We are not talking about electing the Director of Etiquette here. We’re talking about electing a person whose function is to lead and manage an enormous nation.
Nor, by any realistic measure are we hearing the real truth from anyone. Even Romney, in his speech, seriously misrepresented some facts, and he isn’t even running. Ted Cruz’ misrepresentations are almost without number. So are Rubio’s. I’ll hand it to Kasich. He has not told outright lies, but neither has he told the full truth. Granted, he has not been asked the really hard questions, but the reporters know the hard truths are not attractive to viewers, so they accept superficialities as if they had meaning.
The American people don’t want to hear the truth; absolutely don’t want to hear it, and we’ll reject anyone who tells it to us. So what do the politicians do? Trump says what he thinks (rightly, apparently) a very large number of people are thinking. Cruz is still wooing the constitutionalist/evangelical ideological purists. Rubio is trying to be “establishment” and “non-establishment” simultaneously. Kasich is trying to be factual without much result. Clinton appeals to the worst human instincts and makes them sound like virtues. Sanders is an ideological purist of another sort.
But when one of them takes the Oval Office, what do we have then? We have had “liars in chief” before; people who promised much, delivered little, then claimed the accomplished much. We have nevertheless had people there who actually got a few things done that were worthwhile, sometimes against the popular view, but not usually.
Which of the candidates will be able to manage the “biggest corporation” on earth, and how will they do it? Will they even attempt to manage it other than for their own profit? That’s really the question.
Hillary Clinton, we may be forgiven for believing, has demonstrated a depth of corruption unprecedented in modern history. She’s a war-monger and a war-starter. She has a very cruel streak in her. How, then, will she “manage the big company”? With those characteristics at the fore?
What has she built? Well, a parasitical machine; one whose business is influence-peddling. She does something that lands millions or billions in the lap of some company or country, and she and her husband gain thousands or millions. It would be ever so much cheaper to simply have the treasury write her a check for the smaller, net amount.
Of all the candidates, the only ones who have ever built anything for which people paid voluntarily, are Trump and Kasich. The only ones who have hired and fired for reasons of expertise and efficiency are Trump and Kasich. The only ones who have ever had to meet budgets are Trump and Kasich.
Etiquette, slick speeches, and political correctness aside, if expertise in anything other than politics is the desired characteristic, there are really only two choices. But nobody wants to think of it that way.
, I’m just sharing my opinion … not to mention anticipating that some Trump supporters are going to say that Romney’s speech isn’t newsworthy or whatever.
