Replies

Just to summarize, NB, my concern is the fact that you still obviously consider the President-elect to be a fraud, con man, and charlatan, despite overwhelming and compelling evidence to the contrary.

And you continue to question Trump's conservative bona fides, even though his administration represents the most superb collection of conservative minds and advisors that has been assembled over a century. Trump is building a team that easily rivals Reagan's, if not exceeding it altogether.

I can see President Trump doing things that will rankle doctrinaire conservatives, both fiscal and social, on a few issues here and there.

But overall, the direction of the projected changes, almost across the board, is both undeniable and encouraging.

Frankly, your concern for any "departure from conservative values", before President-elect Trump has even assumed office, seems more a product of your dislike for him, rather than being the result of balanced consideration of what's actually being proposed.

So my questions are, after acknowledging all of Donald J. Trump's real flaws (not the imagined ones):

1) Do you still consider President-elect Trump a charlatan, a fraud, a con man, or a buffoon? Any of those?

2) Do you believe President-elect Trump loves this country and wants to do what's best for it, within Constitutional constraints?

3) Will you ever be able to bring yourself to like the man?

If I could hear some positive answers to the above questions, I'd be much less inclined to conclude that you're an incorrigible Trump-hater.

I'll tell you what I think. I think that, even though this is a man who once casually discussed going after married women as conquests, as if it was some kind of acceptable behavior, this man, overall, has character in many places that matter. He also has great skill at connecting with people, as a business executive, and, to be honest, as a leader.

I imagine that every President has had at least one profound weak spot or character deficit. For instance, is something like marital infidelity, which we know many Presidents have been guilty of, really any more (or less) of a detriment than, say, owning slaves? Being a homosexual? Drinking too much? Staging a burlary?

I hope that President-elect Trump has put such immoral thinking behind him and repudiated such behavior. However, I do categorically reject the voluminous and baseless lies that have been promulgated in an effort to smear Donald Trump. And, at least on paper, I do agree with the vast majority of his policies, both in terms of general direction and even details, when provided.

Make no mistake. There are probably some issues where I will oppose President Trump tooth and nail. The Fourth Amendment, for instance. I strongly suspect that President-elect Trump's attitude towards individual privacy is much too pragmatic, and if he doesn't keep his nose clean on things like that then not only will I oppose him, but it'll also present a golden opportunity for his detractors on the Left to accurately label him as fascist.

But, on balance, let's face it: Donald Trump's Presidency is the greatest opportunity for this country to change course in at least 100 years. This movement has the potential to change this country for the good, and in a profound way. It may be our last chance to save this Republic, using a flawed vessel that God can both Bless and Redeem...

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

…Jeremiah 17:9

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

…Romans 3:23

Now you ask, "Do you still consider President-elect Trump a charlatan, a fraud, a con man, or a buffoon?" to which both Jeremiah and St. Paul have vouchsafed us the answer. This is not a dodge on my part. There are three main monuments in Washington DC celebrating Washington, Lincoln and Jefferson. Jeremiah, St. Paul, and I would render the same answer respecting all three.

There are differences of degree, of course. Every one of these men were politicians and they had to con friends and foe alike of their true intentions if they were to prevail as politicians. Jefferson was obviously a hypocrite in his treatment of his slaves, Lincoln was obviously a con man in dealing with his cabinet, his generals, and in furthering the 13th amendment. Washington wore his military attire to the Continental Congress because he wanted to be appointed commander-in-chief.

These men were great men but they were not perfect. Donald Trump is certainly less perfect than they were and, equally important for this discussion, he is far more flamboyant so any deficiency of character he possesses is magnified by the grandiosity of his personality and the power of modern media. On any given day may be any one, none or all of these things but that might not express the essence of his character and even if it does it might not render him less than a very great president.

Anyone who does not believe that Donald Trump is possessed of some degree of all of these character defects is a fool. We were fooled once very recently by George W Bush, his conservatism melted until at the end he was despised by left and right. We should determine not to be fooled again.

The framers had a singular collection of very great men with whom to start off their government and they wrote a Constitution to prevent any one of them from acting on the sins which they presumed everyone of them bore by heeding Montesquieu and separating powers. Can you imagine the conviction of these people about the inherent nature of man to insist that even Washington be subject to constitutional restraint? Yes, many fell on the other side of the line but the people were very mindful of the danger of monarchy. In our last exchange, I referred to it as the danger of a Caesar.

One of the checks on the evil that might be done by powerful men was the first amendment and its protection of free speech. The reaction to the Alien and Sedition Acts of the second president, John Adams, demonstrates the depth of feeling on this issue. Free speech is protected by the First Amendment to protect us from Caesar. To try to intimidate critics of Caesar, or George Washington, or Donald Trump, is to play the fool and play into the hands of those who would deprive us of our liberties.

Remember, your reply #71 you set this subject in the context of liberty:

This movement is not based on purely traditional conservative orthodoxy, and that may be a good thing.What I do know is that the traditional right-left framework is utterly insufficient to defining evidently, AMERICAN LIBERTY. I've concluded that it will not be found within those restrictive boundaries. (Emphasis supplied).

I insist, to the contrary, the conservative verities like the verities of Jeremiah and St. Paul, are immutable and indispensable to liberty. If by a "right-left framework" you meant Republican-Democrat, I would agree with you. But if you mean to set aside that which makes us conservatives because Donald Trump says so, I demur. What is hypocritical on your part is that you reserve unto yourself the right to demur as you please about what constitutes "liberty," for example concerning fourth amendment issues, while you deny the same right to me. Evidently you can discern when Donald Trump's heart is pure, but I cannot.

Consider Trump's policies on trade. He is determined to stop the practice of moving manufacturers to Mexico only to reimport the manufactured widgets. On the whole I think that is a good policy but it is a policy which adversly affects the consumer and the stockholders of the company. We have a Constitution that sets up how these things should be handled and it does not provide for executive Fiat. We are talking about liberty. The liberty of the company to move its plant where it pleases and the liberty of consumers to purchase the goods at presumably a cheaper price. It is a very dangerous proposition to place this kind of unfettered power in the hands of one executive who unilaterally decides that his policy is good for jobholders and that justifies harming consumers and stockholders. The Constitution gives Congress a share in these decisions. It is vital that the process be respected.

On the other hand, there is nothing in the Constitution which prevents a president from jawboning companies. There is a difference between jawboning and sending FBI agents, as JFK did, to roust steel executives out of their beds.

A few notations for the record:

Trump-haters such as yourself are clearly still bitter about a few things.

You repeat this meme over and over leaving me in the impossible position of trying to prove the negative. That is why I twice cited the vanity which you evidently still have not read. It is not a negative piece, in fact it is rather supportive of what seems to be Trump's position concerning Russia.

2) Do you believe President-elect Trump loves this country and wants to do what's best for it, within Constitutional constraints?

Yes, certainly. I believe he loves his country and I believe he would even profess a passing obeisance to the Constitution. But I do not believe that fidelity to the Constitution is in his bones, but he is not alone in that wretched condition. There has not been a president since Franklin Roosevelt who believes in the Constitution with the exception of Ronald Reagan.

If you think Trump adheres to a conservative originalist version of the Constitution except by accident, I see no evidence for it. Ask yourself, why has Trump failed to vigorously support the Article V movement? Has he thought it through? Or is he rather ambitious to be the ringmaster in the center ring without attention being diverted? Who can know, says Jeremiah?

On the whole, however, most of his positions and most of his appointments, as you have pointed out, are very good and consistent with my version of the Constitution.

3) Will you ever be able to bring yourself to like the man?

My observations are not and never have been animated by a personal dislike of Donald Trump. I am wary of the personality cult, but I am also wary of demonizing anyone. In many respects, Donald Trump is a very likable guy. A con man, a sociopath such as Bill Clinton, is universally said to be a likable guy so a hail fellow well met is not necessarily a positive trait of character for the job. Calvin Coolidge is my beau ideal of a president with bonhomie. Donald Trump has many public personality traits that leave him liable to criticism and he openly reacts to criticism, often when he should not and sometimes when he must, which only magnifies the perception.

I do not know how to disabuse you of the notion that all of my observations are animated by nothing more than vitriol. I cannot prove that negative.

I imagine that every President has had at least one profound weak spot or character deficit.

Agreed and for the reasons I stated above.

I do categorically reject the voluminous and baseless lies that have been promulgated in an effort to smear Donald Trump

Agreed.

I do agree with the vast majority of his policies, both in terms of general direction and even details, when provided.

Agreed, as I have stated.

Agreed, even if hyperbolic.

It is our job to see that he does as his positive qualities suggest he has the potential to do and as God gives us the light to see the right he should do, to admonish him when warranted as well as to encourage him when needed and, critically, to grant our fellow conservatives the same degree of grace we claim for ourselves.