I do not want to come across as arrogant; but based on 60+ years of fighting for traditional American values, including hours of using live TV to advantage, I want to share some experience driven suggestions, both for our candidate, and all of us who will be actively promoting a Trump victory in just 20 days.
While speaking in anger can sometimes help rally those who share your beliefs and priorities, it is not the most effective way to convert those who dissent from our purpose. When there is a real problem to be addressed, it is almost always better to speak in sorrow than in anger.
In the present ideological conflict, there is great reason for sorrow. We need to interject, in every possible exchange, those contemporary phenomena that are not only unfortunate from our stand point; but which are likely to be understood as sad by anyone listening to us.
Putting this understanding to work in a situation such as tonight's Presidential debate; Trump needs to intertwine his response to essential policy issues, by sadly lamenting the background social climate, which certainly impacts all aspects of contemporary American life, including the problem reflected in the issue. For example:
The decline in pride in heritage, openly encouraged by Obama's repeated apologies to others for America's traditions & achievement--leading to Americans kneeling through the Star Spangled Banner;--his & Mrs. Clinton's siding with Soros financed thugs against the Police--leading to the cold blooded assassination of American cops;--their refusal to protect the border, leading to job losses among rooted Americans, brutal crimes against American women, and the despicable riots in California, where aliens who do not share our values, or honor our heritage, intimidate local officials into not celebrating the achievements of the Founding Fathers and their posterity.
It was only last week, when anti-American culturalists advocated not celebrating Columbus Day! The Obama/Clinton cabal seem intent on denying that our values & achievements, under uniquely American cultural values, grew directly out of the experience driven values of particular European settlers. That is fact. It takes nothing away from the achievements or values of any other people; but it is our fact, and we are entitled to honor that fact and the rich cultural heritage it reflects.
To the extent that the Obama/Clinton cabal would deny us pride in our history, they are truly bigoted enemies. But we do best, again, when we lament the success of our enemies, as we explain, again quietly and sadly, how totally despicable is this ongoing attack, coming indeed from those who have benefited so much, while gaming our system.
Some may think that this approach is going soft. It is precisely the opposite. In place of venting our wrath at the Obama/Clinton betrayal, we begin to instill wrath in some of those who otherwise would simply go along with the enemy, "to get along."
There is nothing the least bit new in these tactics. Anyone familiar with Shakespeare's play "Julius Caesar," is quite familiar with the technique. It worked in the play because it reflects a true understanding of the psychological factors involved.
bump to #48.
That a woman who has been politically active, all her entire adult life, among a people with the most successful history of economic achievement over their first century and a quarter, of any people on earth, under a Constitutional Government designed to protect that people from a bureaucratic pestilence, which has been the bain of most nations; that such a woman has so missed the essential point of the American achievement, is staggering in its implications.
Mrs. Clinton claimed that a Clinton Government woujld rebuild the "Middle Class." Was she tottally unaware that the American Middle Class clearly built itself? That the American Middle Class resulted from naturally energized individuals, aspiring to achieve the good life, who risked everything to first clear a wilderness, work hard, generation to generation, to save & accumulate the attributes of the good life; with the result that by 1913--the year that a graduated income tax first became Constitutional, this Settler built Federation of newly settled States, had already surpassed every one of the great powers of Europe in industrial strength.
To "rebuild" the "Middle Class," Mrs. Clinton vowed to make the most successful Americans--those who had achieved the most-- pay increased taxes; she called it "paying their 'fair' share." But it was clearly to be a tax on success--a tax to fund a raft of new programs (a cancer or pestilence of an expanded bureaucracy). She was obviously indifferent to the fact that the biggest impediment to any poor person with ambition, actually launching a small business to improve his status, is an almost incomprehensible explosion in bureaucratic regulations, most of which premised on the same flawed understanding of how people actually advance, which Mrs. Clinton displayed, last night.
Americans used to learn by experience. What were the experience based lessons of what transpired from the drafting of our written Constitution in 1787, until the passage of the income tax amendment in 1913? Are they instructive or not, for what actually works for human advancement?
The Constitution prior to 1913, absolutely interdicted a tax driven war on the accumulation of individual wealth. Article I, Section 9, which Mrs. Clinton should have remembered from Law School, provided that no direct tax on individual Americans could be applied in any way but pro-capita. (That is Warren Buffet would pay the same tax--not the same percentage tax--but the same tax as Joe the Plumber. The Founders had no desire to limit individual success. They sought only to encourage it.
Under there experience based philosophy, there were almost certainly not even 1% of the bureaucratic regulations, with which Americans seeking to improve their lot, must face today. In place of today's pursuit of grievances, real or imagined, there was universal admiration for the high achievers! And the growth rate of a people freed to achieve, was the economic phenomenon of human history.
We do not pretend to know whether it was in her indoctrination by Marxist Pied Pipers, in her late teens, or pure confusion in whatever she is struggling with today. But Mrs. Clinton is utterly clueless on how a dynamic economy works; as she is utterly unaware of the dynamic, interactive factors, that drive or stagnate any human aspiration or achievement. What is absolutely clear, even if one ignores her lack of a moral compass in her political dealings; the woman is absolutely unqualified to be President of the United States.
This is one more reason why we must win this election for Donald Trump.
William Flax
[This may be reproduced, if in full context, with or without attribution.]