Waiting For “4,5,6”.

I have written a couple of things previously that I want to revisit at this time.  Even though I still, in the main, agree with President Trump’s policies and appointments, I am dismayed by his learning curve in the Executive Office.  He’s got the “1,2,3” of the Presidency down.  He knows how to find his office; he apparently has his desk set up; there is a full White House staff; he has been across the pond to rub shoulders with foreign leaders; he has been through the obstacle course of a SCOTUS appointment; and the ACHA adventure in the House has demonstrated to him the nooks and crannies of the legislative process.  What he has not done is learn how to effectively use the levers of his new office to facilitate the implementation of his agenda.  He has not learned how to parlay his Republican majority in Congress into real legislative progress (granted…Congress deserves much blame also).  He has not reconciled to any degree his contentious relationship with the media.  His constant tweeting and rhetorical gymnastics severely hampers his message communication and quite frankly makes him look like he is “all over the board” when he is trying to set forth policy.  In short, he has yet to master the “4,5.6” of the Presidency and daylight is burning.  He seems to be stuck in a juvenile stage of political gamesmanship and either he enjoys it too much to evolve to a more effective method, his opponents are far more effective at the game than he is and they are making his job literally impossible, or he is quite simply “in over his head”.  The reality is probably a combination of all of these; but the fact is that if something in the Presidential formula does not change and change rather quickly, Trump’s tenure in the White House will be one characterized by turmoil, chaos, and unfinished ideals.  Regardless of who is right and who is wrong, Trump is the President and history will hold him accountable for his accomplishments…or lack thereof.  No one can help President Trump succeed more than himself.

I once wrote that if Donald Trump tried to run the Presidency the same way he operated as a CEO, it would not work out well.  Well…it ain’t working out well.  I suspect that a large part of the James Comey affair can be attributed to President Trump dealing with a Presidential subordinate the same way he dealt with corporate subordinates.  Clearly, civil service and politics are not the same as corporate structure and “making deals”.  This “he said, he said” episode between the President and the FBI Director (ex-Director) may develop into something significant; but for now it appears to be nothing more than a directive from a corporate supervisor to a corporate subordinate to “wrap this up and let’s move on”. 

Trump’s outsider quality is truly a double-edged sword.  His direct and business-like approach to his executive duties is a refreshing departure from past presidents; but his inability to either grasp or abide by the political nuances required of a President is perplexing.   There can be no doubt that many areas of the WDC swamp need draining; but is equally certain that a plumbing challenge this big must be approached with a certain degree of…shall we say…diplomacy.  There are cultures and habits in our government that need to be either reformed or dispatched; and some of that can be accomplished in a frank and transparent approach leading to quick and decisive action.  But other parts of the challenge need to be addressed within the structure of government itself; the changes must come from within.  It appears that as challenging as the Presidency is, the biggest hurdle for Trump to clear might be finding a sufficient number of competent people to staff his White House; people who are uniquely qualified to deal with a man as dynamic as Trump.  Every time his detractors seem to run out of arrows, he manages to somehow refill their quivers.  Every time he takes two steps forward, he insists on taking at least one step back.  The bright and shiny object always gets Trump’s attention and unfortunately, the object is not always germane to his job description.

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

I wrote that a six month period was a better evaluation period than 90 days; well…here we are.  The Republicans in Congress have a few months (actually weeks) to complete health care reform, tax reform, and an infrastructure bill.  Before any of us realize it, the mid-term election cycle will be upon us and nothing of substance will be accomplished in WDC during that reign of lunacy.  The Republicans in Congress, whose spines are composed mainly of a gelatin-like substance, seem very reluctant to take the risks associated with major legislation without having a strong President for cover.  Trump is not now that strong President and the jury is still out on whether or not he can become one.  If he can somehow grasp the “4,5,6” of being President, many great things are possible for this nation.  If he allows his ego-maniacal instincts to keep him stuck at “3”, we are likely in for another three and a half years of what we’ve just had for six months.

Tolerance for the Sake of Tolerance.

Our nation is built on the premise of liberties for its citizens.  Many times, those liberties are abused and stretched to the very limits of reason by radicals of every persuasion…left, right, and all spaces in between.  Civil rights advocates walk in the same streets as the KKK protesters.  California DNC officials lead convention chants with two handfuls of raised middle fingers and chants of “f### Trump”.  Supposed comedian/comedienne/s use the most vulgar language conceivable and hold up bloody, severed head props of the President.  The DNC National Chair goes all over the country preaching that “Republicans don’t give a s###”.  Gender has no definition anymore and adult men can enter public restrooms with young girls simply by claiming they believe themselves to be women.  College students rule their campuses by dictating rules and policy to the administrators.  Youth athletic leagues are in turmoil over gender issues regarding boys playing with girls playing with…undetermined.  If it all seems a bit overwhelming, then you are probably one of many that feel that way.  There is no time or opportunity or space to step back and carefully consider many of these social issues that are roiling our society.  They are in your face, they demand you decide NOW, and heaven forbid you say the wrong thing to the wrong group at the wrong time.  You can be branded as a hater, a bigot, or a racist before you even know yourself how you feel about many of these situations. 

Educators have a monumentally difficult job.  They must somehow balance the rudimentary requirements of teaching our children the skills necessary to be productive citizens and, at the same time, help them to assimilate into the myriad kaleidoscope of lifestyles that exist in today’s America.  They are not intended to replace parents, but they do supervise the first immersion of children into organized society.  There are so many questions that need answers…Where does personal liberty end and public assault begin?  When did failure to publicly and vocally support a controversial cause automatically make you anti-cause?  How can it be anti-social or disruptive to simply try and discuss the different aspects of these subjects in a sincere and reasonable fashion?  Can we not have a society where one can withhold personal judgment without being labeled either pro-this or anti-that?  Why can we not allow changes in the way our culture and people live and work with each other to evolve and percolate before foisting them wholesale upon the entire nation?  Most reasonable people choose to hold their opinions to themselves and simply co-exist with the world; choosing their mates and friends in their own fashion.  Most reasonable people are just fine with this process.  Most reasonable people understand that they lack the moral authority to judge others on their lifestyles. 

But it seems that it is not sufficient to stand by, reserve judgment, and live to let live.  We have apparently reached a point in these States where failure to openly accept a controversial or different lifestyle is considered intolerant.  Alas, we have become blind to the realities of an open society.  If the rights of the few are to be respected, then the voice of the few must also respect the rights of the many.  Tolerance for the simple sake of tolerance is nothing less than the absence of principle.  The old saying that many of us have grown up with is as true today as it ever was… “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything”.  

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

It is popular today to stand for nothing and tolerate everything.  If that trend continues, then we as a people will have no foundation beneath us to support ourselves.  There must be certain universal, bedrock principles that we hold amongst ourselves that guarantee the right of each person to live as they choose…as long as that living does not intrude on the lives of others.  The freedom to pursue one’s lifestyle is a liberty based on that pursuit not compromising the pursuits of others.  We have the right to feel good about ourselves; but we do not have the right to demand that others feel good about us.  If we as a society cannot restore a foundation beneath ourselves, then the inevitable result will be cultural chaos. 

Tolerance is a gift that must be both given and received; it flows in both directions.  In order to be respected by all, the tolerance given must be sincere, open, and freely given; the tolerance received must be reciprocated by gratitude without demand.   There can be patience without approval. There can be tolerance without acceptance.  There can be private opinions and judgments that each of us hold inside; that is our right.  The gratitude of receiving tolerance is not directed to the individuals who tolerate, but to the nation that insures liberty.  Tolerance by an American citizen is a floor, not a ceiling; it is an obligation.  In a perfect world, it is given without thought or intent; but we do not live in a perfect world.  Once again: as long as the person expecting the tolerance does not infringe on the liberties of others with their behavior; tolerance is required.  However, the motivation for the tolerance cannot, and should not, be prescribed.  For a U.S. citizen, it is sufficient that we tolerate.  Let the inner motivation for that tolerance be a matter between an individual and their Maker.

Looking Through the Smoke for the Fire.

In life, where there are always at least two sides to every argument, it is often difficult to filter out the extraneous noise and get down to the heart of the matter.  In fact, what one side might call diversionary or unnecessary facts might well be called pertinent and critical elements by the opposing side.  Given the polarized environment we have today, this situation is more prominent than ever and it is so very difficult to weed out the fact from the fiction.  Each political party, the mainstream media, and even society in general has adopted an attitude that distortion, misrepresentations, straw men exaggerations, and downright lies are all perfectly acceptable in the quest for a personal or political agenda.

But as we all experience from living, eventually the smoke will clear.  At some point, the noise will die down and we will be confronted with the bare truth.  And even though historical revisionists have a reached a new level of efficiency, reality has a way of outlasting all of its competition and with varying lengths of time passing; a clear view of the way things were and are will come into view. 

There are several issues swirling around our political world these days that are perfect examples of what I’m talking about.  And although oftentimes the time it takes for the truth to come out seems to be excessive; it is probably true that the length of time required to drill down to the real center is directly related to how thick the smoke is.  Put another way…if there is little substance to the objections, the smoke ends up being a thin veil and drifts away in the short term.  At that point in time, the paramount question should become what, if any, judgment should be made upon the creators of the smoke.  Was the smoke thick enough to constitute valid objections and concerns and once they were addressed, did the accusers get their proper credit for bringing up serious conversation and move on with the process?  Or…were the accusers exposed for creating an environment where the wispy smoke they’d been spreading turns out to be nothing more than clanging cymbals and static; a hypocritical and shallow effort to obscure their lack of legitimate points in opposition?  And, were these accusers who sucked all of the air from the room with their rhetorical nonsense get exposed as the charlatans they are?  Among the many issues cropping up in WDC lately, there are five that fall squarely in this realm.   It will be most interesting, and consequential, to see exactly how thick the smoke was when the room clears.

Did the Donald Trump Campaign collude with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election?  For well over a year, a large portion of which Obama and the Democrats controlled the White House and government agencies, evidence has been sought to verify that the Trump Campaign was working behind the scenes with Putin to defeat Hillary.  The reality is that nothing…nothing…of substance has been discovered by accusers to prove this illicit relationship; heck, a significant portion of the accusations occurred after the election in November of 2016.  Even more remarkable is the fact even if it had occurred, it is not against the law.  Now don’t get me wrong: It would certainly be unacceptable and unethical and totally reprehensible; but it is not illegal.  The Obama Administration made a clumsy effort to influence the outcome of Israel’s recent elections using taxpayer money (unsuccessfully, BTW).  There can be little doubt that many Presidents before Obama, from both parties, dabbled in the sovereign political affairs of foreign nations.  This does not make it right; it just makes it yesterday’s news and builds a strong foundation for ferreting out hypocrisy.  So we now have Special Counsel Mueller investigating a matter that has no central crime, no evidence of wrongdoing, and is accompanied by a political frenzy that rivals my seven-year old granddaughter’s drama queen act when she doesn’t get her way.  This affair certainly seems to be putting to the test the old adage that if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes truth.  A huge amount of taxpayer dollars will be spent on a runaway lawyer casually pursuing an ill-defined goal while those in Executive Agencies and Congress, whose official duty it is to monitor the very things the Special Counsel is looking into, can simply pass the buck and perform calculated commentary as the investigation interminably proceeds.  When the smoke clears on this one, there should several dozen egg cartons used up for face painting.

DNC Lawsuit Regarding Clinton Favoritism over Sanders.  One of the side benefits (perhaps sometimes the prime directive) of blowing smoke is obscuring issues other than the one talked about by drowning out all the other talk in  the room.  This would explain why many have heard nothing about the DNC being sued by Bernie Sander’s supporters for their actions during the Democratic Presidential Primary that appeared to unfairly (illegally?) favor Hillary Clinton and helped to insure her ultimate primary victory.  Based on DNC statements, leaks of DNC conversations, and the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC Chair, the smoke surrounding this episode looks pretty thick.  We can look forward to a pretty definitive verdict on this one due to the fact that it is playing out in court and not in the layers of government administration.   Perhaps the oddity of this story lies in the fact that the future relevance applies much more to Sanders, who likely harbors future political aspirations, than it does to Clinton, who needs to simply just…go…away.

The Obama Administration’s Unmasking Practices and Security Leaks.  This one is going to take a while to finalize; if it ever is.  But the implications stemming from this potential scandal go much further than any of the others we discuss today.  If ideologues and amateur professionals like Ben Rhodes and Susan Rice are able to arbitrarily (and perhaps illegally) unmask U.S. citizens from the results of intelligence surveillance and then selectively leak them to friendly media for political purposes, then we have a situation that makes Watergate look like a schoolyard marbles game.  As has been stated many times by many people, absolute power corrupts absolutely.  If proven to be true, the actions alleged in this abuse of power episode must result in somebody, somewhere, being prosecuted for crimes.  Liberty requires the absence of unwarranted government intrusion into our personal lives.  The retort that the intrusion might have occurred for specific and allegedly justified purposes does not alter the fact that our government must respect the privacy of its citizens.  The inescapable truth is that our government (regardless of majority Party) cannot be trusted to be given the keys to our private lives, no matter what the justification is.  Does this call into question the balance between security and citizen privacy?  Of course it does.  Freedom comes with a price and sometimes that price entails risks.  Those risks are the price we pay for our way of life and the liberties we enjoy.  The mere fact that the Obama Administration may have abused the power of citizen surveillance for purely political purposes makes the dual case that those guilty of this abuse should pay the maximum price and that as stated before, our government simply does not have the credibility or the integrity to enjoy such empowerment.  When the smoke clears on this one, someone should be receiving their meals through the door.

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

Federal Appeal of Trump Travel Restrictions.  For me personally (given up front that I am a rank amateur legal observer), the bizarre political twisting of the Federal Judiciary began with the SCOTUS decision on Obamacare when they determined that the tax that was passed through Congress as not a tax was in fact a tax.  If words have no meaning in the law itself, how can there be any order to our society?  The most recent example of this political contamination of our Judiciary is the recent Federal Appeals Court (Ninth Circuit in the West, Fourth Circuit in the East) rulings on President Trump’s travel restrictions. Not only are these restrictions remarkably similar to similar restrictions under Obama; not only are they clearly within the legal authority of the Chief Executive; and not only are they clearly warranted in light of recent terrorist activities (i.e. Manchester)…they are simply common sense steps to take in the crazy world that we find ourselves living in these days.  Both Courts split on their travel restriction opinions down party lines with the minority issuing very adamant dissensions.  Specifically, the dissent recently issued by the losing minority in the Fourth Circuit goes a tremendous way towards exploding the idiotic rationale used by the majority in a transparent attempt to further a political agenda through legal means.  Read the dissent here http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448047/whats-stake-court-cases-about-travel-ban .  These cases are no doubt headed to the Supreme Court and whether you are Democrat or Republican, agree or disagree with the travel restrictions; we should all hope that the SCOTUS will restore some semblance of legal order to this most recent adventure in judiciary madness run amuck.

The ultimate decider: Real Results.  Let’s face it: Presidents receive far too much credit when times are good and far too much blame when times are bad.  This is not to say that they can’t on occasion display extraordinary leadership and have a disproportionate influence on certain issues.  But by and large, our lives are far more influenced by the laws that are passed by Congress and the enforcement of those laws by the Judiciary.  I will acknowledge that the overt and growing influence of Executive Actions have been distorting this democratic principle over the last few decades; but our country still remains a nation of laws and compliance with those laws.  Therefore, it is patently fair and proper that the ultimate judge, both historically and politically, of a President is the state of the nation under his tenure.  Life is not always fair, and the same might be said for presidential politics.  Some Presidents get breaks in the makeup of Congress, the ebb and flow of domestic economic cycles, and the arbitrary nature of foreign policy and global events.  Stuff happens and oftentimes stuff takes precedence over the best laid plans. That being said…it is reasonable (and equitable) to assume that Donald Trump’s effectiveness as President will be based on how this country fares under his tutelage.  Should we consider how unfairly the media has treated his early days in office with negativity and the lack of a traditional Presidential honeymoon?  Should we take into account the pitiful state of domestic and foreign policy that was left to him by his predecessor?  Should we factor in that the Federal Judiciary has decided to engage in legal and political jujitsu in an attempt to foil his initiatives? What about the fact that the Republicans, his party, control both Houses of Congress?  What about the fact that federal tax revenues are at an all-time and historical high?  Should he be credited with the advantage of Executive Action latitude being at the highest point in memory; giving him a relatively free hand to act in many areas free of Congressional input?  The simple answer to all these questions is: No.  Oh, we can read about it and talk about it and think about it; as we should.  We can take it all into consideration.  After all, the ingredients have a huge impact on the quality of the cake.  But the final score is what goes in the record books.  How does the cake taste?  You were hired to do a job: do the damn job.

At the end of the day, when the smoke clears entirely, when the debits and credits are tallied and the paycheck lies on the table beside all the bills to be paid…reality and the quality of life will render its verdict on the Trump Presidency.  So, watch and see how the AHCA plays out and how it impacts health care.  Can real tax reform work its way through Congress and free up the economic engine of America?  Will responsible, compassionate, common sense immigration reform begin to be implemented?  Will some type of infrastructure bill create some good paying jobs across our nation and help to restore our transportation system to a better condition?  Will someone…anyone…in Congress find a way to restore some semblance of fiscal responsibility into our federal budget?  These are the issues that will determine the success or failure of Trump.  In the sands of time, the reasons why they did or did not happen will be lost.  Once the air is cleared and the noise dies down, reality will gavel a verdict and all the other distractions will be irrelevant.  Now…just how do you think that will turn out?

Divided We Stand; the Death of Bipartisanship.

It started way back with Nixon and Watergate; it gained momentum during the Clinton years; it flirted with high speed and recklessness during the G.W. Bush Administrations; it reached a crescendo with Obama in the White House; and now it has reached the level of full blown idiocy. 

It has not only become acceptable to simply obstruct the opposing party and never offer anything in response; it has become expected to do so.  And not only are we seeing the two major political parties engaging in hyper-partisanship these days; the mainstream media has thrown aside any pretense of objectivity and gone full bore anti-Trump.  Clapper, Yates, Hillary, Perez, Schumer, Hollywood…all are in full-throated unison to block any initiative proposed by our President.  The New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC and others are now running fiction as fact, quoting unnamed sources with a multitude of axes to grind, misrepresenting facts when all those present at an event say otherwise, and running front page headlines based on memos they have never seen and which are partially and selectively read to them over the phone by…once again…unnamed sources.  The venom we see from late night television is bracing, even shocking on occasion.  The Judiciary has been politically weaponized, career government employees are choosing sides based on ideological agendas, and holdover employees from previous Administrations are now expected to be undercover agents leaking all manner of propaganda and sowing seeds of dissent at every opportunity. 

Bottom line: When surveying the political landscape of America and realizing that forty-plus percent of the nation sees Republicans as territorial Neanderthals, while forty-plus percent see Democrats as anarchic Socialists; it certainly seems that we have quite possibly gone down the rabbit hole, are in total free fall, and all hope of having any semblance of a bipartisan, functioning government has disappeared.    There is no statesman on either side…no group of patriots who are willing to compromise, sacrifice, or sincerely engage in anything less than total political warfare.  And make no mistake about it:  It is war.  Just as surely as each side hurling missiles and bombs at each other, Republicans and Democrats are fully engaged in a contest to totally destroy and rule over the other.

And while we turn our heads from the constant attack memes in the media, trying to find anything that is politics-free and not driven by political correctness; the elephant in the room is this simple question: What is next?  Now that every player is locked in to a position, now that each party is openly armed and armored, now that all the folks in journalism have thrown aside their standards and selected their side; what are the implications of this unmasked hostility for our nation? 

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

The logical conclusion to be drawn from a fully polarized government is pretty simple: it is either total victory and dominance or total irrelevance and guerrilla warfare.  If Chuck Schumer and the Democrats, in league with the mainstream media and their other liberal friends, choose to continue their strategy of total opposition to anything Trumpian, then Republicans will have no other choice but to use the power available to the majority party to make the Democrats as irrelevant as possible.  The only logical alternative to this “crush or be crushed” mantra would be complete and total stalemate, gridlock, and spasms of legislative seizures; that status would be intolerable to either party in the long run.  The Democrats detonated the nuclear option on Presidential appointments.  The Republicans detonated the nuclear option on Supreme Court nominees.  The next nuclear device to drop will be targeted for simple cloture on routine legislative matters.  Once that threshold is crossed, we have entered into full blown political party autocracy.   And no matter which side of the political fence you stand on, that is not a good prescription for our nation.

If some type of miraculous wind doesn’t sweep across WDC and blow away the partisan seeds of destruction that are being sown, we are heading hell-bent towards a 2018 mid-term election that will set the course for our country either on a continued path of civics-centered chaos or will set the stage for a one-sided Republican transformation of government.   And if the latter turns out to be the case, it is simply a matter of time before the roles are reversed and we flip the script to a Democrat-authored government.  In politics, there are no truer words than “what comes around, goes around”.  Then, as our society and culture springs from one platform to another, the party that plays the minority role will inevitably become more obstinate, more disruptive, and more resentful for not having the pre-eminent position it inhabited not so long ago.  This is not a prescription for long-term success and well being; not a manner of existence that leads to a high quality of life for generation after generation. 

One must ponder the real likelihood that should our government continue to evolve in this fashion, will we not see our everyday lives trend in the same direction?  In so many respects, history has shown us that while it might not actually dictate specific behavior, our government sets an example that inevitably seeps downward into the way its citizens live, work, and play.  If you look around, you can now see that the “win at all costs and take no prisoners” mentality has permeated America.  We are badly fooling ourselves if we make the mistake of thinking that it cannot get any worse.

President Trump and the Democrats with their media allies remind me of a problem I have with my grandson…my six year old grandson.  On our occasional walks through the cattle pastures, I warn him to watch out for the fresh cow piles.  But like some kind of supernatural, organic magnetic force is at play, he’s attracted to the mess and will many times end up poking around with a stick or the toe of his boot.  He simply cannot resist the temptation.  The President and his perpetual critics have the same problem with each other that my grandson has with the cow manure; they simply cannot keep themselves from stirring it up and making it so much worse than they found it.  If there is to be any positive result from a Trump Administration, the President is going to have to talk less, speak softer, and learn to play with a winning hand.  The Democrats and the mainstream media need to crawl out of their sandboxes, shed their perpetual adolescence, realize that the election is over and was legit, and respectively assume their proper and necessary roles as the loyal (to their Country and Party principles) opposition Party and reporters (not Creators) of Facts (not Fiction).

Conservative Euphoria May Lead to Disillusion.

Like any political clique or faction, Republican Conservatives see the world through a glass darkly; they tend to evaluate realities based on their own ideals and never quite see the entire picture clearly.  This is as it should be; but the key to that particular philosophy enduring over time lies in its ability to adhere to non-negotiable principles that don’t totally exclude those who do not agree while compromising on practices that will lead to an overt influence of their thinking on everyday life.  Republican Conservatives were jubilant when Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton for the Presidency in 2016.  The question is: How much of that joy derived from severing the liberal path that Obama had placed this government on coupled with the defeat of his ideological successor versus the prospect of simply having a Republican President in the person of Donald Trump?  I believe that, unfortunately for those Conservative Republicans, the initial joy came from the latter; but it will be the former that fosters in huge disappointment.

Most people will hold Ronald Reagan out as the iconic Conservative.  He was a converted Democrat.  Closer to the point, he adhered to many conservative strategies, but on occasion would steer towards a moderate position.  George W. Bush looked like a Conservative, talked like a Conservative, reveled in the celebration of Conservatism, but he was a moderate …up to the point of renaming his adopted philosophy as Compassionate Conservatism.  I will always believe that the common trait that made John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan remarkable Presidents was their political courage.  Clearly, both were astute politicians and did a very effective job of reading the partisan tea leaves.  They then parlayed their reads into political successes.  But in both cases, these men were driven by personal convictions that they upheld and practiced at the peril of their political careers.  George W. Bush had a bit of this in him and, to a far lesser degree, Obama showed brief flashes of this behavior.  This form of exposing one’s true inner feelings is the way that most voters decide where to place their allegiance.  They try to read the real person behind the political mask.  Our President does not appear to be a man driven primarily by strong core convictions; but more so by pragmatic calculation seasoned with a strong dose of political consideration. 

Ronald Reagan has been so politically over-analyzed and his Presidency is sufficiently removed so as to limit the benefit of his comparison to Trump.  However, I find a comparison of Trump and Bush 43 beneficial.  Trump is a product of a New York liberal culture and society.  He was raised a Democrat and was, in fact, a practicing Democrat for most of his adult life.  And while his business experience has driven him to embrace many conservative principles in the realm of finance, his upbringing has molded him into a more moderate or even liberal stance in non-fiscal affairs.  Bush 43 is quite the opposite.  Any objective examination of his Presidency will show that he ran the fiscal affairs of our government in a very liberal fashion; spending tax dollars like a drunken sailor and piling on layer after layer of new bureaucracy.  But the way George W. Bush handled social civic matters revealed a truly conservative nature.  In the case of each man, Conservative Republicans found (and will continue to find) much to celebrate and much to disappoint. 

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

Like many people in this country who voted, Conservative Republicans rejoiced when Hillary Clinton was defeated.  A victory for her would have led this nation down a path of corruption and policy that likely would have dramatically diminished our great nation for generations to come.  If we citizens are forced to choose a President who does not fully represent our individual personal beliefs, I firmly believe that most Independents and Moderates in each party will select the candidate who bends conservative on fiscal matters and moderate on social matters.  I think that the residual conservative animus towards Bush 43 leads back to this type of logic; even though he was a faithful conservative on social issues, he wandered far off the conservative path on fiscal affairs.  So we have in Trump a fiscal agent who should satisfy the spending desires of Conservatives; but find that the motivation for those habits lies in the principles of business and not in the tenants of Conservatism. 

It is yet to be seen what type of President we will have in Donald Trump.  But from a personal standpoint, I see indications in the ongoing health care debate, tax reform discussion, immigration argument, and budget talks that lead me to believe that the moderate-to-liberal influence in President Trump’s character will be more pronounced in social aspects of governing as his Administration progresses.  And as we move further away from the joy of removing the Clintons from their perch of political influence, the reality of a not-so-conservative President Trump is going to cause a lot of heartburn in the circles of Republican Conservatism.  But even more interesting will be watching the dynamic of a growing conservative disenchantment with Trump as his migration towards a moderate social policy evolves, simultaneously enhancing his standing with non-ideological voters.   Trump appears to be heading towards a fiscally-thrift Presidency that takes either a hands-off or state’s rights approach to the hot button social issues of the day.  The very policy positions that are anathema to Conservatives could make him attractive to many Moderates.  A fiscal conservative with a libertarian social bent might disillusion the Republican Right, but that formula might very well suit the majority of American voters to a tee. 

If he can pull off the truly challenging feat of successfully getting legislation through Congress, he could be in for a long and productive tenure in the White House; assuming, of course, that his erratic personal tendencies do not implode his Presidency.  The over-riding and long-term question of consequence for the Republican Party is whether or not a fiscally-conservative President with moderate social tendencies is pure enough to satisfy the true believers?  If the answer is NO, then the Republicans may be condemned to a position of occasional rule with chronic splintering among its various factions.  If the answer is YES, then the Republicans may have found a winning political formula for future elections and Conservatives may begin to deliberately chip away at our bloated and overly intrusive federal government.

TDSF.

It is really rather ridiculous for everyone to be all up in President Trump’s “first 100 days”.  It is not ridiculous for some type of early assessment to be made on his progress as President; but it is certainly ridiculous to assign an arbitrary number such as 100 to a man that is facing the challenges he is facing.  Let’s get real…Obama left this country and this world in a colossal mess.  At the end of his tenure, our nation was like a pickup truck with the front end over the edge of a steep cliff over a deep holler.  If it wasn’t for the fact that our truck is a 4WD with posi-traction, any reasonable person would have figured we’d be heading on over into the abyss.  Even though I think a six-month point might be more reasonable to examine our President’s progress; I will render my humble opinion on his record so far.  The media do what they do; I suppose if they can do it every hundred days, they get to do it more often.

Every President in my lifetime has come into office with partisan opposition to his agenda.  However, every President in my lifetime has also come into office with some semblance of a media honeymoon…some longer than others.  Obama came into office with more political capital than any President I can recall.  He squandered it in a foolish, selfish, and stupid fashion.  It all went downhill from there.  President Trump, with all of his many flaws and the poisoned WDC political environment, has come into office with absolutely nothing but media animus and an opposition party that stands for little else than “anyone but Trump”.  Regardless of what opinion you might hold of The Donald, it is hard to deny that few, if any, incoming Presidents have faced greater domestic and global challenges, encountered a greater level of vitriolic partisan opposition, and experienced a more strained relationship with the media than has President Trump.  While any person elected President in 2016 would have faced the same geo-political challenges, one cannot help but accept that no other candidate would have been skewered (on many occasions, self-inflicted skewering) like President Trump.  I think we can all agree that had Hillary Clinton been elected President in 2016, the media embrace would have been saccharin beyond reasonable tolerance.  So…let us discuss the last few days since President Trump’s inauguration; or, to put it another way, TDSF…The Donald So Far.

Foreign Policy.  Every President comes into office shackled and cursed by their campaign rhetoric and the irresponsible remarks made in the heat of the contest to obtain the presidency; Donald Trump is no different and likely one of the more “shackled and cursed” in memory.  Fortunately, President Trump has felt no serious allegiance to many of his prior foreign policy positions.  He has initially shown a surprising willingness to adjust his actions to the realities of the planet.  Now this not akin to admitting errors in prior judgment; he has not yet achieved that capacity of humility.  He has, however, demonstrated a refreshing grasp that the global society is complex, arbitrary, and unpredictable; populated by predominantly good people and many inept or evil leaders; and subject to “on the fly” decisions of great consequence.  I will not presume, especially at this early date in his Administration, to judge the wisdom of the President’s foreign policy actions.  I will note however, that I find it refreshing to hear him reaffirm our nation’s preeminent role in world affairs.  The plain and simple fact is that the United States is uniquely qualified to take leadership positions on global issues of war and peace.  Their failure to do so leaves a vacuum that gets filled, to varying degrees, by the most opportunistic, ruthless, or ambitious; seldom by the most able or best equipped.   Obama’s denial of this plain truth was infuriating and the President’s embrace of the principle is reinvigorating.  I also find the President’s choice of foreign policy Administration officials to be sound and even more so is  his apparent willingness to give them the authority and the autonomy to make serious and consequential decisions.  The world finds itself in a very dangerous time and we can only hope and pray that God’s wisdom guides our President’s decisions in this area.  Unfortunately, the President himself is guiding his oft-times irresponsible rhetoric and tweeting regarding world affairs.  There is some benefit to having a truly unpredictable American President that forces foreign adversaries to guess about his intent; the problem is that our foreign allies face the same dilemma.  We can only hope that experience will teach this President to hold his counsel a bit closer to the vest and keep his fingers a bit further from the keyboard.  I look forward to the time when the President will openly acknowledge some of his prior misconceptions about global politics, his awesome but limited ability to influence global politics, and his fallibility in decision making that makes even his best efforts the choice of a flawed man.  There is a delicate and impossible to fully achieve balance facing America.  We must use our power and authority for global good and justice; enforcing universal tenants of morality and humanity.  At the same time, as is oftentimes said, we cannot be the world’s police; controlling the internal affairs of other nations to conform to our own visions.  Calls must made and actions must be taken when certain lines are crossed (genocide, chemical weapons, nuclear irresponsibility); but we cannot, and should not, attempt to micro-manage the perennial civil disorder that occurs on this planet.  Choosing when, where, and how to use the awesome power of the American military and financial machine is a truly intimidating task that would require of any man the Wisdom of Solomon.  So far…Trump seems to understand this concept.  It is yet to be determined whether or not he is up to the task of managing it.

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

Domestic Policy.  The two most surprising things I have found about this President (after, of the course, the mere fact that he won the election) is that he is obviously making a supreme effort to keep his campaign promises and that he appears to be showing outstanding judgment in selecting members of  his Administration.  Like him or not, the Trump you saw and heard in October of 2016 is the same man that inhabits the White House in May of 2017.  He is implementing (or attempting to implement) the policy initiatives that he ran on and that, my friends, is as it should be.   Elections have consequences and we need to have candidates that do what they say they will do if elected.  It is encouraging to see the President roll back the intrusion of Government into our private and public lives.  It is good to see him shifting power and authority back to the states and the citizens.  It is good to see his disdain (although it is at times quite incoherent) for political correctness.  In the main, he is slowly bringing the massive and monolithic ship of state to a new heading towards a more conservative and less manipulative direction.  Like all so-called conservatives who have reached the Presidency, he is finding it far easier to change policy than it is to reconcile the finances.  I would like to see a greater awareness from our President regarding the national debt and deficit; but I will acknowledge the reality that the governmental spending malady is so ingrained and so chronic that the best we can hope for is a fundamental change in approach; that being an approach that accepts the need to be deliberately moving towards greater fiscal responsibility and a better understanding of what our government needs to do and what our government can afford to do.  I fear that one of our President’s more meaningful flaws might end up being the fact that he has always been a person of privilege; he has never really wanted for anything.  Many times, folks in that position never fully appreciate the consequences of facing demands without the resources to meet them.  Let us all hope and pray our country never reaches that point.  I applaud the President’s sense of priorities.  I like his immediate addressing of health care and tax reform.  I like the fact that the complex and divisive issue of immigration reform is being held over for later, and more extended, debate.  As for the wall…nobody really cares who pays for it or exactly when it will be completed; just get started on it and show some steady progress towards getting it done.

Leadership.  The President has shown positive signs of growing into his job.  Some of his recent speeches demonstrate a new-found grasp of leadership gravitas and his words occasionally approach inspiration and stirring emotion.  One of the President’s most consequential moments came when he nominated Justice Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.  His leadership during that episode was immaculate (with a big assist going to Senator McConnell…a dime for Mitch).  I find it really surprising that he has demonstrated a relatively effective grasp regarding the separation of power between the Congress and the Executive.  Now this grasp will surely be tested as his Administration endures; but for now, he seems to have a good understanding of what he can do and what he must rely on Congress for.  I especially appreciate his patience as the Republicans in the House go through the messy “fits and starts” of legislating.  Whether we like it or not, we the people must understand that these are largely amateur, citizen politicians in the House who represent a handful of counties each.  They are by nature independent people who come to WDC with an idealized vision of how government should operate and trying to organize them must be like herding cats.  It took the Democrats two years with complete control of Congress and the Executive to pass Obamacare.   Can anyone reasonably expect (or even desire) that Republicans will come up with its successor in a few months?  I have stated over and over that Congress must return to regular rules of order and that entails complex and sometimes difficult to understand discussion and debate.  This is how government should work.  The real test is whether or not the process leads to results.  That verdict is outstanding.

As much as I hate to include the media in this assessment, I feel it is necessary to do so.  I find it instructive to read about how the recent WHCA (White House Correspondents’ Association) annual WDC dinner has become something of a “come to Jesus” moment for the press.  Many (but not all) in the journalism community have observed that the President’s refusal to attend the annual event (contrary to tradition) has forced the organization to reconsider its place in this nation’s society and culture.  The WHCA (perhaps more aptly called the Obama Admiration Society) has devolved into a glitz and celebrity-driven club of headline wannabes without any apparent allegiance to any form of journalistic principle.  They have obviously lost their way and their sense of purpose.  I do not say this because the press is predominantly anti-Trump; I say it because the press is predominantly partisan, vindictive, sophomoric, unprofessional, and untrustworthy.  If in fact this most recent breach in the media/President nexus results in a reexamination of their relationship, then it might very well be a positive development.  While the media has been childish and irresponsible to the max in their approach to the Trump Administration, Trump has also been less than classy in how he has reacted to their negativity.  It is important that our President and our media have a civil relationship; one built not on personal beliefs, but on respect for the office and unique position that each side occupies in our nation’s culture.

All told, The Donald has been a pleasant surprise to me.  He has exceeded my expectations on the quality of his appointments, his adherence to his promises made, and his ability to recognize his own Presidential limitations.  Like a promising college freshman, here is hoping that he can finish out his rookie year with continued learning, leading to increased production and efficiency in his sophomore season.  I will continue to cringe at his random bizarre tweets and his occasional rhetorical bluster.  But if in the next couple of months, our Congress manages to pass health care reform and tax reform, we have an episode of bipartisan trough-feeding (aka infrastructure legislation), and if our President can grow into his office in some meaningful ways…then this reality show television personality that rode a perfect storm into the Presidency might end up being a pretty decent leader of our nation and the free world.   

A Grudging Acknowledgement to the Only Adult in the Room.

I have oftentimes been a very vocal critic of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.  While professing a personal devotion to “Senate Traditions”, I believe he has chosen his battles in a curious fashion over his long Senate tenure; a pattern that does not seem to jibe completely with Senate tradition.  I have also found it curious how he chooses when and where to exert his not insignificant influence when policy debates are in vogue.  That might very well result from him being an experienced, studied, accomplished legislative scholar who knows how to acquire power and how to effectively use it and me being an obscure internet blogger.  But on this day, when the Senate Republicans have determined to return the Senate to normal rules of order by choosing to execute the so-called nuclear option, I see Senator McConnell assuming the role as the only adult in the room.  While essentially everyone in WDC (regardless of political standing) seems to be embracing the circus surrounding President Trump and his Media Wars, Senator McConnell has been conspicuous by his absence.  He is the big dog that has not barked. 

While he is unquestionably one of the most powerful men in our government today, he has chosen to keep his own counsel.  He does not court the media; instead appearing only on those occasions when events seem to demand the opinion of the Senate Majority Leader.  Some might say that reality itself has rendered McConnell a low profile player; but that would be a large mistake.  Mitch McConnell is not a flashy, enigmatic legislator and has seldom sought the spotlight.  While it is true that when the challenges came close to his personal set of principles, he has risen up and gone public in a big way; his typical strategy is one of patience, deliberation, and a healthy respect for the letting things play out in a natural kind of way. 

Anyone familiar with his political career would readily acknowledge that he is not one to be trifled with when it comes to campaign etiquette.  He has shown no reluctance to competing at any level necessary to win; even though he oftentimes allows his opponent to determine what that level might be.  I have witnessed his effective ruthlessness when primary-challenged and general election-challenged here in Kentucky.  When immersed in heated political conflict, or when he chooses of his own volition that it is necessary, he can morph from the bespectacled man standing to the side to an acid-tongued warrior that knows no bounds to heaping sarcasm and ridicule on his rival.  There has always been fire in his belly when he chose to ignite it; perhaps his ascending position in the U.S. Senate has persuaded him to call on it more sparingly than in the past.  Experience has taught him that our Government runs in large part through its Senate; and he who controls that Senate has significant influence on government.

While McConnell was clearly not an early or even eventual energetic Trump supporter, he nonetheless always came up with the right words when questioned about The Donald, his Administration, and his Agenda. Exhibiting a quiet confidence borne of strength and power (some might call this arrogance), McConnell has remained relatively quiet while the political universe has debated New Travel Vetting Policies, ACA Repeal/Replace, Trump Campaign/Russia Collusion, and Obama Administration Political Spying.  When these subjects were broached with the Senate Majority Leader, he assumed a low-key response by acknowledging the regular order of the Senate and how the appropriate Investigative Committee processes work.  How refreshing is it to hear someone on either political side simply stand up straight, unflinchingly state the obvious, and say… “Let’s see how it plays out”? 

But when the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch came up, that old fire from down under began to heat up.  McConnell knows first–hand how the Senate Democrats mortgaged the integrity of the “advise and consent” clause for some short-term gains back in the early 2000’s. Although both parties have dipped their feet into this cesspool of hypocrisy, it is clearly the Democrats who have pioneered the political hijacking of the Senate role in Presidential appointments.  There has been a painful, shameful, and inexorable roll towards the Supreme Court Nominee nuclear option and as sad as it is to acknowledge the futile surrender that it represents; it is a welcome occurrence that we can put the charade behind us.  Once the nomination process itself became more important than the nominee, it was damn sure time to change things around. 

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

As one who has been a life-long disciple of Senate tradition, it cannot have been an easy decision for McConnell to lead the return back to majority rule on Supreme Court nominees.  He knows far better than most that this rule change will come around to work against his party in future years and that any complaints pointed its way at that time will be hollow and specious.  The fact that it is Senator Mitch McConnell (he the long-time advocate for Senate rules of order) who has led the ignition of the nuclear option, speaks volumes to the fact that it was absolutely necessary.  It is a tragedy that the Supreme Court has become so politicized and is now considered by most voters as, at a minimum, a quasi-partisan body.  But if that is the fact, then it is also the fact that the best way to determine that body’s composition is through the ballot box.  And if we embrace that logic; then the simple majority rule for approving Supreme Court nominees is entirely appropriate and proper.