How Can You Be Reluctant and Unhesitating?

By Rich Kozlovich

Today I posted a piece by Daniel Pipes entitled, A Reluctant but Unhesitating Vote for Donald Trump.  There's much in this piece that I like and completely agree with.  There's much with which I disagree.

I find the author to be a bit self serving, being afraid to be the rock in the current with those with whom he fraternizes.  A quality if find is unfailingly common among talking heads and writers involved in social issues and geopolitics.  I wonder if they ever read history books?

The article's title is, in my opinion, the give away.  How can you be reluctant and unhesitating? Reluctant but willing possibly, or even reluctant but resolved maybe, but you can't be reluctant and unhesitating.  Look up the definitions, the words are contradictions in concept.

I also wonder if these writers ever read dictionaries?

While he praises Trump a great deal, which is another reason I'm posting this.  Other than Trump's personal character almost everything he complains about Trump is a demonstration of what's wrong with the NeverTrumper talking heads.  He makes an important point about the debt load, but at this point the need to fix the overspending and debt can't be addressed as long as the Democrats hold the House, and this writer has to know that.

As for loyalty.  That's a canard.  It's the hired help that has to be loyal to the President or resign.  Those who were fired were either not loyal, or failures.  And they wouldn't resign.  What's a leader supposed to do when the hired help, who are supposed to salute and say "Yes Sir", refuse to follow his instruction and bolt off on their own?  If you're the boss, and you're a "real" leader, you fire them.

This isn't a private company Trump's running.  It's a nation filled with seriously vile people attempting to destroy the American identity, the American cultural, the American economy and destroy the Constitution, all in order to impose a socialist state on America.  He can't afford disloyal failures surrounding him. 

So, a real leader fires them, and that includes Sessions.  Much has been made of Trump firing Sessions, as he was the first Senator to support Trump, which at that time was gutsy. But that gutsiness was an illusion.  He was clearly over his head and drowning, and taking Trump down with him.  Trump needed a blood and guts Attorney General but ended up with a no guts, no glory failure! I would have fired him earlier.

The President is "the" executive, not the staff, he determines policy, not them.  This is especially true since in Trump's case he came to the White House with absolutely no support from the Republican party, which is a demonstration of just how screwed up they are, including George Bush.

As Monica Showalter notes in her piece, Watch for it: Strange new respect for George Bush as Bush minions form PAC to boost Joe Biden, saying:

The embittered camp of former President George Bush, a man who never defended himself against the left's demonization of him while he was president, has formed a super-PAC to support Joe Biden.

Former officials from the George W. Bush administration have formed a super PAC to support former Vice President Joe Biden’s White House campaign. The super PAC, dubbed 43 Alumni For Biden, referring to the 43rd president, was formed Monday, according to a Tuesday filing with the Federal Election Commission. Karen Kirksey, a former Treasury Department official from the Bush administration, is listed as the group’s treasurer and custodian of records.

Bush is also shooting his mouth off about "America's Failures".  Once again, this was a man "who never defended himself against the left's demonization of him while he was president", and he kept his mouth shut when attacked even after he was no longer President.  Well, two of those failures was the election of his dad and him, but now since that's been fixed, and it wasn't repeated by electing his brother.  As for now - George - go back to sleep!

Then we have idiots like Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, who has declared "Trump Is the 1st President in My Lifetime Who Does Not Try to Unite the American People."  Really?  What does that mean?  What if the opposition wanted to impose a dictatorship?  How exactly would Mattis find a united front with them?  Oh, wait, I know, I know.  He would give up and surrender.

Was he asleep all during the Obama years where Obama laid the ground work for the outrages going on right now?  Isn't this Obama's Army, because for eight years he continually undermined national cohesiveness with race baiting and the victimization of different groups?  All blaming "white privilege".  Or perhaps Mattis is just too stupid to know what's going on around him?

Either way,  I would have fired him too, only I would have fired him much earlier also.  Here's an update on this ridiculous and petty little man, The embarrassing nonsense of General Mattis. Ignorant, self-serving or just plain stupid? I go for stupid!

Trump has had to find his own replacements, and that required a lot of hiring and firing until the right people were in place. People who were there to serve the President.  In fact, for some time there were, and still may be, Obama appointees in positions of authority because of that lack of support.

Solution? Fire anyone who's in opposition to the boss.   Trump is the boss.  Get over it.  They need to do as their told, quit or get fired.  Those are the options.

It's clear, by this author's comments about trade, he doesn't grasp that the Bretton Woods Era is over, and it takes a leader like Trump to get it done.  As for his character, the difference between Trump and so many of these others, his life has been an open book.  Obama, Biden, the Clintons and a host of others have led two lives, and one of them, filled with corruption.  Corruption they're desperately are trying to hide, including Obama.

Not all "real" leaders have the sterling character of Ronald Reagan.  Get over it.
 
Since I disagree with so much of what he's saying, why did I post this piece?  Because he represents what I believe is a large segment of the population that has become so disenchanted and frightened by the opposition they'll either not vote, or vote for Trump.  In that group I include women, blacks, Asians, Catholics, Hispanics, and believe it or not - gays.  All of whom have consistently voted for Democrats in very large numbers.

The alternative?  Antifa and a dystopian socialist state.