http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428506/donald-trump-good-guy
Trump Is the Good Guy

*I*t is time to look more seriously at the Donald Trump presidential
candidacy. He continues to lead the polls among Republicans; his closest
rivals seem now to be Senators Mario Rubio and Ted Cruz, easing ahead of
Dr. Ben Carson. There does not seem to have been much effort to see the
Trump candidacy in any sort of historic context. For the first time in its
history, the United States has had four, and arguably five, consecutive
terms of unsuccessful federal government, from administrations and
Congresses of both parties. The last Clinton term under-reacted to the
original terrorist incidents at the Khobar Towers (1996), the Nairobi and
Dar es Salaam embassies (1998) and the USS *Cole* (in 2000); and stoked up
the housing bubble through the Community Reinvestment Act and executive
orders to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to invest massively in sub-prime
mortgages. George W. Bush responded well to terrorism, and his economic
countermeasures were adequate after the 9/11 attacks, but he did nothing to
let the air gently out of the housing bubble, his response was contemptibly
inept when the economic crisis erupted, and his intervention in Iraq was
for unsubstantiated reasons and resulted in a major strategic victory for
America’s Iranian enemies, a vast waste of lives and treasure, and an
immense humanitarian crisis.

President Obama has doubled the national debt accumulated in 233 years of
American independence in eight years, not really produced an economic
recovery, facilitated nuclear weapons for Iran after a great deal of
purposeful braggadocio, and humiliated the United States by drawing and
erasing a “red line” in Syria and being chased out of its air space by the
Russians. Two-thirds of Americans, in all polls, feel the country is headed
in the wrong direction, Obama does not get a positive job-performance
rating even in the most leftish polls, and a majority consider Obamacare to
have been a retrograde step. It is unlikely that the United States has been
less respected in the world than it is now, at least since the time of
Hoover, who was blamed for the worldwide Depression, if not since the
prelude to and early days of the Civil War.

The crime rate, after decades of decline, is rising again, in part because
of police discontent at public and media focus on what is widely regarded
as a coast-to-coast shooting gallery conducted largely in the
African-American districts of the country’s cities. The habits of decades
of the political system simply ignoring problems as they festered and grew
— abortion, immigration, wealth disparity — has disgusted the country, and
coincided with a pecuniary inundation of politics on a scale the world has
rarely glimpsed in a democratic country. Most congressmen and senators are
unambiguous representatives of the leading economic interests in their
states or districts, and presidential campaigns, as we are seeing, last for
years and cost over a billion dollars for each party. It is a corrupt and
vulgar system and virtually all Americans know it, and everyone above the
age of 40 has seen an alarming decline in the quality of candidates for
high, and especially national, office since the Reagan years.

*Trump’s rather iconoclastic techniques and his promises to effect radical
change if elected has a profound appeal.*
*------------------------------*

The presidencies between Polk and Lincoln (Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, and
Buchanan sharing three terms) were inadequate, and so were those between
Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt (Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, though
Coolidge retains his apologists), but none of these presidents was
re-elected after a full term, and neither talent drought was as profound or
extended as the 20 years of misgovernment the United States is reeling from
now. In the circumstances, it is little wonder that the country is looking
elsewhere than the ranks of its elected officials to find a possible
president. There is precedent for this, but usually with generals
(Washington, Jackson, Grant, Eisenhower, and unsuccessful candidates
including Cass, McClellan, and Hancock), plus not entirely career
soldiers such as Hayes, Garfield, and both Harrisons, and Colonel Theodore
Roosevelt: These named individuals were major-party nominees for national
office in a total of 20 elections, but wars and their generals have not
been as popular lately; Colin Powell was the last who could have done it).
And there have been non-military candidates for the presidency as an
entry-level elective office, including Horace Greeley, Alton B. Parker,
Wendell Willkie, and Herbert Hoover.

Viewed from that perspective, the rise of Donald Trump is not so
surprising, and he is not running as a spoiler, as Ross Perot did against
George H. W. Bush did in 1992, nor as an aggrieved Theodore Roosevelt did
in 1912 against William Howard Taft and Woodrow Wilson. He has the populist
aptitudes of the old Progressive party because of his often outlandish
Archie Bunker–esque political incorrectness, but he is more credible than
Archie because his views emanate not from a blue-collar reactionary, but
from an accomplished billionaire as well as a successful television
personality. As he is financing himself, it is refreshing that he is not
constantly seeking life support from controversial individual sources, or
from a vast and aggressive fundraising organization, or from a coalition of
sleazy and opinionated philistines in the entertainment industry.

But his rather iconoclastic techniques and his promises to effect radical
change if elected — and even to be at the head of an angry movement of
scores of millions of Americans who feel their country has been stolen and
mismanaged and that there is no point merely to ejecting the incumbents —
has a profound appeal: They have tried turning the rascals out many times
in the last 30 years and they just get worse rascals. The liberal media
establishment is frenzied in its animosity to Donald Trump, and their
hysteria is becoming more vociferous and desperate as he utters clangorous
violations of the normal parameters of political discourse. The echo
chamber explodes, the commentariat foams at the mouth, but he seems to pay
no penalty in the polls. I think there are two explanations for this:
Donald doesn’t really say such outrageous things as his opponents
spinningly impute to him; and vast sections of the population are more
bitterly disappointed and angry at the deterioration of their country and
the misinformation of the mainstream media than the subjects of that
resentment can imagine.

They started by mocking Trump; and his preoccupation with unserious
matters, such as where the president was born, made that simple. But
Trump’s durability now scares them. Last week, the *New York Times* accused
Trump of being on “the brink of fascism.” The worthy Max Boot, respected
strategic writer, compared him to Joseph R. McCarthy. There is a good deal
of this sort of overreaction, and of course the public will be too
intelligent to buy into much of it. McCarthy announced that Roosevelt,
Truman, General Marshall, and even Eisenhower were effectively Communist
dupes. Fascists are identified with lawlessness, mob rule, racism, the
physical intimidation of opponents, and the overthrow of democracy. The
*Times* and Max Boot should know better than to descend to this sort of
thing.



Just to set the record straight, let me review the key positions Donald
Trump has taken.

On immigration, he wants to deport 351,000 illegal immigrants in American
prisons; stop all illegal immigration, chiefly by constructing an
Israeli-like wall on the Mexican border; and conduct an imprecisely defined
screening action to deport a large number of illegal immigrants and
regularize entry of the others, citing Eisenhower (who certainly did not
deport people in the numbers spoken of in this campaign). He acknowledges
that the U.S. is partly responsible for the refugee crisis in the Middle
East but still opposes admission of any of its victims. His latest wheeze,
of suspending admission of Muslims unless they are returning people who
have already been granted residency or accredited foreign officials, was
clumsily phrased and hysterically misrepresented. He will presumably clean
it up enough to reduce the controversy.

In other areas, he does not advocate much increase in defense spending, but
a reallocation toward anti-terrorist operations. On health care, he seeks
the repeal of Obamacare, the shattering of the insurance cartel, and the
provision of universal health care, with health-savings accounts and with,
presumably, where necessary, the according of discretionary tax credits. He
is for gradual, extensive legalization of drugs with some of the proceeds
of savings available to drug education and treatment. He is a militant
opponent of cruelty to animals, supports anti-pollution standards but
deplores the excessive zeal of the EPA, thinks climate change is a hoax,
and cap-and-trade both insane and hypocritical. He would disband the
Department of Education and distribute its funds to the states, and leave
legalization of specific drugs, like the rules over same-sex marriage, to
the states.

*Trump’s policy positions, though vague in places, are not especially
radical or provocative.*
*------------------------------*

He does not believe gun control is the answer to violence, and thinks
better policing, tighter immigration control, and greater facilities to
identify and treat mentally deranged potentially violent people are
preferable. He would abolish super PACs, lift limits on individual
contributions to candidates, and ban soft money. He is a medium
protectionist to support domestic-manufacturing and other employment; his
tax plan is a moderate reduction in income taxes and a steeper reduction in
the corporate rates; he seeks, effectively, to turn the national debt into
a sinking fund, cutting expenses beneath revenues and steadily shrinking
the deficit.

Trump gets a little closer to a reactionary view in international affairs.
Germany, he believes, can sort out Ukraine with the Russians, who are
welcome to Syria, and let Russia destroy ISIS. It’s a bit flippant and
doesn’t entirely square with his call for the U.S. to behave in a way that
commands the world’s respect again. (Though what he does propose would be
an immense improvement on the Obama-Clinton-Kerry *Gong Show* of the last
seven years.)

He favors retention of the death penalty and heavy prison sentences, and
seems not to notice the rot in the U.S. legal system, or at least has not
much commented on it yet; and he has largely avoided abortion as a subject,
though he opposes it personally, and would ban it in the late term, other
than in extraordinary circumstances.

In general, his policy positions, though vague in places, and subject to
being moved around in response to his apparently spontaneous aperçus and
reminiscences, are not especially radical or provocative. The Trump effect
appears to rest on his talent for shocking conventional opinion, and on his
extreme contempt for the conventional wisdom, the degraded political modus
operandi, and the snipers’ gallery of the biased and lazy senior media. He
still leads the polls of those for whom people absolutely will not vote,
and I suspect that in the end the elected Republican politicians will stand
on each other’s shoulders and deny him the nomination, while making
profound concessions to his policy preferences.



Donald Trump — who, I should disclose, is an old friend, a fine and
generous and loyal man, and a delightful companion — is striking very close
to the heart of the American problem: the corrupt, dysfunctional political
system and the dishonest media. My view, as persevering readers know, is
that it all started to go horribly wrong with Watergate, when one of the
most successful administrations in the country’s history was torn apart for
no remotely adequate reason and the mendacious assassins in the liberal
media have been awarding themselves prizes and commendations for 40 years
since. Ten times as many people believe Rush Limbaugh as Bob Woodward (and
they are correct in that assessment), and Donald speaks in fact (obviously
not ex officio) for many more people than Obama. I suspect the Bush-Clinton
era, which had its moments, is ending, and that whatever happens next year,
Donald Trump will have played an important role in it. But the desperation
prayer of the liberals — that he will split the Republicans — will not
happen: He was never going to run as an independent, and the Republicans
recognize how great a bloc of voters he can bring to them. To adapt George
Wallace’s old phrase, he has shaken the American political system “by the
eyeteeth,” and it will be better for it.

 *— Conrad Black is the author of* Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of
Freedom
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00D0V13WK/ref=nosim/nationalreviewon>
*and* Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0052TWKQ6/ref=nosim/nationalreviewon>
.

*Editor’s Note: This piece originally stated in error that the USS
*Cole *bombing
occurred in 1998. In fact, it was 2000.*


__._,_.___
------------------------------
Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMzdvNzFtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NTAyMTk3NTc->


[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNXFubjk1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MDIxOTc1Nw-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to