reading the papers and reports I came across, gosh was I wrong -- he is so much worse than my imagination.

"The Case for Impeachment" is 290 pages long, with 50 pages of notes. I thought of counting all the instances of Trumps life that the author thought could imperil his presidency with impeachment, but I thought it nearly impossible to discern how many victims of fraud there are out there, or how many instances of Trump speak enabled Donald to slide through litigation. Even more significant, as both the book and my tally would necessarily end on the specific date of print, every new day Trump has an opportunity to inflate the tally some more.

I would be remiss to not point out that it is his wealth that enables him to commit so many questionable activities, I dare say anyone I reach with this column has no chance to repeat offending like Donald Trump before landing in jail....

Making it this far into my polemic might mean, like me, you value information over bull shit. It seems to me that reading 240 pages about a topic that is destined to be a big issue is a very minor investment.

I've heard from self titled constitutionalists, populists, conservatives, liberals, and I read my share of memes, articles, and comments, but I'll consider my time spent inside this small book as more valuable if the events around the President spiral toward his impeachment -- I'll have a better understanding why.

Hours invested in talk radio isn't going to match the 240 pages here, and hysterical claims of "fake news" or reactionary echos of Trump himself only serve to diminish one's esteem to lend it to a man who neither deserves it or values it.

Read the book -- its Trump's real life story, unlike the "Art of the Deal" and its exposes a real liberal agenda, unlike "The Big Agenda."