quote:

The Resurgent has not supported President Trump because he is not ideologically pure enough for them.

Perhaps they support President Trump in what they agree with, and voice disagreement where things have not gone well, both with Congress and with the administration?

I get it.... you don't like conservatives, who are consistent. You think consistency = "ideologically pure".

If you don't like The Resurgent, perhaps the Federalist where the story first appeared?

Breaking: Sebastian Gorka Resigns From Trump Administration
August 25, 2017 By Mollie Hemingway

Sebastian Gorka is resigning his post as Deputy Assistant to President Trump, multiple sources familiar with the situation have told The Federalist.

In a blunt resignation letter, the national security and counterterrorism expert expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of the Trump administration. “[G]iven recent events, it is clear to me that forces that do not support the MAGA promise are – for now – ascendant within the White House,” Gorka wrote. “As a result, the best and most effective way I can support you, Mr. President, is from outside the People’s House.”

Gorka’s letter expressed unhappiness with the direction the Trump administration’s foreign policy has taken, as signaled by the president’s recent speech on Afghanistan:

“Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will ‘Make America Great Again,’ have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months. This was made patently obvious as I read the text of your speech on Afghanistan this week…

“The fact that those who drafted and approved the speech removed any mention of Radical Islam or radical Islamic terrorism proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been lost…

“Just as worrying, when discussing our future actions in the region, the speech listed operational objectives without ever defining the strategic victory conditions we are fighting for. This omission should seriously disturb any national security professional, and any American who is unsatisfied with the last 16 years of disastrous policy decisions which have led to thousands of Americans killed and trillions of taxpayer dollars spent in ways that have not brought security or victory.”

During his time in the Trump administration, Gorka focused on issues such as countering the Muslim Brotherhood, the crisis in Qatar, supporting efforts to draft a new long-term national security strategy, and combatting China’s economic warfare. Before coming to the White House, Gorka was the Major General Matthew C. Horner Chair at Marine Corps University and also contributed to Breitbart News.

Gorka’s tenure at the White House was marked by unusually vociferous attacks against him and his family by left-leaning media organizations and the Democratic Party. This includes personal attacks against his wife, mother, and son.

A source close to the White House said of his decision, “This was more or less going to be a done deal when Bannon submitted his resignation. Not because he didn’t have a protector, but because there is no point in having your life ruined every day if you’re not going to get much accomplished.” The same source said that what did change after Bannon left was that anti-Bannon factions began erecting bureaucratic road blocks to undermine Gorka internally.

In his letter, Gorka made clear that he believes in the promise of the Trump presidency despite being concerned about its present direction.

“Your presidency will prove to be one of the most significant events in modern American politics. November the 8th was the result of decades during which the political and media elites felt that they knew better than the people who elect them into office. They do not, and the MAGA platform allowed their voices to be heard,” he wrote, adding, “Millions of people believe in, and have chosen, you and your vision of Making America Great Again. They will help eventually rebalance this temporary reality.”

UPDATE: In response to this story, the White House issued a statement that said, “Sebastian Gorka did not resign, but I can confirm he no longer works at the White House.”

http://thefederalist.com/2017/...rump-administration/

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
https://m.youngcons.com/cnn-fi...remacist-by-default/

CNN finally called everyone that voted for Trump a white supremacist. See you all at the meeting.

Is business casual okay and will there be refreshments?

I believe it's a white-tie event

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
https://m.youngcons.com/cnn-fi...remacist-by-default/

CNN finally called everyone that voted for Trump a white supremacist. See you all at the meeting.

Is business casual okay and will there be refreshments?

Cookies. There will be cookies. Beautiful white cookies.

With sprinkles. 'Cuz I likes sprinkles.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
Cookies. There will be cookies. Beautiful white cookies.

With sprinkles. 'Cuz I likes sprinkles.

Are the sprinkles gonna be rainbow, or just brown?

"Desperate Democrats want to keep Trump's judicial picks off the bench at all costs. Here's how Republicans can stop them…"

www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/0...n-stop-them.amp.html

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
Cookies. There will be cookies. Beautiful white cookies.

With sprinkles. 'Cuz I likes sprinkles.

And because sprinkles are for winners!

-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
Cookies. There will be cookies. Beautiful white cookies.

With sprinkles. 'Cuz I likes sprinkles.

And milk. Lotsa milk.

Thought for sure there'd be crackers...

quote:

Originally posted by sorenson:
Thought for sure there'd be crackers...

Let's try to keep the racism at a minimum please.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
UPDATE: In response to this story, the White House issued a statement that said, “Sebastian Gorka did not resign, but I can confirm he no longer works at the White House.”

Is that their convoluted way of saying he was fired?

flashguy

Senator McLame was the first to go after Pres. Trump for pardoning of Sheriff Joe.....what a total asshole, and a blight on the great state of Az. He knows that he is a short timer, and wants to get in all of the digs that he can. Because of his medical condition, the people of Az. will not try a recall election, but I sure wish that they would!!! Most of Az. is thrilled about the pardon.

Dr. Keith Ablow: Trump mentally ill? I hope every president we ever have is this 'crazy':



This oped was originally published months ago—before Yale forensic psychiatrist Bandy Lee was known to be consulting with other psychiatrists and with members of Congress about creating an expert panel to advise Congress on President Trump’s mental well-being. Publication also preceded recent comments calling into question the president’s fitness for office by James Clapper, who served in intelligence positions for Presidents Bush and Obama.

At the risk of sounding a bit narcissistic myself: These people should quiet down, enjoy a nice Trump cigar or glass of Trump wine and listen to me.

My insights are basic ones that an average medical student or below-average political science major in a college should be able to grasp, immediately. So, chill. Here we go . . .

Let me issue the standard disclaimer of psychiatrists who discuss the mental health of public figures: I have not personally examined President Trump. But, I don’t need to.

Now, here is my assessment, once again: Donald Trump is stone cold sane and more than mentally fit to be president of the United States.

When a man acquires billions of dollars through complex real estate transactions, invests in many countries, goes on to phenomenal success in television and turns his name into a worldwide brand, it is very unlikely that he is mentally unstable.

When the same man obviously enjoys the love and respect of his children and his wife, who seem to rely on him for support and guidance, it is extraordinarily unlikely that he is mentally unstable.

When that same man remains friends with his ex-wife (Ivana Trump), who supports him, politically, it is almost impossible that he is mentally unstable.

When the same man walks into the political arena and deftly defeats 16 Republican opponents and then the Democratic heir-apparent to a two-term president’s administration, the odds of that man being mentally unstable become vanishingly thin.

And when that very same man attracts to his team the kind of intellect and gravitas represented (to name just a few) by Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Dr. Ben Carson, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, four star Marine Corps General John Kelly and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general and commander of the U.S. Central Command, he cannot be mentally deranged. Period. It is a statistical impossibility.

Those who imply otherwise are political opportunists, or fools, or both (and I am thinking here, in particular, of Dr. Lee). Disclaimer: I have not personally examined her for mental stability, either.

President Trump is the first human being to win this nation’s highest office without having held any other political office or serving as a general. Most political pundits thought his quest was pure folly. Most journalists assessed his chances as zero. So who was laboring under quasi-delusional thinking? Answer: Not Donald J. Trump.

Anecdotally, by the way, I have never had one bad Trump experience. Not one. I own several of his ties — all of them of the highest quality. I have stayed in his hotels and never had a single complaint (and I am a born complainer). I have eaten in his New York restaurant — flawless service, excellent food. I own an apartment at Trump Place in Manhattan. Impeccable design, sturdy construction, fabulous amenities.

I had two of his bumper stickers on my SUV. They stayed on throughout the campaign and peeled off, without a bit of adhesive remaining to mar the bumper.

My son wears a Make America Great Again sweatshirt. It’s been laundered a bunch. It still looks great. A mentally unstable man would be unlikely to deliver superior products across multiple industries, don’t you think?

If you’re still worried about the mental stability of the president, note this: The stock market doesn’t like instability. Investors, en masse, can take the measure of a man pretty darn well. The stock market has hit record high after record high since Trump’s election, and if you think that’s an accident, or that investors have all been fooled, it’s time to start wondering about your own capacity for rational thought.

Employers don’t like instability, either. And job growth is surging.

I should note that nothing I am saying should besmirch the reputations of men like President Abraham Lincoln or Sir Winston Churchill, both of whom are said to have fought the ravages of major depression or bipolar disorder. One was instrumental in ridding America of slavery. The other was instrumental in saving the world from tyranny. Mahatma Gandhi, by the way, also reportedly suffered from depression. So did Pablo Picasso and astronaut Buzz Aldrin. Me, too, by the way. Psychiatric illness does not, a priori, disqualify a person from rendering extraordinary service to mankind.

Mind you, neither Lincoln nor Churchill nor Gandhi led a nation after becoming a business sensation and television star. That trifecta defines one man: President Donald J. Trump.

Now, think about those who are rabble-rousing about the president’s mental status. Take Sen. Al Franken. Remember? He was all worried about the president allegedly overestimating the crowd size at his inauguration. But Franken is allied with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who asserted she is Native American, when there is no evidence of that whatsoever.

And they’re still calling Trump’s sanity into question? Really, you can’t make this stuff up.



http://www.foxnews.com/opinion...e-is-this-crazy.html

quote:

Originally posted by lkdr1989:
I believe it's a white-tie event

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
https://m.youngcons.com/cnn-fi...remacist-by-default/

CNN finally called everyone that voted for Trump a white supremacist. See you all at the meeting.

Is business casual okay and will there be refreshments?

I thought it was more of a cap and gown affair

Wouldn't want to look like academics. That would be triggering.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

The Resurgent has not supported President Trump because he is not ideologically pure enough for them.

I get it.... you don't like conservatives, who are consistent. You think consistency = "ideologically pure".

If you don't like The Resurgent, perhaps the Federalist where the story first appeared?

Chelim1,

I’ve been a card-carrying member of the Federalist Society. I like conservatives and purists but I am not a fan of those who find seemingly every opportunity to denigrate the president.

I do owe you thanks, though. They say that humor keeps a marriage strong so I’d like to acknowledge you for keeping my wife of 40 years laughing at what you accuse me of being.

I can understand why you have now posted an article from the Federalist. They have developed over the decades into a solid force with good scholarship and a measure of gravitas. I would want to run away from the Resurgent article too. The Resurgent, not the Federalist, predicted the abject future failure of the president – the point I was making about the Resurgent’s error.

The material from the Federalist had already been posted in this thread; yet, you posted the Resurgent article. Why? It appears to me that the Resurgent took pot shots at the President for things that have not even happened and you thought that was important to post.

Remember, I posted criticism while pointing out what the Resurgent, not the Federalist, article actually stated:

“The Resurgent article says “he’ll sign any health care deal that crosses his desk.” The article says, “[i]n the Middle East, Trump’s deal making will likely end in failure.” It says, the president will “continue all the policies of his predecessor in relation to Iran and North Korea.” It says that MAGA is just a slogan stolen from Reagan and nothing more. I’d say the piece sounded like a self-indulgent pitty party.”

I take issue with the self-ascendant purist ideologues who claim they are the true conservatives. Sometimes it seems that RedState, The Resurgent, Bill Kristol, George Will and others have made their own cult as bad as Alex Jones.

It is one thing to be “normative” in philosophizing about the way the world “should” be but it is another to deal with the “descriptive “ world the way that it is.

Continuing to slight and posit the president as a future failure as your article did seems the cute play for never Trumpers and those wishing to continually slight and impede the president. Some purists seemingly do not see the president as capable of making good decisions because he is seen as making them for the wrong reasons.

Well, in public policy, few unaltered purist views make it into law. The fact is, anyone seeking to make laws in the world the way it is, as opposed to the way one may want it to be, must realize that it’s a numbers game. Holding one’s breath or turning one’s self into a speed bump doesn’t produce legislation. Give and take and well thought out appeals across a broader philosophical spectrum do. Our pluralistic society and legislature requires it.

I have a problem with the self-proclaimed conservative purists claiming to speak for conservatives while denigrating the president – a president who has delivered concrete changes in our society that are decidedly conservative. Such purists only speak for themselves and represent a strand that may very well be so heavenly minded that they are no earthly good. While ideological purity serves an important function, the practical job is to make a better and more free world for our citizens.

As the president makes changes and implements conservative policies, I do not believe denigrating his process or who he arranges to help him achieve conservative results is a good course. I don’t care if the president gets whomever as an advisor or what label a person wears so long as we get conservative policies made into law.

This focus on purist philosophy that slights the president for getting conservative results but for improper philosophical reasons seems wrong headed to me.

Pronouncing failure before events even happen seems equally flawed.

Although you attempt to recast your article as just disagreeing with the president sometimes, the article said he will be a future failure like the Resurgent has seemingly posited all along.

quote:

This focus on purist philosophy...

You're the only one focused on "purist philosophy". I was talking about what Sebastian Gorka had to say.

He wants to ‘Make America Great Again,’ as much as you or I do... and up until Friday he was working for President Trump as his Deputy Assistant to do so.

The Resurgent article and the Federalist article were just used to get to what Sebastian Gorka was saying. You seem to want to use The Resurgent to link to RedState, Bill Kristol, and George Will. Well, going off on that tangent is just going down a rabbit hole and completely missing the point. There's a reason why Erick Erickson left RedState. I haven't read George Will or Bill Kristol for years. They are elitist snobs.

Anyway, back to Gorka:

“Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will ‘Make America Great Again,’ have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months. This was made patently obvious as I read the text of your speech on Afghanistan this week...


“The fact that those who drafted and approved the speech removed any mention of Radical Islam or radical Islamic terrorism proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been lost...



“Just as worrying, when discussing our future actions in the region, the speech listed operational objectives without ever defining the strategic victory conditions we are fighting for. This omission should seriously disturb any national security professional, and any American who is unsatisfied with the last 16 years of disastrous policy decisions which have led to thousands of Americans killed and trillions of taxpayer dollars spent in ways that have not brought security or victory.”

Echoing comments made by Bannon following his ouster last week, Gorka reportedly told the president that he could better serve his America First agenda from the outside: "[I]t is clear to me that forces that do not support the MAGA promise are – for now – ascendant within the White House..."

In the letter, Gorka blamed the president's failure to outline a plan for exiting Afghanistan after “16 years of disastrous policy decisions" for being the final straw. He also criticized the president and his military advisers for omitting any mention of Radical Islam from the president's statement on Afghanistan, delivered earlier this week."...

THAT, is precisely correct. President Trump's "NEW" Afghanistan "policy" is a 180-degree departure from his stance, up-to-that-point, early this week. I guess you don't see that.

I guess, while you profess your conservative bona fides, you haven't noticed that while he surrounds himself with HR McMaster, and Jared and Ivanka Kushner as well as the Goldman Sachs boys President Trump has just reversed what he was saying as a candidate. Or didn't you like what candidate Trump had to say about removing our troops from these disastrous and illegal wars?

I support President Trump and the good things that he is doing and trying to do. Above all, he is not Hillary Clinton. I want to drain the Swamp of the Imperial City as much as anyone. However, I will continue to keep my eyes and ears open and will make note of what I see and hear. I voted for George W. Bush, but certainly didn't agree with every decision he made. But he wasn't Al Gore. I cast my first vote ever for Ronald Wilson Reagan in 1984, who remains my favorite, but I still didn't agree with every decision he made. Of course, he wasn't Jimmy Carter. I am not going to bury my head in the sand and ignore everything that goes on around me and in the world because Trump! You can respect the Office of the Presidency without taking it to the level of cult worship. Critical thought is not forbidden.

Now.... if you want to discuss this, rather than simply being disparaging of the messenger(s), why don't you tell me why it is that you support his reversal of his position on Afghanistan?

Remember, America-first?

In the words of Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes, "I'd rather be right than consistent." He said that in relation to newspaper analysts who determined that he would surely vote a certain way on a case before the US Supreme Court.

In President Trump's case, what specifically makes you think he has abandoned you such that all his major policy goals are now gone and he will fail as your article predicts?

When you sit in the chair to make decisions with full briefings after careful consideration and debate, a person may see something as a better overall strategy for the benefit of the country. Or, in Holmes' case a better reading of the law.

Making tough decisions is about learning and seeking to to do what is best on balance. I heard McMasters wanted 80,000 troops. President Trump is taking a more moderate course.

Crucify him out of your ignorance of what he now knows because of what you perceive as a reversal of course. You don't even know that what he announced is a reversal in his mind.

We have a president who thinks misdirection and keeping military objectives close to the vest is a good thing. I have some confidence that the Secretary of Defense has enlightened the president's decision.

Your response deflects from my criticism of the Resurgent article. Do you, then, agree that President Trump will be a failure in what has not happened yet?

The closer we get to trial I find that clients often "borrow so much from the future" in believing some lie or calamity will undo their case. It is human nature but it is not helpful. I constantly tell people to stop borrowing from the future because the what ifs and uncertainties will drive them to non-usefulness in his/her own cause.

What the Resurgent and maybe you articulate is worse. The article said that the President doesn't believe in making America Great Again and will fail in what he will do to make it so. It's not exactly the morale builder needed to rally the troops.

Telling me about prognosticated doom and failure really tells more about the source than the reality of what will happen.

By the way, I disparage the Resurgent messenger because of the message.

I spoke about purist conservatives because you said that I do not like purist conservatives. Not so. Many are just seemingly ill-equipped when it comes to legislation and how getting something done may be better than getting nothing done.

How on this earth do you know that what President Trump wants to do is not precisely something that will put America first?

You don't. Yet, you seem to want to assert that.

There are some who believe that you elect a person to do exactly what the voters want. One state representative even sent post cards to his constituents for them to return to tell him how to vote on every issue.

Another view is a different type of representative government, you know, like what we established in the US Constitution. We send people who have the qualities and perspective to make the best choice on thorny, difficult issues on our behalf.

You seem to want President Trump to choose policy courses based on what is in your mind of what he should do as a preordained path based on your interpretation of America First. That does not seem wise or warranted when he is elected to do what he perceives to be best after he is fully briefed on things you will never know.

quote:

Originally posted by Tubetone:
In the words of Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes, "I'd rather be right than consistent."

Thank you for that. I personally have changed literally countless beliefs and practices as a result of receiving new information, thinking things through more fully, having new life experiences, or because external circumstances changed. As Ralph Waldo Emerson put it,

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. … Speak what you think now in hard words, and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today.”

We can argue which consistencies are foolish and which are not, but I would expect every intelligent, thinking person to continually challenge and reevaluate his consistencies. All human progress is by definition based on inconsistency.

I predicted here just before the Inauguration last January that many of us who were exulting in his victory then would be unhappy with the Presidency within a year. I of course had as much chance of being wrong as if I’d predicted the sun would keep shining. I also knew that I would approve of some things myself, and some I wouldn’t. The one consistency that has absolutely not wavered, though, is my gratitude to the Fates that Hillary Clinton is not President.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Balzé Halzé,