I Understand Why You 'Get' Trump, I'm Just Not Sure What We'd Be Getting In Return

Listen, I, personally, get why people are pulling for Trump, who is neither a conservative nor a libertarian.  We are all frustrated to the point of blind fury.  We feel betrayed.  We feel like no one is either listening to or working for our interests.  We love the fact that Trump takes it to the PC Crowd, the Establishment, and the media.  Even Bill Maher gets it.

Throughout the world, elites in government, business, society, media, and academia have said to us:

1. We know better what's best for you than you do.

2. We don't care if only a minority of you support what we are doing, we are doing it anyway. See the 21% support for the Iran deal, for example.

3. Democracy is 'too messy' and so is republicanism.  We, elites, cannot wait for the consent of the government.  So sorry.

4. You are just a bunch of nuts, cranks, sticklers for the Constitution and the rule of law, racists, sexists, homophobes, Islamophobes, bigoted reactionaries clinging to your guns and religion.

5. Learn that the system is rigged...in OUR favour...and we are going to keep it that way...even if we have to flat-out deceive you and dismiss your vote.  Besides, we have to  take into consideration the opinions of those who can’t be bothered to get off the couch and go vote!

'When it becomes serious, you have to lie.'

- Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the EU, who claims that unelected representatives and apparatchiks should be able to overrule the opinions and rights of 500 people because WE. ARE. THE. EXPERTS. AND. WE. GET. TO. DECIDE. WHAT. IS. SERIOUS.

Note: Every member of the EU has abolished the death penalty, BUT, interestingly, in the EUSSR with its 28 unelected, unaccountable apparatchiks, the death penalty was reintroduced in a footnote to the Treaty of Lisboa, upon neither the whole nor part of which the overwhelming majority of Europeans were allowed to vote.  In its “explanations” and “negative definitions” accompanying the fundamental rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union allows a reintroduction of the death penalty in case of war or imminent war, BUT ALSO THE KILLING OF HUMANS TO SUPPRESS INSURGENCY OR RIOT.  You see, unelected and unaccountable bodies cannot be bothered with things like human rights if their very existence comes under ever the slightest threat.

These are the same people, along with the ECB and IMF, that have:

A. Orchestrated the overthrow of the Italian government and installed a technocracy.

B. Ordered the bank accounts of Cypriots be raided even though they violated the EUSSR and ECB's own deposit insurance programmes.

C. Put a gun to the head of the (irresponsible and not particularly sympathetic either) nation of Greece and stated that the results of the referendum were irrelevant.

D. In 2005, both the Dutch and the French overwhelmingly rejected adopting the EUSSR Constitution. 'So? We'll just impose it on you via this new interpretation of this old treaty.'  Ireland was supposed to vote in 2005 or 2006, but after the Dutch and French failures, the EUSSR pushed through the Lisbon Treaty, which changed the mechanisms.  In 2008, the Irish rejected the Constitution.  The EUSSR said, 'You'd better have a do-over'.  So, in October 2009 when Ireland's finances were melting down and it needed a bailout, a referendum was scheduled and the government fearmongered a majority into voting 'Yea.'  The 'gutless' PM Gordon Brown - and everyone knows how much I detest the man - was bullied into signing the Lisbon Treaty, which basically removed jurisdiction over immigration to Brussels, among other things, by the  then-EUSSR President Jose Manuel Barroso and Premier Jose Socrates of Portugal.  I can go on and on (look at the ongoing invasion and the EUSSR's demand that 'refugees be redistributed' and countries pay huge fines if they fail to accept their quotas), but you get the idea.

This rejection of democracy, self-government, and the individual rights of man is happening all over the world and it will not end well....BUT, it does not nor should not mean that we elect comedians, like Beppe Grillo, or radical nutters like Jeremy(!) Corbyn.  Reagan was an entertainer, true.  He was also a successful, two-term governor and had been a movement leader for decades.  He didn't decide to run for President as a Republican in 1980 after donating to Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976. Trump has been a successful businessman, but how will he govern?  He also needs to learn that, if he wants to be taken seriously, he can’t claim to be just an entertainer.

E. Progress is always good (even when pre-cancerous cells progress into a terminal condition...we don't have to pay for your old white arse.  We can import some new 'brown' children,)

F. You WILL bend over, grab your ankles, and like it.  Then, you will say: THANK. YOU. MEIN. FUHRERS. MAY. I. PLEASE. HAVE. ANOTHER!

As I admitted yesterday, there are days when I wish that some people in power would turn out to pasture or just fvcking die already.  I hate myself for it because I don't want to wish horrible things on other people, but I'm human and I get seriously frustrated at times.  Of course, there are other people that I hope everyday will die...like the Ayatollah, ISIS fighters, Lil' Kim's Lil' Un. Just like I would have wished for Hitler and Stalin to die.

8.. When those in power try to censor and ever more restrict people, the latter is eventually going to turn to the loudest brawler they can find.  It's almost like we are all becoming Jon Stewart's audience.  We whoop it up and love it when one of ours 'destroys', 'annihilates' one of theirs (even if Stewart was credited with far more kills than he actually achieved).  Perhaps, civilisation hasn't really progressed much since the Romans cheered on the lions to eat the Christians.

To paraphrase Mark Steyn (because I cannot find the actual quote):

When supposedly responsible and sober leaders forbid the governed to vocally recognise reality, eventually the latter will turn to irresponsible and shoot-first-aim-later ones.

His quote is much better, but I think the sentiment is the same.  Those in power have been telling you 'NO, NO, NO!' for so long, that they do not deserve your support or loyalty.  In our legitimate anger, we cannot, however, just turn to anyone simply because s/he's taken it to the objects of our fury.

I understand the anger and frustration.  I share it.  I really, really do, but I don't know if I am ready to burn the place down.  History tells us that, almost always, what comes next is worse. French monarchy ~> French Revolution ~> National Razor Begins to Consume its own ~> Revolution gives rise to the dictator, Napoleon.  When things get really bad and chaotic, most people opt for security and call for a strongman rather than fight for their liberty and freedom.  Remember, the majority of colonialists were NOT on the side of Washington and the Revolutionaries.  The land was divided into roughly three camps: 1. Pro-Independence; 2. Pro-English; and, 3. The 18th century's version of 'Y'all didja see Bey's new video and what Kim & Kanye did?'

Donald Trump isn't a conservative nor is he one with a libertarian streak.  He is a successful businessman and a marketing genius, especially when it comes to self-promotion.  He has some good ideas and he is certainly bringing up and making the country talk about things that the 'elites' normally say are off-limits.  But, even the most avid supporter has to admit that he doesn't always hold what one would consider to be 'constitutional principles.' 

I can't say that I would never, ever, ever vote for him.  There are others of which I can definitely say that.  Nevertheless, I gotta tell ya, I'd still be very uneasy pulling the lever for him because, FOR JUST ONE EXAMPLE, HE SUPPORTS THE KELO DECISION, one of the worst decisions ever rendered by the Supreme Court.  Ever.

We should never be meek in our fight.  We should make the other side play by their own rules (Alinsky Rule #4).  Yet, we shouldn't loose our heads and become the kind of people that we oppose.  You can attract more flies with honey than vinegar.  You can slip a shiv between the 5th and 6th ribs and get right to 'the heart of the matter', figuratively (of course), with the sweetest smile you've ever given.

I like tough guys, but not mercurial ones.  Reagan gave Gorbachev an ultimatum, was prepared to walk out at Reykjavík, and did.  He wasn't going to negotiate with the Communists as our equals nor try to meet them halfway, which would be like us saying to Russia 'You can keep your nuclear warheads aimed at only half of our cities!' or to Hitler: 'Listen, Herr Hitler, if you give us back France and 3 million Jews, you can keep Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland, Romania, Hungary, the Balkans, Ukraine, Western Russia, etc, along with the other 3 million Jews, plus all of your slave labour acquired east of the Rhine and north of the southern most grain of sand on Gavdos!  Just let us have peace in our time and welcome you back to the community of nations!' 

Reagan had a plan and it was a simple one: We win. You lose.

I don't want leaders that treat the ruthless, homicidal mullahs in a theocracy with a GDP that has the grand total of $400 billion, who call for our deaths and those of our allies, like they are our equals, which they are not.  I don't want leaders who bargain from positions of weakness and give away the store to people that have murdered our people and have global aspirations of conquest.  And, I certainly don't want leaders that give the leading state sponsor of global terrorism the US GDP equivalent of $8 TRILLION so that they can carry on with their evil acts.

Yes, I have no doubt that Trump is a strong negotiator.  At this point, however, I am not yet convinced he has the principles, depth of knowledge, and/or temperament to be an effective President.  I just can't shake the vision of him banging his shoe on the table à la Khrushchev or pointing at Angela Merkel and saying, 'Look at that face!'