Put Down the Phone, Mr. President

[txradioguy]

Attributes such as "honesty", "character", and "leadership" no longer matter to the average voter. It's all about "gibsmedats", and my kids and grandson will be handed a $30-$40 trillion deficit over the next 10 years. Heck, the Uniparty remains mired in fighting over reductions in the planned growth of spending, let alone actually cutting fat from the federal budget.

That applies to the Department of Defense, too. There are vastly more sinners than saints at the Pentagon. A small, but meaningful first step? Axe the number of general and flag officers by a third. You can start with those that haven't been in a field command for more than five years.

It's been amazing to see how many jobs and staff positions that used to be quite well run with a Colonel and a MSG now require a flag officer and a CSM just to turn the lights on and start the coffee machine.

[RoosGirl]

Then I wonder what was the point on attacking Clinton's character.

I know you know the saying "Can't see the forest for the trees."  Attacking Clinton's character is SOP.  But, when the reasoning comes down to Clinton  vs. Not Clinton they HAD to tell us that character doesn't matter.  We wouldn't have gone through all the 'If you aren't voting for Trump then you're voting for Hillary' BS otherwise.  And I really would have missed the 'holier than thou' insults that they try.

[Night Hides Not]

It's been amazing to see how many jobs and staff positions that used to be quite well run with a Colonel and a MSG now require a flag officer and a CSM just to turn the lights on and start the coffee machine.

Upon my return from Germany, I had the good fortune of working again for my last Battalion Commander in Germany. I was his S-4 (Supply Officer) during his last year in command, and it was one of the best times of my life.

He was promoted to Colonel, and put in charge of the (then) Air Defense Artillery Board at Fort Bliss. It was a military-civilian directorate that tested weapons in the acquisition and development cycle. Any and all VIPs made trips to the Board, all the shiny new toys were on display.

As luck would have it, we rented apartments in the same complex in El Paso, and he offered me a job when I completed the Captains course. For 18 months, I was the operations officer, a young Captain in a Lieutenant Colonel's slot. Great job...my power did not come from the position, but from the implied power of the relationship developed in Germany.

I was cognizant of that "power", and it was imperative that I backed that up with competence, to not let the old man down. It was a high profile position, as I was the primary briefing officer when VIPs stopped by. Up to 3 stars, I did the briefing. VIPs above that (including civilian equivalents) were handled by the Colonel, though I was there to answer all questions. I often updated the text and slides 2-3 times a week, based on developments in testing certain weapons.

My rep was solidified when I was tasked with coordinating the monthly status briefing. The first one I attended took nearly 3 hours...lol, I knew that wasn't going to fly with the Colonel. Within 5 minutes after it ended, he said "you're now in charge of it, and I want it done in an hour!"

The GS-14s and 15s were happy to drop it on my lap. No problem...next month, we were done in 55 minutes.

Nah, that position didn't require a Lt Colonel.

ETA: why did I have such a great working relationship with him? Simple: he demanded imagination and independence from his officers. I didn't get off on the right foot with him (a long story interesting only to me...lol), but once he saw my work in person, his initial attitude changed. He chewed me out numerous times (heck, I was still an LT), but I knew it was over and forgotten within 5 minutes after leaving his office.

[BassWrangler]

Same here.

 I've been saying since the general election he needed  to put Twitter away unless it's the official account run by his communication office otherwise he's going to be in big trouble of his own doing.

What kills me is that it's absolutely the smallest sacrifice he could make, yet he won't do it. But based on the poll up on Drudge, it seems most of the ardent Trump supporters have convinced themselves that his tweets are a good thing.

[Polly Ticks]

[Emjay]

What kills me is that it's absolutely the smallest sacrifice he could make, yet he won't do it. But based on the poll up on Drudge, it seems most of the ardent Trump supporters have convinced themselves that his tweets are a good thing.

I'm not an ardent Trump supporter...my candidate was Cruz and I was a Trump despiser until a certain thing happened.  He got elected.

At that point I did the forbidden thing.  I thought about Hillary and Obama and the sort of people they are and what they have done and want to do to our country.

I decided to support Trump when possible.  And it's been possible more often than I expected or hoped for.

Yeah, he's still the childish egoist and he does dumb tweets but they don't hurt the country.  They just hurt him .... not in everyone's eyes though.  So many people on my Facebook page love it.  They say stuff like 'the media has it coming' and 'it's about time someone stood up to them.'

So, I may cringe but I'll give him a pass on this one thing as long as his major positions and appointments are mostly right.

Today he is pushing the 'Repeal Now, Fix later' meme on Obamacare.  He also put out a very good tweet on Independence Day and thanking the troops.  Of course, the media ignored that one.

It's us against them, baby, and I'm still US.

[BassWrangler]

I'm not an ardent Trump supporter...my candidate was Cruz and I was a Trump despiser until a certain thing happened.  He got elected.

At that point I did the forbidden thing.  I thought about Hillary and Obama and the sort of people they are and what they have done and want to do to our country.

I decided to support Trump when possible.  And it's been possible more often than I expected or hoped for.

Yeah, he's still the childish egoist and he does dumb tweets but they don't hurt the country.  They just hurt him .... not in everyone's eyes though.  So many people on my Facebook page love it.  They say stuff like 'the media has it coming' and 'it's about time someone stood up to them.'

So, I may cringe but I'll give him a pass on this one thing as long as his major positions and appointments are mostly right.

Today he is pushing the 'Repeal Now, Fix later' meme on Obamacare.  He also put out a very good tweet on Independence Day and thanking the troops.  Of course, the media ignored that one.

It's us against them, baby, and I'm still US.

It absolutely hurts the country because it is distracting from his agenda and energizing the opposition. It's also marginalizing the Republican Party, which, like it or not, is now firmly hitched to the Trump train.

[corbe]

   Very thoughtful post @Emjay

[bigheadfred]

   Very thoughtful post @Emjay

The bennies of a clean bong.

[corbe]

The bennies of a clean bong.

   Sparkling water is the secret.

[Emjay]

It absolutely hurts the country because it is distracting from his agenda and energizing the opposition. It's also marginalizing the Republican Party, which, like it or not, is now firmly hitched to the Trump train.

Do you honestly think that the media and the libs need Trump's tweets to lie about him and diss on him.  They do not.  And they do not need to be energized.

We now see the laziest president ever, (Obama) fully energized ... thinking he's still president and actually meeting with foreign leaders.  Did Trump's tweets cause that?

I wish he wouldn't tweet but I'm not gonna blame all the troubles of the universe on it.

Actually, I think the Congress and the Court system deserve more blame than Trump right now.

[Suppressed]

What kills me is that it's absolutely the smallest sacrifice he could make, yet he won't do it. But based on the poll up on Drudge, it seems most of the ardent Trump supporters have convinced themselves that his tweets are a good thing.

Yup.  He's being played, but rather than admit that, they have to justify his reactions.

I think this illustrates it well...

[Suppressed]

Yeah, he's still the childish egoist and he does dumb tweets but they don't hurt the country.  They just hurt him .... not in everyone's eyes though.  So many people on my Facebook page love it.  They say stuff like 'the media has it coming' and 'it's about time someone stood up to them.'

So, I may cringe but I'll give him a pass on this one thing as long as his major positions and appointments are mostly right.

@Emjay, thanks for the thoughtful post.  I understand your position of taking Trump for what he is.  But I have to disagree with you on two points.

First of all, one of the things The Left has tried to do for decades is to attack us culturally, degrading America and its decency.  Cultural Marxism is a real push.

So when you say "So, I may cringe but I'll give him a pass on this one thing as long as . . ." you're acknowledging that it's okay for him to hurt America, as long as he does the second half of your sentence, which is... "as long as his major positions and appointments are mostly right."

The trouble is, positions and appointments aren't all it takes.  He needs to act like a leader to be a leader.  Positions and appointments aren't worth much if he undercuts any chance of accomplishments.

So his anti-American (in deed, if not in intent) behavior will still garner criticism from me.  I admit that even if all his supporters stood up for decency, he still might not be able to summon it up, but I think if he saw that as the only way to feed his narcissistic cravings, he just might.  So, unfortunately, his ardent supporters are complicit in giving The Left just what they want.

[BassWrangler]

Do you honestly think that the media and the libs need Trump's tweets to lie about him and diss on him.  They do not.  And they do not need to be energized.

We now see the laziest president ever, (Obama) fully energized ... thinking he's still president and actually meeting with foreign leaders.  Did Trump's tweets cause that?

I wish he wouldn't tweet but I'm not gonna blame all the troubles of the universe on it.

Actually, I think the Congress and the Court system deserve more blame than Trump right now.

Nope, they don't need it, but it certainly makes it a lot easier for them. Trump is a moral reprobate, and as such it is almost impossible to defend his position on anything. Any discussion with those nor already in his camp will inevitably turn to his complete and utter lack of character. After 16 years of making this case about Clinton and then Obama, it's hard to argue that character doesn't matter now, just focus on the agenda. This is especially true when you are trying to convince someone who may not have fully thought through or even be aware of the conservative worldview.

The left has for years been promoting this stereotype of conservatives as mean-hearted, evil-doers out for their own greed at the expense of the country. Trump has given them what they need to finally get some traction with that argument.

[INVAR]

The left has for years been promoting this stereotype of conservatives as mean-hearted, evil-doers out for their own greed at the expense of the country. Trump has given them what they need to finally get some traction with that argument.

Exactly as we warned it would.

However, since Trump was NEVER a Conservative, a recent convert to Republicanism after a lifelong supporter of Democrats and Communists (Bill DeBlasio, Hillary etc.) one has to wonder if this is just another 'act' to tarnish whom Trump would have a natural opposition to given his lifelong tenure as a NY liberal Democrat?

[truth_seeker]

It absolutely hurts the country because it is distracting from his agenda and energizing the opposition. It's also marginalizing the Republican Party, which, like it or not, is now firmly hitched to the Trump train.

Some statistics for you to ponder:

--From 2006 to 2014, the GOP was associated with GW Bush, then with McCain and Romney. In 2006 they lost control of the House.

--Only in 2016 under Trump, has the GOP gained majorities in both houses, plus the Presidency, and the chance to impact the Supreme Court with the next appointment.

I posit:
 
GW Bush, nice enough fellow, but totally inept during much of his term. they attacked, he remained quiet as the House slipped away, and set the stage for  Obama to come into office with the ability to impost Obamacare solely with dem votes.

The kind of GOP that people on this forum apparently want is the ineffective one. Got GW Bush, John Boehner, Denny Hastert, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan?

The last four names, were elected to be our GOP leaders, by our GOP representatives.

Can you say  "no heuvos?"

[Emjay]

@Emjay, thanks for the thoughtful post.  I understand your position of taking Trump for what he is.  But I have to disagree with you on two points.

First of all, one of the things The Left has tried to do for decades is to attack us culturally, degrading America and its decency.  Cultural Marxism is a real push.

So when you say "So, I may cringe but I'll give him a pass on this one thing as long as . . ." you're acknowledging that it's okay for him to hurt America, as long as he does the second half of your sentence, which is... "as long as his major positions and appointments are mostly right."

The trouble is, positions and appointments aren't all it takes.  He needs to act like a leader to be a leader.  Positions and appointments aren't worth much if he undercuts any chance of accomplishments.

So his anti-American (in deed, if not in intent) behavior will still garner criticism from me.  I admit that even if all his supporters stood up for decency, he still might not be able to summon it up, but I think if he saw that as the only way to feed his narcissistic cravings, he just might.  So, unfortunately, his ardent supporters are complicit in giving The Left just what they want.

What is anti-American about making a few foolish tweets about some media hacks?

How is tweeting undercutting good appointments and conservative positions?

I know Trump is particularly annoying to you but "So, unfortunately, his ardent supporters are complicit in giving The Left just what they want."  just flat doesn't make any sense to me.

The Left wants to get rid of Trump.  They don't need my help or your help or tweet help.

[corbe]

Some statistics for you to ponder:

--From 2006 to 2014, the GOP was associated with GW Bush, then with McCain and Romney. In 2006 they lost control of the House.

--Only in 2016 under Trump, has the GOP gained majorities in both houses, plus the Presidency, and the chance to impact the Supreme Court with the next appointment.

I posit:
 
GW Bush, nice enough fellow, but totally inept during much of his term. they attacked, he remained quiet as the House slipped away, and set the stage for  Obama to come into office with the ability to impost Obamacare solely with dem votes.

The kind of GOP that people on this forum apparently want is the ineffective one. Got GW Bush, John Boehner, Denny Hastert, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan?

The last four names, were elected to be our GOP leaders, by our GOP representatives.

Can you say  "no heuvos?"

   Nice try @truth_seeker But you glossed over one important point in your desire to prop up your twiiter guy:

   I posit:

   BHO had more to do with the gains the GOP made (2008-2016) than Trump ever will and 2018/2020 will prove I am all but delusional.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Some statistics for you to ponder:

--From 2006 to 2014, the GOP was associated with GW Bush, then with McCain and Romney. In 2006 they lost control of the House.

--Only in 2016 under Trump, has the GOP gained majorities in both houses, plus the Presidency, and the chance to impact the Supreme Court with the next appointment.

I psosit:
 
GW Bush, nice enough fellow, but totally inept during much of his term. they attacked, he remained quiet as the House slipped away, and set the stage for  Obama to come into office with the ability to impost Obamacare solely with dem votes.

The kind of GOP that people on this forum apparently want is the ineffective one. Got GW Bush, John Boehner, Denny Hastert, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan?

The last four names, were elected to be our GOP leaders, by our GOP representatives.

Can you say  "no heuvos?"

Gop had majorities in both houses since 2014.

[BassWrangler]

Some statistics for you to ponder:

--From 2006 to 2014, the GOP was associated with GW Bush, then with McCain and Romney. In 2006 they lost control of the House.

--Only in 2016 under Trump, has the GOP gained majorities in both houses, plus the Presidency, and the chance to impact the Supreme Court with the next appointment.

I posit:
 
GW Bush, nice enough fellow, but totally inept during much of his term. they attacked, he remained quiet as the House slipped away, and set the stage for  Obama to come into office with the ability to impost Obamacare solely with dem votes.

The kind of GOP that people on this forum apparently want is the ineffective one. Got GW Bush, John Boehner, Denny Hastert, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan?

The last four names, were elected to be our GOP leaders, by our GOP representatives.

Can you say  "no heuvos?"

I think the Republicans won because there was a big backlash against Democrats. Most of this happened *before* Trump was ever on the political scene (for example,  Republican take-over of State legislatures has been the trend for over 10 years).

I completely agree with you that Bush did himself, his party, and the country a disservice by refusing to stand up and counter the continuous onslaught of propaganda against him coming from the DNC and MSM. However, there's a big difference between a Reagan style punch back - a pithy, but well-reasoned, reply based on factual arguments, and a Donald Trump style "well you're a poopy head!" reply. Maybe as a country we're at the point in our history where "you're a poopy head!" is what people want to hear. I like to think not.

[INVAR]

Gop had majorities in both houses since 2014.

All glory and accomplishment must be attributed to Trump according to a lot of what I'm reading out there among GOP Party Loyalists and Trump fans.  Even if he actually had nothing to do with it.

Which is in perfect keeping of what the left has done since riding Reagan's coattails.

[Emjay]

   Nice try @truth_seeker But you glossed over one important point in your desire to prop up your twiiter guy:

   I posit:

   BHO had more to do with the gains the GOP made (2008-2016) than Trump ever will and 2018/2020 will prove I am all but delusional.

No doubt at all that the country was sick of Obama but .... not saying you're totally delusional ... maybe mildly delusional, but I honestly think that unless something goes horribly wrong, Trump is on a slow but good path to improving things in our country.

Who knows if I'll last that long but it will be very interesting to see what happens in 2018.

[corbe]

No doubt at all that the country was sick of Obama but .... not saying you're totally delusional ... maybe mildly delusional, but I honestly think that unless something goes horribly wrong, Trump is on a slow but good path to improving things in our country.

Who knows if I'll last that long but it will be very interesting to see what happens in 2018.

   'Mildly Delusional' I'll accept that, respectfully, from you @Emjay (no sarcasm intended or implied)

[Night Hides Not]

All glory and accomplishment must be attributed to Trump according to a lot of what I'm reading out there among GOP Party Loyalists and Trump fans.  Even if he actually had nothing to do with it.

Which is in perfect keeping of what the left has done since riding Reagan's coattails.

 

[RoosGirl]

Gop had majorities in both houses since 2014.

What?!  You don't remember all the elections we've had since the Presidential that put so many Republicans in the House and Senate?  Trump was out campaigning for all of them!