Who Will Be The Next Secretary Of State?

President-elect Donald Trump has narrowed his choices to four men: Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, David Petraeus and Bob Corker. Each man brings great skills and experience to the table. Correspondingly each has his drawbacks.

Rudy Giuliani is the former mayor of New York City who guided the city in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Prior to this he was a U.S. Attorney for the State of New York during which time he prosecuted organized crime and financial institutions. Most recently he has worked as a consultant dealing with heads of state around the world.

Giuliani has been one of the most loyal members of Trump’s political team. Many believed that his untiring advocacy of Trump would result in his selection as Secretary of State. The issues that he would face in Senate confirmation hearings would include potential conflicts of interest relating to recent business activities.

Mitt Romney was a senior partner at Bain Capital where he made his fortune. Subsequently he served as governor of Massachusetts and was CEO of the Salt Lake City Olympic Committee.

Mitt would bring a statesmanlike background to the State Department if chosen. He has broad business and governmental experience and a temperament that would serve him well as Secretary of State. However Romney was one of Trump’s most ardent critics during the presidential campaign. There is a large contingent of Trump supporters who believe Romney should be disqualified because of the bad blood that existed between him and the president-elect.

David Petraeus was a four-star general in the Army and served as a combat commander. He is known to be a highly exceptional warrior, statesman and intellect. After he retired from the military, Petraeus was head of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Petraeus would be a sensational Secretary of State. Unfortunately he was convicted of passing secret information to a former lover. It is difficult to see how the Senate will be able to get past this serious misstep.

Bob Corker is currently the chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. During his tenure as a member of the aforementioned committee, Corker has been intimately involved with the Department of State.

It would appear that Corker would be the most non-confrontational selection for Secretary of State.

Trump seems prepared to make a decision, probably this week. He has interviewed each man extensively. The issues impacting each man have little to do with their qualifications and more to do with extraneous issues. Giuliani- conflicts with business activities, Romney- loyalty to Trump, Petraeus- mishandling secret information and Corker- the least exciting man in the group.

Trump is unpredictable so the choice is up in the air. Personally I would select Petraeus if he were not tainted by his actions with a former lover. Giuliani is very controversial, but I think would be a great Secretary of State. Romney looks the part in every way. He has great experience as a manager and is very statesmanlike. Corker is the safest bet when you consider the vigor of the Senate confirmation process.

It should be interesting.

 

The New York Times Wants Trump To Fail

Some New York Times readers expected the paper to tone down its “nuclear assault” against President-elect Donald Trump after the election. No one really believed that the venom spewed by Times journalists would dissipate completely, but perhaps some moderation is in order for the sake of our country.

However, post election, the Times continues unbridled attacks in its reporting and certainly in its opinion pieces. In previous hard-fought elections Americans and the press joined together to support the new president.

Some foolishly expected the paper to temper its perspective. In the eyes of many readers it is not being fair and balanced in its criticism of Donald Trump. Reporters and columnists constantly rehash Trump’s alleged “crimes against humanity” during his campaign. And they suggest that his transition is flawed in any number of ways- not enough women, not enough minorities, too right-wing, too slow, etc.

It’s obvious that the Times, as a media organization, wants to do everything possible to sabotage the new president, a tactic that is un-American in the minds of some. Those that side with the Times are quick to recount comments by Mitch McConnell who indicated that his goal was to defeat Barack Obama. This perspective was not conducive to comity in government either. But the comment was made by a politician in the opposition party, not a media outlet protected by the First Amendment. This protection is designed to ensure that the media is able to keep Americans informed.

Charles Blow, a Times columnist, has taken his responsibilities to a new level. Basically he’s declared war on Donald Trump. Trump received over 60 million votes and easily won the majority of the Electoral College, while Blow is using his position at the Times to express his darkest personal views.

Surely the Times staff has been influenced by the outgoing president who promised Trump a smooth transition and hope that he would be successful. Shortly after doing so, the former president kicked off a final world tour where he tried to convince anybody who would listen that he’s been a great president. Interestingly he took the opportunity to bash Trump, a serious misstep by a lame duck president. Most previous ex-presidents have been respectful of their successors, not so for the lame duck.

So it’s no wonder that Blow started to blowviate. His column on November 26 is horrifying. Blow indicated, “I will say proudly and happily that I was not present at the [meeting between Times senior people and Trump].” The meeting was requested by Trump to bury the hatchet. At it the president-elect backed off on a number of extreme positions he took during the campaign. We should be thankful that Blow was excluded by Times management. He probably would have come to blows with Trump [pun intended].

Blow’s column was particularly harsh as he gives Trump no chance to redeem himself from some of the more outrageous comments and juvenile tweets during his march to the presidency. Yet Blow should be reminded that Trump is not a mass murderer, nor did he commit any crimes against humanity or any crimes like some of the people Blow has supported.

Blow threw the book at Trump- he’s a xenophobe and a misogynist, a liar, an egomaniac, a future torturer [of Gitmo terrorists], unrepentant for all his sins, etc.?

The columnist said there was no chance that he would ever believe Trump because he is “an aberration and an abomination who is willing to do and say anything- no matter whom it aligns you with and whom it hurts- to satisfy [his] ambition.” Frankly most Americans believe this description aptly describes all politicians. Let’s not forget the Clintons in this regard.

In the end Blow promises with all his heart and soul to work to destroy Trump.

Wow! How could one man hate another without any evidence that he committed crimes? To reiterate, this type of characterization of another is usually directed at someone who commits an egregious offense. How about it Charles, don’t you think you’re overreacting?

There is another issue that offends even those of us who didn’t vote for Trump, but want to give him a chance to succeed. Times personnel has not been balanced in its reporting of political events. Hillary Clinton and her husband have been at the epicenter of numerous scandals over their 30+ years of public life. Real crimes and lies have hung over this power couple since they entered politics. I cannot recall any outrage expressed by Charles Blow in these matters.

Blow thinks he is superior to all those to whom he preaches. Perhaps the Times encourages its columnists to have a god-complex and to help all of us who can’t think for ourselves. Plus it’s good for circulation to be controversial. It might make sense for someone of authority to inform Blow that it is possible for our new president to rise above his ambition and exaggerated self-image. We will never know unless we give him a chance. And by the way he won the election fair and square.

 

Pence Responded To “Hamilton” Ambush Like A True Statesman

This past weekend Vice-President elect Mike Pence went to see the Tony award-winning show “Hamilton.” He hoped for a pleasant night out on the town with some family members but was ambushed by a group of actors who portray our founding fathers as they fought for freedom.

Do these actors have a right to express themselves? Absolutely. The First Amendment protects our rights of religious liberty, free expression and political action. At no time during the post-performance commentary by Brandon Victor Dixon, who plays the part of Aaron Burr, did the actor or the cast do anything beyond the scope of the First Amendment.

Were the remarks classy and respectful? Not so much. Karl Rove suggested an edited version of the Dixon speech that would have been so much more inspirational.

Dixon said, “we are the Americans who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents or defend our inalienable rights . . .”

Rove offered the following, “We sir, are part of the diverse nation that is America. With the election now past, we all hope for your administration’s success in defending our planet, our children, and the inalienable right of every American. We are grateful that you came and hope this show inspires you as you work on behalf of all the people of our common country.”

A few points should be emphasized about Dixon’s comments and perspectives. First he’s not a patriot just because he dresses up and portrays Aaron Burr each night, and then raps about the early days of our nation. Nor is he a soldier who risks his life for our freedom. Nor does he represent all Americans. In fact he represents about half of the voters as over 50 million people cast their ballots for Trump/Pence in the election.

The venue was New York City, in a Broadway theater that’s manned by an idealistic, young and diverse cast. The show is a super hit that’s difficult to see because tickets are scarce. I’ve attended two performances on and off-Broadway and think the show is spectacular, deserving of all the accolades it has received.

It’s not a surprise that Dixon and his troupe are liberal-minded with strong feelings about the recent election. Nor is it offensive in any way that the actors are protective of the rights of minorities, gays and millennials. In fact I applaud their enthusiasm.

What I find hard to swallow is that Dixon’s words did not in any way live up to the high standards of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s “Hamilton” script. It could have been a gigantic moment where young and old, people of color and whites and liberals and conservatives banded together as one. This would have been truly enlightening for the audience and Pence.

To criticize Trump and company before they take office and to presume they will fail is kind of un-American. Our nation was built on hope and high expectations, not negativity.

But the most outrageous part of this episode is that yet another group of performers, along with all the celebrities that supported Hillary Clinton, actually believe they have any meaningful influence over our elections. Voters don’t cast ballots because Jay-Z, Beyonce, Bruce Springsteen, Katy Perry and Jon Bon Jovi ask them to. They vote as citizens with their minds and hearts.

The outcome of the presidential election may not satisfy the predominantly liberal citizens of New York City. But that’s too bad.

Congratulations to Mike Pence who handled a very awkward moment like a true statesman. Alexander Hamilton would have been proud of him.

The Survival Of The Democratic Is At Stake

The Democratic Party is reeling after losses on Election Day at both federal and state levels.

Trump beat Clinton decisively even as most pollsters and talking heads assured America  Clinton would win. In the Senate Democrat gains were minimal, as they were in the House, leaving both chambers in the hands of Republicans. Soon President Trump will nominate a judge to replace Antonin Scalia restoring the conservative tilt of the Supreme Court.

All this results in a potentially dangerous scenario in which one party controls every branch of government.

It’s no wonder that Democratic leadership is in grave jeopardy. Obama’s term is at an end, and everyone expects that he will retire and work on his legacy (what’s left of it), his golf game and lining his pockets with speaking engagement fees.

If current comments and attitudes are any indication Democrats will attempt to disrupt the Trump tsunami. This could be a recipe for disaster for the party. Obstructionism in today’s environment could alienate voters even further and result in more losses for the party in 2018.

Democrats should seriously consider a proactive plan to recapture voters and protect the two-party system. With a flood of good ideas the minority party can be successful and relevant. There are a number of issues where Democrats can work with Republicans constructively.

It’s a given that Obamacare is going to be repealed or significantly amended. And so it’s absurd for Democrats to oppose the process. Instead Democrats should work with the other side to save those aspects of the law that both parties are in favor of, namely preexisting illness protection and a continuance of health care for children until the age of 26.

A positive attitude in a Trump health care initiative could result in other compromises that would be beneficial to Democrats and Americans. It would decrease the animosity we have come to expect involving all significant legislation. And Democrats could showcase their creativity and conciliatory attitudes to voters.

Similarly Democrats should recognize that the Iran nuclear deal is bad for the U.S. and the Middle East. The global community does not need another rogue nation armed with weapons of mass destruction.

Withdrawing from the arrangement will create a great stir with U.S. allies. European countries, blinded by the economic benefits of doing business with Iran, have said they will oppose efforts to abrogate the deal.

Democrats and Republicans should come together over this issue. Congress has the ability to put great economic pressure on Iran with punishing sanctions that the rest of the world would not be able to mitigate. The U.S. alone could and should drive Iran into bankruptcy if it continues to develop a WMD. This would have the derivative impact of creating political unrest in Iran.

And finally there are the infrastructure initiatives that Trump has promised. This effort could have a tremendously positive impact on economic activity in the country and result in millions of high paying jobs. Democrats and Republicans can work together to overwhelm expected conservative push back and use a massive infrastructure effort to legislate a work program than may rival FDR’s success during the Great Depression.

This will not be easy. A lot of money is at stake, and legislators must believe that higher construction activity will enhance economic growth. But there is a great need as our roads, tunnels and bridges crumble before our eyes.

The possibilities are grand. Even though Democrats are the minority party they will receive great accolades from voters if they are cooperative and creative about making America great again.

If Democrats decide to protect Obama’s fallen legacies and Republicans are successful, it will serve to degrade the party even further.

An emasculated opposition party is bad for our country. It must be strong to ensure that the federal government is balanced and supportive of social equality.

 

The Crybabies Should Stop Whining And Support Trump

The election of Donald Trump has increased the animosity that certain Americans have towards our federal government and the conservative movement. It has encouraged radical left-wing elements to protest against many aspects of our lives ranging from capitalism to entitlements to civil rights.

Interestingly reporters have found that many protesters didn’t even vote. Imagine that. What right does a citizen have to criticize if he or she was too busy to vote on Election Day? Some countries have mandatory voting requirements. Maybe the U.S. should consider this alternative form of democratic practice.

Immediately after the election the losers attempted to be gracious. Hillary Clinton wished Trump the best even though she didn’t mean it. She moped around on stage and shed a few tears as if she was (once again) cheated out of her divine right to be president.

The Clinton campaign was just as dirty and deceitful as Trump’s. It really wasn’t a fair fight because Hillary had the support of most of left-wing press. Yet she still found a way to lose.

Even our failed president acted presidentially, for a day or two. He hosted Trump at the White House and told him that it would be a mistake to dump Obamacare and tear up the Iran nuke deal (his legacy accomplishments). He told Trump that it was tough to be president, and he shouldn’t make any rash decisions when he takes office like reversing  the president’s unconstitutional mandates.

But these “good vibrations” didn’t last very long. Obama went on the attack. His legacy, if that’s what you want to call it, is under siege. Every day he’s trying to convince anyone who will listen that he did a good job. He didn’t, and everybody knows it. Consider the following.

Our health care system is in shambles. Iran is violating provisions of the nuclear arms deal and creating havoc throughout the Middle East. ISIS is gaining strength as an ideology, if not as a fighting force. Blacks are worse off than they were eight years ago if welfare and urban violence are the barometers. The economy is fragile. No one should be fooled by lower unemployment statistics. They don’t account for those who left the work force and those that are underemployed. And when middle class Americans look at their bank accounts they realize that they have less disposable income than they did when Obama took office. I wonder what the president did right, and why aren’t we celebrating the impending change at the White House?

Obama broke with tradition by sticking his nose into election politics and by not truly supporting his successor, regardless of whoever it was. His rhetoric is flowery, but his comments are vindictive and fomenting violence in the streets.

It has been reported that teachers across the country are encouraging  children to denounce the new president. They are telling impressionable young ones that they are in mortal danger because Trump will soon be in power. It’s likely that these educators will soon have their students preparing for a nuclear war by seeking shelter under their desks like we did in the 1950s.

One of the greatest campaign efforts took place shortly before Election Day. Trump and Pence were crisscrossing the battleground states trying to convince voters to cast their ballots for change.

At the same time Hillary, Bill, Barack, Michelle, Joe (Biden), Kaine, Bruce (Springsteen), Jay-Z, Beyonce, Katy Perry, Jon Bon Jovi, Chance the Rapper and scores of other celebrities were begging voters to opt for Clinton. It didn’t do any good. The Clinton campaign was banal, unimaginative and unconvincing. Hillary got what she deserved- a one-way ticket back to Chappaqua.

Now we’re in the transition phase. The campaign has said on numerous occasions that the selection process is moving along nicely. But the talking heads and Trump haters are saying it is falling behind either because no one wants to work for Trump or because the process is inefficient. It was reported that the transition team has already received 40-50,000 resumes for jobs in government.

The naysayers have indicated that Trump is involving his family. They say his business interests represent an irreconcilable conflict of interest. They say he has not returned calls to world leaders. Maybe he’s been too busy. They even say that the president-elect is choosing conservatives to advise him. Can you believe that?

The crybabies are doing everything possible to make life miserable for Trump. Given that he won the election fair and square you would think all Americans would give him a chance to succeed. Do they really want the new president to fail? Too many people don’t want to be ruled by Trump, but it’s too damn bad.

Having said all this, Trump has to perform. He must keep his promises regardless of push back. Setting aside style Trump has good ideas. His principal objective is to make America great again. The fact is our country has slipped after eight agonizing years with the other guy.

 

Trump Must Keep His Promises

This week Sean Hannity of Fox News, an enthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump, offered his viewers a menu of issues that the president-elect must address during his tenure in office. Hannity indicated that Trump would not be successful unless he delivers on the promises made during the campaign.

In no order of importance they include the following:

  • Repeal Obamacare. This is a signature issue for Trump. His constituents are expecting decisive and immediate action relating to this failed initiative. The problem with repealing or even amending the legislation is that 20+ million people will be affected. The transition to a new arrangement must be seamless and simultaneous or it will create chaos.
  • Lower taxes. Trump promised to decrease taxes for all Americans. The question is how can Trump lower taxes without dramatically increasing the deficit? Will the Trump team try to convince Americans that lower taxes will spur the economy and offset lower federal revenues?
  • Repatriation of offshore corporate cash. American corporations have accumulated $2 trillion of cash in foreign countries. These funds would be subjected to a 33% tax if repatriated to the U.S. Trump is considering a tax holiday that would enable these funds to come to the U.S. with only a 10% surcharge. The money, presumably and hopefully, would be used to increase business operations in America resulting in higher employment.
  • Build a wall (or a fence or a barrier of some kind). Trump must erect a structure that inhibits illegal immigration from Mexico. It is key issue for the president-elect that was heavily marketed during the campaign.
  • Appoint conservative justices. Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court is still vacant. Trump supporters expect him to name a constitutionalist to fill the position and restore the previous split between liberal and conservative judges on the court.
  • Improve conditions in urban areas. Trump campaigned hard to break the stranglehold of Democrats on African American voters. He made some minor inroads by insisting that liberal leaders did nothing to improve the lives of this group in recent years. Trump has a once in a lifetime opportunity to score big with urban minorities if he can create real change. This means, among other things, increasing employment, improving schools, settling the differences between the police and residents, etc.
  • Energy independence. By tempering global warming regulations and disenfranchising radical environmental groups, Trump can help make America more energy independent. As a starting point he should ensure regulatory approval of existing pipeline projects and free up more protected areas to increase energy production.
  • Drain the swamp. Trump says corruption and cronyism must end in Washington. Many are hopeful that he will push for term limits for more elected offices. This will result in a massive changing of the guard in Washington and around the country.
  • Radical Islam. Trump promised to root out terrorists and to dismantle ISIS. These will be great challenges for the new administration and the military that may require the assistance of Russia, Iran and a plethora of interested parties in the Middle East.
  • Extreme vetting. Trump must secure the U.S. by making it exceedingly difficult for troublemakers to enter the country. This can only be done with coordinated and aggressive racial profiling of immigrants to the U.S. The new president should disregard claims that he is xenophobic and discriminating.
  • Education back to the states. Federal efforts to improve education have been disastrous. Each state must assume the responsibility of educating their young. Public education has failed and needs to be supplemented with more choice, vouchers and a greater number of charter schools.
  • Free and fair trade. All of the U.S.’s trade agreements must be reassessed to insure that America does not lose more jobs. Those agreements that are detrimental to our interests must be abrogated.
  • Remember the forgotten men and women. Recent leadership has focused principally on densely populated areas. However rural areas and places that are dominated by lower and middle class citizens swept Trump to victory. The new president should not ignore their needs.

Donald Trump has a tough row to hoe. His detractors have already started to parse and criticize his every action and comment. Given his political success in the election the president-elect should do what he thinks is good for the country and not be swayed by those who are responsible for America’s precarious global reputation.

It is imperative for Trump to hire the best people to assist him. And he should strive for diversity in his cabinet and among his aides.

Trump’s Vision Of America Is Evolving

Now that he will soon become the leader of the United States and the free world, Donald Trump has begun to temper his electoral rhetoric. This may be a difficult journey as left-wing news outlets continue to misconstrue his words and express total disgust with the outcome of the election.

Yesterday the president-elect spoke on CBS’ “60 Minutes.” The New York Times reported on the broadcast today. Please appreciate that the Times and CBS have been among the most resolved critics of Trump. In fact the bad blood between the Times and Trump is evident in the piece referred to above.

Every day the list of Trump flip-flops and diluted objectives is growing, thank goodness. On immigration Trump will more likely build a fence or a barrier (as opposed to a wall) between the U.S. and Mexico. The original plan was a ploy (a metaphor, if you will) to dramatize the importance of halting illegal immigration.

In certain places, barriers on the border already exit. The important issue is that border protection will increase dramatically to secure our country. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has endorsed this revised plan.

Trump indicated that he wants to root out criminal illegal aliens and deport them. This is a much softer approach than his original threat to round up all ten million illegals and send them back to their countries of origin.

Trump’s abortion plans are a bit muddled at this time. For sure the president-elect will appoint a judge who is anti-abortion thereby restoring the previous split in the Supreme Court on this issue. This should not be a surprise to anyone.

But what does it really mean? Abortions will continue to be available to women. This right has already been etched into our society. But certain related things may be examined.

For one abortion rights may be delineated at the state level, not by the federal government. Simply, each state will decide under what conditions an abortion is legal. This does not mean that they will be prohibited.

For instance limits many be imposed relating to federal funding of abortions and the ability to get an abortion after being pregnant for more than a certain number of months. Included in the list of banned procedures will be late-term abortions without a substantive medical reason.

Thankfully Trump has seemingly put to bed the issue of same-sex marriage. The gay community will finally be able fall in love and be married. Bravo.

The press has misinterpreted Trump’s vision of a nuclear world. Two situations are most important in this regard.

The Iran nuclear deal will likely be abrogated. The arrangement is flawed for many reasons. The most important ones are that Iran cannot be trusted to abide by the terms of the agreement- they will cheat and move along post haste to build a deliverable nuclear weapon. And, why the hell would the U.S. agree to legitimize a nuclear program for its mortal enemy?

The other relates to Japan. It is perfectly reasonable for Japan to develop a nuclear capability to counteract North Korean nuclear ambitions. Trump has stipulated that Japan has a need for a weapon to protect itself. And the international community of nations has confidence that Japan will manage its program responsibly and with long-term peace in mind, unlike Iran.

Trump is not opening the door for lesser-developed and violent countries around the world to develop nukes. Obama did this, and Trump wants to end it.

Trump’s use of social media to communicate with America was discussed at length in the Times article. No doubt Twitter was a good thing for Trump and his campaign. He was able to respond immediately to the barrage of attacks perpetrated by the hostile press and others. It would be wise for the new president to be more measured, and statesman-like, in his tweeting.

The status of FBI Director James Comey is now front and center. It appears that Trump will investigate the situation. The rationale of Comey for taking the actions he did will be evaluated.

Finally the issue of Hillary and Bill Clinton corruption is hanging over the American people. This was not specifically discussed in the Times piece

It would be magnanimous and wise for Trump to recuse himself from all FBI investigations relating to the Clintons, and to state so publicly. In the interest of unifying our nation Trump should shed his pent up animosity for the Clintons and allow objective federal investigators to do their job.

A few words about the national protest against Trump are relevant to this essay.

Donald Trump won the election fairly. The electorate went to the polls and made a decision. This event was democracy at its finest.

Understandably certain groups feel they are at more risk under a Trump administration. However some of these feelings are over-dramatic. For instance women are not in more danger because of Trump’s misogynistic past. In fact the national debate about protecting women has never been more intense.

Law abiding legal aliens will be protected. The rhetoric of mass deportations has already been quashed. Why would illegals who would be good citizens be opposed to ousting the criminals in their midst?

Nobody likes to lose. But all dissenters should be heartened by the fact that a man who was not well liked by most was able to rise up and win the presidency. If you have a gripe, rise up and do something about it under the law and through our democratic process.

The New York Times Attacks Trump Minutes After He Is Declared The Winner

It didn’t take much time for the New York Times to begin an expected all-out attack on President-elect Donald Trump.

In an editorial that must have been written in the wee hours of the morning after Clinton conceded the election, the Times started to sling mud. “So who is the man who will be the 45th president?” The Times queried.

The paper felt it had an obligation to remind us that Trump has not released complete financials, as if this was a capital offense. There’s no constitutional or legal requirement to do so.

“Mr. Trump is the most unprepared president-elect in history.” Probably true. But is any president-elect truly prepared to become the commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation in the world? Obama wasn’t, that’s for sure.

“[Trump] is temperamentally unfit to lead a diverse nation of 320 million.” Fifty two million of these very same people cast their vote for Trump to do the job, a number greater than what Clinton received, it should be noted.

“[Trump] threatened to prosecute and jail his political opponents . . .” I thought he just threatened to sue his detractors for libel, a perfectly legal action.

“. . . he has said he would curtail freedom of the press.” Perhaps this is a slight exaggeration by the Times. Changing the rights of the press is a constitutional issue.

“He . . . intends to cut taxes for the wealthy . . .” The times neglected to mention that Trump wants to cut taxes for all Americans and businesses. “. . . and withdraw the health care protection of [ACA/Obamacare] from tens of millions of Americans.” Yeah. Trump wants to redo the law before it crashes and burns because of skyrocketing costs, higher premiums and worsening terms (like deductibles).

The editorial indicates that Trump will abrogate the Iran nuke arrangement. He should, it’s an abomination that gives our worst enemy a license to build nuclear weapons. To quote Trump, it’s really dumb deal. And he’s going to “do away with” NAFTA. Since it is effectively stealing jobs from America, this is an excellent idea.

Trump will “restore” a “right-wing majority” to the Supreme Court. Of course he will and should. Clinton would have replaced Scalia, a conservative, with a liberal judge. This would have “changed” (as opposed to restore) the balance that has existed in the court for many years. When the Democrats win the presidency and the Senate they could then tilt the court if vacancies arise.

Donald Trump won the election against all odds by recognizing that many Americans wanted to change the political establishment in Washington. He single-handedly saved the Republican majorities in the House and the Senate, per Paul Ryan. It was a gigantic victory.

Not only that, Trump won even though the Times and all the other left-wing newspapers and media outlets bombarded him on a daily basis. Maybe the system is just a little rigged.

Trump offered Americans a chance to reset the national agenda. The electorate wanted to give someone from outside the beltway a chance to improve America. The Democrats have failed miserably to improve the country economically, socially or diplomatically during the past eight years. Their terrible presidential candidate together with Obama’s failed presidency gave Trump an opportunity to capture the top job. If the Times or any liberals want to vent, they should direct their anger at Hillary Clinton and the current administration.

Clinton and Obama have asked Americans to unite behind the new president. The Times has chosen to conduct its own private war against a president that has not yet assumed control, ignoring a tradition in this country only minutes after he was declared the winner. This is not a good start to any effort to bring comity back to our government.

 

What Must Donald Trump Do To Be A Successful President?

Donald Trump shocked America and the world by soundly defeating Hillary Clinton. The man with a 60% disapproval rating crushed his detractors and denied the woman who would be the first ever to lead the U.S.

Trump’s ability to govern effectively is dependent upon several things moving forward.

He must recognize that large swaths of people, including women, minorities and young people are not convinced that he has the intellectual capacity or the temperament to be president. To bring the country together, Trump needs to make peace with these groups, in particular. He must bury forever his misogynistic attitude. He must demand that the federal government heed the cries of the African American community and all those in need. And, he must give millennials hope as they assume more responsibility in the coming years.

Trump must recognize his greatest shortcomings- he is not an experienced politician, nor is he a statesman. In these regards Trump must select an all-star group for his cabinet along with highly qualified advisors that will educate him and guide him as he tries to make our country great. This is exactly what Ronald Reagan did in 1980. It was a winning formula. Frankly Trump must delineate his vision of America and empower his underlings to make it happen.

Trump must not be a sore winner or assume that he is omnipotent. He will not, even with control of Congress, be able to issue edits without great consideration and engagement of others. The new president needs to mend fences and surprise his political detractors by offering to engage them in the process of improving the country.

In his own party Trump will face many obstacles. They will come from two directions, the spurned establishment and the upstart Tea Party. Bringing these two constituencies together will be a monumental task.

Diplomatically Trump must not give in to the temptation to isolate America. He must engage other nations to fight along side the U.S. and defeat terrorism. Most importantly Trump will need to develop a plan that ends with the ultimate demise of ISIS and other forms of radical religious-based intimidation around the world.

Trump must show the world that he has the temperament to manage the country. He was not elected dictator so he must be able to convince others to do his bidding, not order them to do so. The man has graduated from CEO of Trump Inc. to CEO of the most powerful nation in the world.

The events of the past 24 hours are the beginning of an “American Spring,” our version of the Arab Spring. However our spring must be peaceful and engage every person in the country. Trump must prove that the U.S. is strong and compassionate domestically and globally. The use of force should be only a last resort.

The reputation of our federal government within its borders is tainted as it is outside of them. Trump must change these perspectives and prove the U.S. is a  government that cares for its own and is a dependable ally for other nations. He must repudiate the many missteps of his predecessor of the past eight years.

I did not vote for Trump (or Clinton) and have the same fears that many Americans have expressed over the past 18 months about the man. It is inconceivable that any one, including Trump, can be ordained by the greatest nation in the world in such a dramatic fashion and not be moved to strive for greatness. But Trump needs help from his advisors, and he needs the support of the American people. I’m prepared to stand by him as he finishes his great odyssey.