Saturday, February 10, 2018

What Peggy says . . .

While I'm steering you to other people's writing this morning, let me recommend Peggy Noonan's latest at the WSJ.

I've been trying for years to accurately depict the mindsets of the various camps regarding the Trump phenomenon. She nails it:

A rock-solid Republican, a veteran of the Reagan wars who knows what it is to have all forces arrayed against you, spoke of opposing Mr. Trump. It isn’t a matter of style or snobbery, isn’t knee-jerk. The veteran said: People who are for Trump always say “Look, he’s got an unfortunate character and temperament, but he’s good on regulation, good on the courts.” The problem, the veteran said, is the but. Once you get to the but, you are normalizing him—you are making him normal, which means you are guaranteeing a future of President Trumps. That means you have lowered the presidency forever, changed it forever, just when the world’s problems are more dangerous, and thoughtfulness and wisdom more needed. 
The veteran is trying to be protective, and a patriot. 
Trump supporters, on the other hand, chose him and back him because he isn’t normal. They’d tried normal! It didn’t work! Of course he’s a brute, but his brutishness was the only thing that could surprise Washington, scare it, make it reform. Both parties are corrupt and look out only for themselves; he’s the one who wouldn’t be in hock to them and their donors. Is he weird? Yes. But it’s a weird country now. He’s the only one big enough to push back against what’s pushing us.
 She goes on to look at three big news stories of the week now concluding: Rob Porter, the stock market gyrations, and the parade idea, and how each relates to Trump. Regarding the parade, she is on the same page as Ralph Peters: the idea is driven by ostentation and Trump's overriding appetite for self-aggrandizement.

Good stuff. Check it out.
 

4 comments:

  1. Glad you're not on board with the pahrade charade either. This is what rogue and outlaw countries do. I'm already aghast at how many generals he relies on.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Now, relying on generals I like a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, that's very Constitutional of you or something like it. Congress had to give our Secretary of Defense (a post normally held by a civilian) a special dispensation to get him legally nominated. And the chief strategist is normally a civilian, but, man that Prexy you detest but who does most of the right things got his way there too. He may be a good delegator, but it's the wrong direction he's delegating in. Wonder if all this military meddling in our cherished civilian traditions has anything to do with the red ink we're going to have to endure because of greatly increased military spending? Oh well, I'm sure you think it all bodes well for your beloved Israel and all their anti-Christs to whom we just gave a record pay-out under the previous anti-Semitic administration?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, we're going to have to make sure Israel knows we have her back in the wake of the downed F-16, the subsequent retaliation strikes inside Syria, and the resulting pronouncements about a "strategic change" from Hezbollah.

    ReplyDelete