You are correct there. It is actually all three...
I do believe he is doing it out of an arrogant liberal mindset that he can lay his hands on the controls and make it all work.
I do believe that there is self-interest, as you point out.
But I do believe there is a great deal of ignorance, and when it all comes crashing down, it won’t be his fault. He will be gone, or he will blame it on someone else. But it will suprise him, and it will be due to ignorance.
I think to be able to conduct yourself appropriately both in and out of government, you need to have a grasp of history. That is my opinion. This is an area liberals are shockingly and dangerously deficient at, and it is by design.
To them, there are three problems, as I see it.
First, history is not important, except as a tool when it suits them.
Second, history begins today and now for them.
Third, any history they do embrace is often twisted and deformed. To this day, they think Hiss was not a spy, the Rosenbergs were innocent, and Ronald Reagan was dangerous.
Third, any history they do embrace is often twisted and deformed. To this day, they think Hiss was not a spy, the Rosenbergs were innocent, and Ronald Reagan was dangerous
. . . because to think anything else would be to face the fact that their nostrums aren't new - they only seem new because whoever tried them before died off without a trace.