• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:00:19 PM
Whatever. Keep playing your semantics game. It's the only way you can feel like you're winning.  ::)

I feel like I'm winning due to the results in Virginia and New Jersey.  So, you certainly seem to have an odd personal definition of 'winning.'

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:11:57 PM
I feel like I'm winning due to the results in Virginia and New Jersey.  So, you certainly seem to have an odd personal definition of 'winning.'

YOU"RE CANADIAN and obviously crazy.

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:17:10 PM
YOU"RE CANADIAN and obviously crazy.

You're a Trump supporter and obviously mentally challenged.  I still love you though.

Gd5150

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on November 28, 2017, 03:03:25 PM
Do you know why Trump's dumb tweets and dumb comments don't help him?  Why displaying a certain temperment, as least publicly, is to his benefit?  No, clearly you don't.

All these little barbs and comments add up.  Especially with a media only too happy to pounce on each one and try to turn them against him.  As a whole, they put him in a bad light.  They drive potential supporters away, and turn off those who do support him.  And for no benefit. 

Every official, certainly every president, starts out with a certain amount of political capital.  Everything they do, every policy, every vote, creates enemies and spends down that capital.  That's why Congress tends to be cautious and doesn't get as much done as people would like.  Each of these comments and tweets spends down his political caplital, for no real benefit.


Trump is the president.  He doesn't have to prove anything.  Yet his inferiority complex, or whatever is going on with him just won't let go.  I'm sure he enjoys venting, and poking people in the eye, but so what.  You wouldn't let your kids act the way he does.

If you really think he has the media and the Democrats on the run, that he's hurting them, you're wrong.  He's in the process of destroying his credibility, and taking his party down with him.  The danger here, and what I've told you along, is the Ds will come booming back, and become the permanent national party, just like what happened in California in the aftermath of the Schwartzennegger debacle.  Same ego, same dumb conduct, ultimately the same result.
You’re making the same mistake most of the establishment republicans make; “If we bend over and be nice, demokkkrats will give us a chance”. No they won’t. Just a few things leftwing lemmings and their slavemasters said about our more “grown up leaders” who played nice.

Ronald Reagan: Wanted ww3. Wanted nuclear war. Caused aids to kill gay people.
HW Bush: was going to get 500k troops killed in the Iraq war - Barbara Boxer (quoted because of the insane stupidity of it).
Gingrich: wanted to starve old people, make them eat cat food.
Dole: Hitler...
W Bush: Caused a hurricane on purpose to hurt black people. Hitler...
McCain: Hitler...
Romney: Hitler...

Trump could be a saint and it wouldn’t matter, and as long as he’s got an R in front of his name the worthless left will accuse him of being: Hitler, white supremeacist, hates women...yada yada. They were doing it before his inauguration. Their playbook never changes. Trump is the first to give it back, and it’s caused their entire community to become detached from reality. The demokkkrat media, the demokkkrat education industry, the demokkkrat party, and their mindless lemmings, all have their insanity on full display for all of us to enjoy. The piece de resistance, they actually think he’s going to be impeached, they filed articles, and there is still zero evidence to support their witch hunt. Their hysteria is the greatest political time in our lives. His popularity is as solid as ever and the demokkkrat losers have no answer for 2018 or 2020. Enjoy their Trump induced collapse.

Bravo Mr President, bravo!


Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:21:04 PM
You're a Trump supporter and obviously mentally challenged.  I still love you though.

Do you even care about your own country or do you think Trump-bashing on the internet makes you some sort of political activist? The meds are for your own good. Start taking them again!  ::)

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:29:14 PM
Do you even care about your own country or do you think Trump-bashing on the internet makes you some sort of political activist? The meds are for your own good. Start taking them again!  ::)

Trump is a danger to the entire world, including Canada.  I've made a number of posts here that indicate my level of expertise on Canada.  I think not only do I know more about Canada than you know about the United States, but that I know more about the United States than you do. 

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:31:50 PM
Trump is a danger to the entire world, including Canada.  I've made a number of posts here that indicate my level of expertise on Canada.  I think not only do I know more about Canada than you know about the United States, but that I know more about the United States than you do.

Yes, you've obviously got the world sewn up with your "personal definitions."  ::) ;D

Like I said, you're obviously deluded but keep posting. It's all the insane people on the left like you that got Trump elected. Great job! Keep it up! We need another term. Post often.

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:39:34 PM
Yes, you've obviously got the world sewn up with your "personal definitions."  ::) ;D

Like I said, you're obviously deluded but keep posting. It's all the insane people on the left like you that got Trump elected. Great job! Keep it up! We need another term. Post often.

And it's people like you on the right that helped Democrats win at least 16 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates, including this guy:

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:45:53 PM
And it's people like you on the right that helped Democrats win at least 16 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates.

16?! Wow! That's a lot. Just a few hundred more to go.  ;D

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:48:26 PM
16?! Wow! That's a lot. Just a few hundred more to go.  ;D

There are only 100 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates.  See, once again I know more about your own country than you do.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:54:38 PM
There are only 100 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates.  See, once again I know more about your own country than you do.

I'm talking about the country but whatever. Score another victory for The Semanticist...in your mind.  ;D

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:45:53 PM
And it's people like you on the right that helped Democrats win at least 16 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates, including this guy:


I've only ever had good things to say about Carter. The only bad thing I can say about him is that he allowed his adminstration to be hijacked by insane technocratic globalists like this guy but that's a lot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvO3qAlyTg

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 06:57:54 PM
I'm talking about the country but whatever. Score another victory for The Semanticist...in your mind.  ;D

The problem is, the only races that can be one are those that are being held.


136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 07:01:24 PM
I've only ever had good things to say about Carter. The only bad thing I can say about him is that he allowed his adminstration to be hijacked by insane technocratic globalists like this guy but that's a lot:

This is Lee Carter, a new member of the Virginia House of Delegates:
https://wamu.org/story/17/11/14/meet-lee-carter-democratic-socialist-beat-republican-seat-virginias-house-delegates/

Jimmy Carter is a decent person, but he was a lousy President.




136 or 142

So, this is what I had read about the idea of the 'deep state' that I thought you might be interested in.  This is from former Ontario Premier Bob Rae's book "From Protest to Power."  Like any book from a politician, take it with some grain of salt, but he seems to be fairly honest in his reporting in this book.

The theory of modern government is that elected politicians decide on a broad range of policies after receiving the best possible advice from a highly skilled, politically neutral civil service, which then is given responsibility for implementing the policy.

Life is not quite that simple.  The senior bureaucracy in the government of Ontario has many talented and public-spirited people.  It also has its share of time-servers and careerists.  A newly elected government and premier have to spend a considerable period of time sorting out who are good and talented and who aren't and recognize the inevitable fact that people who have been working in a given area have expertise and a vested interest in having their advice accepted.

One of the best descriptions I've ever heard of a ministerial briefing was that of the 'Goldilocks theory of government.'  Each briefing on a difficult issue comes with three options.  The first turns out to be too hot. The second is much too cold.  The third is, magic of magics, just right.  Ministers thus eat their porridge dutifully as their masters had always intended.

Large organizations develop cultures and rules, and a power and authority structure all their own.  This is very much the case in the government in Ontario.  While the Tories were in power for their forty-two year uninterrupted stint, there was no real line dividing partisan politics from public service. This was also very much the case in that extraordinary federal Liberal run from 1935 to 1957 and again in the years 1963-1984.  (My own addition: with the exception of the few months Tory Joe Clark held power in 1979.)

I had two major managerial problems. The first was that the caucus and the cabinet were new to the world of governing.  We had very few political staff with any direct government experience.  This made mistakes inevitable, and we made our share.  The second was ultimately more important, and we could only make a beginning of dealing with it in our term in government: the management of the Ontario public service was too inward looking and too stuck in routine, with power and authority structures that dated back decades.  Information systems were outdated.  There was little sense of entrepreneurship and innovation.  Just getting things done was difficult, particularly when some senior bureaucrat didn't want to do it.

There were clearly many senior civil servants who saw their role after September 6, 1990 (the election day that made Rae Premier), as representing a kind of permanent government, which would be there long after we had gone.  Much is made of political patronage and how wrong it is to have 'political interference in the civil service.'  This is at best naive, because it ignores the political reality that there is cronyism and patronage within the civil service itself: deputy ministers promoting their favorites, and being promoted themselves on the say of the cabinet secretary.

Peter Barnes, the cabinet secretary, clearly saw himself as the leader of the permanent government.  He would present lists of candidates for various jobs to me, and after a while, I realized that the same names kept coming back again and again.


Pages 233-235
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an extra, this is my favorite part of the book.  Bob Rae at that time was the leader of the left leaning New Democratic Party but his government   
unilaterally altered public sector worker contracts in order to deal with the budget deficit.

Irony of ironies, OPSEU (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union) in its wisdom decided to have regular hecklers sent to all our events which prompted me to phone Leah Casselman in the middle of the campaign and ask what she thought would happen under a Tory government.

"You're the government now and we want to get you to the table to negotiate a reasonable agreement."

"I'm not going to negotiate an agreement before the election, and I'm certainly not going to reach a deal just to keep a couple of demonstrators off my back."

"Then you'll have to live with the consequences."

"No, actually Leah, you will."

Page 264

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 07:52:50 PM
So, this is what I had read about the idea of the 'deep state' that I thought you might be interested in.  This is from former Ontario Premier Bob Rae's book "From Protest to Power."  Like any book from a politician, take it with some grain of salt, but he seems to be fairly honest in his reporting in this book.

"The theory of modern government  is that elected politicians decide on a broad range of policies after receiving the best possible advice from a highly skilled, politically neutral civil service, which then is given responsibility for implementing the policy.

Life is not quite that simple.  The senior bureaucracy in the government of Ontario has many talented and public-spirited people.  It also has its share of time-servers and careerists.  A newly elected government and premier have to spend a considerable period of time sorting out who are good and talented and who aren't and recognize the inevitable fact that people who have been working in a given area have expertise and a vested interest in having their advice accepted.

One of the best descriptions I've ever heard of a ministerial briefing was that of the 'Goldilocks theory of government.'  Each briefing on a difficult issue comes with three options.  The first turns out to be too hot. The second is much too cold.  The third is, magic of magics, just right.  Ministers thus eat their porridge dutifully as their masters had always intended.

Large organizations develop cultures and rules, and a power and authority structure all their own.  This is very much the case in the government in Ontario.  While the Tories were in power for their forty-two year uninterrupted stint, there was no real line dividing partisan politics from public service. This was also very much the case in that extraordinary federal Liberal run from 1935 to 1957 and again in the years 1963-1984.  (My own addition: with the exception of the few months Tory Joe Clark held power in 1979.)

I had two major managerial problems. The first was that the caucus and the cabinet were new to the world of governing.  We had very few political staff with any direct government experience.  This made mistakes inevitable, and we made our share.  The second was ultimately more important, and we could only make a beginning of dealing with it in out term in government: the management of the Ontario public service was too inward looking and too stuck in routine, with power and authority structures that dated back decades.  Information systems were outdated.  There was little sense of entrepreneurship and innovation.  Just getting things done was difficult, particularly when some senior bureaucrat didn't want to do it.

There were clearly many senior civil servants who saw their role after September 6, 1990 (the election day that made Rae Premier), as representing a kind of permanent government, which would be there long after we had gone.  Much is made of political patronage and how wrong it is to have 'political interference in the civil service.'  This is at best naive, because it ignores the political reality that there is cronyism and patronage within the civil service itself: deputy ministers promoting their favorites, and being promoted themselves on the say of the cabinet secretary.

Peter Barnes, the cabinet secretary, clearly saw himself as the leader of the permanent government.  He would present lists of candidates for various jobs to me, and after a while, I realized that the same names kept coming back again and again.


Pages 233-235
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an extra, this is my favorite part of the book.  Bob Rae at that time was the leader of the left leaning New Democratic Party but his government   
unilaterally altered public sector worker contracts in order to deal with the budget deficit.

Irony of ironies, OPSEU (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union) in its wisdom decided to have regular hecklers sent to all our events which prompted me to phone Leah Casselman in the middle of the campaign and ask what she thought would happen under a Tory government.

"You're the government now and we want to get you to the table to negotiate a reasonable agreement."

"I'm not going to negotiate an agreement before the election, and I'm certainly not going to reach a deal just to keep a couple of demonstrators off my back."

"Then you'll have to live with the consequences."

"No, actually Leah, you will."

Page 264

TL;DR

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 07:55:46 PM
TL;DR

It takes about 2-3 minutes to read.  Do you have the attention span of Donald Trump?

Fine I'll break it up for you.

136 or 142

The theory of modern government is that elected politicians decide on a broad range of policies after receiving the best possible advice from a highly skilled, politically neutral civil service, which then is given responsibility for implementing the policy.

Life is not quite that simple.  The senior bureaucracy in the government of Ontario has many talented and public-spirited people.  It also has its share of time-servers and careerists.  A newly elected government and premier have to spend a considerable period of time sorting out who are good and talented and who aren't and recognize the inevitable fact that people who have been working in a given area have expertise and a vested interest in having their advice accepted.

One of the best descriptions I've ever heard of a ministerial briefing was that of the 'Goldilocks theory of government.'  Each briefing on a difficult issue comes with three options.  The first turns out to be too hot. The second is much too cold.  The third is, magic of magics, just right.  Ministers thus eat their porridge dutifully as their masters had always intended.

Large organizations develop cultures and rules, and a power and authority structure all their own.  This is very much the case in the government in Ontario.  While the Tories were in power for their forty-two year uninterrupted stint, there was no real line dividing partisan politics from public service. This was also very much the case in that extraordinary federal Liberal run from 1935 to 1957 and again in the years 1963-1984.  (My own addition: with the exception of the few months Tory Joe Clark held power in 1979.)

I had two major managerial problems. The first was that the caucus and the cabinet were new to the world of governing.  We had very few political staff with any direct government experience.  This made mistakes inevitable, and we made our share.  The second was ultimately more important, and we could only make a beginning of dealing with it in our term in government: the management of the Ontario public service was too inward looking and too stuck in routine, with power and authority structures that dated back decades.  Information systems were outdated.  There was little sense of entrepreneurship and innovation.  Just getting things done was difficult, particularly when some senior bureaucrat didn't want to do it.

There were clearly many senior civil servants who saw their role after September 6, 1990 (the election day that made Rae Premier), as representing a kind of permanent government, which would be there long after we had gone.  Much is made of political patronage and how wrong it is to have 'political interference in the civil service.'  This is at best naive, because it ignores the political reality that there is cronyism and patronage within the civil service itself: deputy ministers promoting their favorites, and being promoted themselves on the say of the cabinet secretary.

Peter Barnes, the cabinet secretary, clearly saw himself as the leader of the permanent government.  He would present lists of candidates for various jobs to me, and after a while, I realized that the same names kept coming back again and again.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 08:00:26 PM
It takes about 2-3 minutes to read.  Do you have the attention span of Donald Trump?

Fine I'll break it up for you.

No, really, it's alright. No need to go to all that trouble.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 08:01:39 PM
The theory of modern government is that elected politicians decide on a broad range of policies after receiving the best possible advice from a highly skilled, politically neutral civil service, which then is given responsibility for implementing the policy.

Life is not quite that simple.  The senior bureaucracy in the government of Ontario has many talented and public-spirited people.  It also has its share of time-servers and careerists.  A newly elected government and premier have to spend a considerable period of time sorting out who are good and talented and who aren't and recognize the inevitable fact that people who have been working in a given area have expertise and a vested interest in having their advice accepted.

One of the best descriptions I've ever heard of a ministerial briefing was that of the 'Goldilocks theory of government.'  Each briefing on a difficult issue comes with three options.  The first turns out to be too hot. The second is much too cold.  The third is, magic of magics, just right.  Ministers thus eat their porridge dutifully as their masters had always intended.

Large organizations develop cultures and rules, and a power and authority structure all their own.  This is very much the case in the government in Ontario.  While the Tories were in power for their forty-two year uninterrupted stint, there was no real line dividing partisan politics from public service. This was also very much the case in that extraordinary federal Liberal run from 1935 to 1957 and again in the years 1963-1984.  (My own addition: with the exception of the few months Tory Joe Clark held power in 1979.)

I had two major managerial problems. The first was that the caucus and the cabinet were new to the world of governing.  We had very few political staff with any direct government experience.  This made mistakes inevitable, and we made our share.  The second was ultimately more important, and we could only make a beginning of dealing with it in our term in government: the management of the Ontario public service was too inward looking and too stuck in routine, with power and authority structures that dated back decades.  Information systems were outdated.  There was little sense of entrepreneurship and innovation.  Just getting things done was difficult, particularly when some senior bureaucrat didn't want to do it.

There were clearly many senior civil servants who saw their role after September 6, 1990 (the election day that made Rae Premier), as representing a kind of permanent government, which would be there long after we had gone.  Much is made of political patronage and how wrong it is to have 'political interference in the civil service.'  This is at best naive, because it ignores the political reality that there is cronyism and patronage within the civil service itself: deputy ministers promoting their favorites, and being promoted themselves on the say of the cabinet secretary.

Peter Barnes, the cabinet secretary, clearly saw himself as the leader of the permanent government.  He would present lists of candidates for various jobs to me, and after a while, I realized that the same names kept coming back again and again.

Why not start a Canadian politics thread where you can cut and paste about that to your heart's content. This is the Trump thread.  ::)

136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 08:03:54 PM
Why not start a Canadian politics thread where you can cut and paste about that to your heart's content. This is the Trump thread.  ::)

I try so hard to please you :(

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 08:04:58 PM
I try so hard to please you :(

And you fail repeatedly. Maybe you should try to learn from that experience.


paladin1991

Quote from: mv on November 28, 2017, 02:47:00 AM
on what grounds?
I challenge you, on what grounds?  Hint: Because we have such bitchin' avatars.

Jackstar

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:31:50 PM
Drumpf is a danger to the entire world

massive rolleyes


Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 28, 2017, 06:31:50 PM
including Canada

Dump the lizard bitch, and we'll talk.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 28, 2017, 04:32:14 PM
I think that's happening and you're intelligent enough to be able understand that the chaos and turmoil is just the globalists fighting back against this. Swamp draining takes time and must be done right. Or did you expect things to magically change on week one?

I expected repeal of ObamaCare, implementation of a common sense immigration policy, control of the border, a cut on business taxes, and even a reorganization of the bloated, useless, federal government bureaucracy and a start on reducing the deficit and national debt.  You know, ''the agenda''.  Most of which was promised ''on Day 1''.  And all of which requires legislation that is going to have a lot of detractors, make a lot of enemies, and cost a few people their seats.

The media and the Democrats expected it too, which is why they've behaved in such a panicked, over the top, dishonest, disgusting (even for them) manner.

With a razor thin Senate majority, did it really make sense to insult McCain and enough others who were never really with him anyway to sink any legislation that came up?  When he could have gone on a charm offensive, he decided to be an asshole instead.  How's that working in getting wavering Senators to vote his way?  I'm thinking maybe things work a little differently dealing with Congress than the way things worked bossing around his employees at Trump Towers?

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod