In the midst of all of the drama surrounding the various appointments that are being made by Donald Trump, I realized today that I’d missed a very important part of what is going on.
Donald Trump is well-known as being the first President-Elect who has no political or military experience. So what does a canny businessman do to overcome this huge lack?
Much has been made of the problems of Trump University. But Trump is giving us a business-school master-class regarding a businessman’s non-hostile takeover of a field in which he has little knowledge. He has realized that he has a very short and most precious sliver of time between the election and the inauguration, a couple months, and he is taking full advantage of it.
(Photo shown for illustrative purposes only. Any resemblance to actual individuals, living or dead, is purely coincidental. Void where licensed, prohibited, or taxed)
The answer, I realized today, is that a smart businessman coming into a new industry will personally meet with every major player, friend or foe, and listen to them, and more importantly, learn from them. Under the guise of interviewing potential appointees, Trump has gone back to school. He is meeting with top men and women of every stripe and from every part of his new field. He is probing their knowledge. He is searching out their strengths and weaknesses. He is asking what they would do differently. He is discovering what they know, who they know, who they agree with, who their opponents are. He is considering what they have to offer and what they want.
Day after day, there is an unending stream of people of all kinds entering Trump Tower. Naysayers claim he wants them to “kiss his ring” … but the post-meeting interviews with his guests have had one uniform thread. Everyone says, the man knows how to listen, he asks interesting questions, and the topics are always said to be wide-ranging.
For example, a few days ago he met with Rahm Emanuel, the Mayor of Chicago and Obama’s first Chief of Staff. I scratched my head when I read that, wondering why … but now I see that in fact, like him or not, Emanuel IS one of the power players in the game, and Chicago is a major city in the country. Now, Trump knows more about the issues regarding both that Rahm thinks are important.
And after saying that climate change is a “hoax”, I was puzzled when he met with both Al Gore and Leonardo DeCaprio. Afterwards they both said that they were able to deliver their message to him. And why meet with them? Again, in the new industry that Trump has entered, whether you agree or disagree with their messages, they are assuredly both major players in the game, huge name recognition.
How brilliant! By squeezing a ridiculous number of meetings into each day, by the time he actually takes the job, Trump will will have personally met and discussed the issues with just about every single major player in the new arena in which he is entering. He is meeting current and former Congressmen and Congresswomen. He is meeting current and former judges and lawyers. He’s meeting foreign leaders. He’s meeting with the New York Times, a newspaper violently opposed to him. (Quick factoid. 57 major city newspapers endorsed Hillary. One, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, endorsed Trump. But I digress …)
He’s meeting top TV executives and anchors, many of whom spoke out against him. He is meeting current and former mayors and governors. He’s meeting entertainers and businessmen and admirals and people like Mitt Romney who had lashed out viciously about Trump in the campaign, he’s met with Democrats and Republicans, he meeting with every major player he can squeeze in during the short time he has to prepare himself for one of the most difficult jobs imaginable.
I commend him for two things. First, he said he wants to be President for all Americans. The record of his meetings bears that out. Second, he is clearly taking his new responsibilities very seriously—he is using every minute of his available time to learn from the leaders and major figures.
And as to learning from them, consider. In the campaign, he said he would allow torture. Double-plus ungood on my planet, although not disqualifying IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, the circumstances being the parlous state of the US, the clarity and logic of his stated plans and positions, and the nature of his opponent.
But in his post-election interview with the Times, he said that after spending time meeting with General Mike Kelly, he had changed his mind on the matter of torture. Of course the media portrayed this as a giant Trumpian flip-flop or a sign of indecision, but I was overjoyed. It was clear proof that an old dog can indeed learn new tricks.
And that is what Trump has been doing all this time—learning new things about his new tasks and his new responsibilities.
He’s become a student of the bizarre geography, ethnography, and tribal alliances of the insane American Game Of Thrones political landscape that he is entering, learning not only from its current inhabitants but from the former inhabitants, as well as from the major players in the surrounding intertwined business, law, military, diplomatic, media, university, entertainment, law enforcement, and all the other important spheres.
What a stellar education! I can only envy the man his opportunity to be able to meet and talk to and learn from all of the top men and women in every field. Aaaah, to be a fly on the wall …
I’ve argued in the past that we should shorten the period between the election and the inauguration, saying that it is a relic of a horse-drawn age where January was the earliest it could practically happen.
But seeing the use that the Donald has made of it, like him I have to change my mind … it is a crucial time for the President-Elect to prepare to hit the ground running. He’s squeezing the juice out of every minute out of it, and it will be just as valuable to future women and men in his position, faced with preparing themselves for the awesome task of being everyone’s President.
Best regards to all,
w.
When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do, sir?
John Maynard Keynes
Skating Under The Ice 
Hi Willis,
The Constitution set the inauguration date as March 4. The twentieth amendment moved it up to January 20, responding to your argument regarding travel.
cheers,
gary
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very good piece – thanks!
LikeLike
Keynes speaks from another time, when disagreement was still possible, and even celebrated. The dark times we are both part of, and face tomorrow, are incredibly reactionary, as the dreadful Guardian and NYT newspapers demonstrate all too clearly; The Guardian started long ago when Ukrainian cannibalism reports in 1933, filed by Malcolm Muggeridge, were suppressed.
Thus, it becomes imperative to know your opponents, both their strengths and their weaknesses. The syrupy clichés served up by such newspapers do not help this process (in either direction). Trump has begun in fine style, far more reflectively and calmly than one might ever have believed during the election. But he really must rein himself in when attacked, fairly or unfairly. Today’s attacks on the FBI sound petulant and ill-informed, even if this is not true.
Softlee softlee, catchy monkee.
LikeLike
Thanks, Kolnai. People keep busting Trump for responding to attacks. Three things about that.
First, I’m the same way. I welcome attacks on my science, but I don’t take personal attacks lying down. I punch back twice as hard.
Next, I don’t think Trump will change that. Why should he? Because it’s “unpresidential”? Bad news on that score, presidential is as presidential does.
Finally, Trump uses Twitter because there is no filter between him and the people who elected him. And if you think they care that he slammed some Union jerkwagon, think again. They are overjoyed to see him call out the head of the Carrier Steelworkers Union, who not only had his own job saved, and not only didn’t say “thanks” to the guy who saved it … HE CALLED TRUMP A LIAR.
Like I said, I got no problem with him punching back twice as hard at that kind of ugly attack …
w.
LikeLike
Yes, Willis, the steel worker (and by extension, the whole ‘progressive’ reaction to the Carrier deal) is from the land of the fairies. If (say) Hillary had made it, the NYT and its analogues would be slavering with gratitude. I like him ‘punching back’, too. And ‘Twitter’ (dread word!) is his only reliable weapon so far.
If he is right about the CIA, I really don’t know what’s going to happen – the CIA!. The established power may be capable of anything, and will stop at nothing to crush opposition. This is evident in the cry-baby reactions of zombie journalists (!) after the victory, and the horrific (but predictable – I predicted it) calls for a ‘second referendum’ over Brexit here, amongst the remains of Magna Carta. But how far does has this treachery penetrated governmental institutions…?
We really are a long way up the creek…..
LikeLike
AAARGH! Sorry, ‘CIA’. Old age, o dear….
LikeLike
great analysis. trump is routinely underestimated and seen as “unpredictable” as a result. the mistake is to assume that trump is reacting to events, when his true intent is to control events. trump only appears unpredictable because people, including the press, fundamentally misunderstand his motivation.
LikeLike
Excellent analysis Willis, as usual. For those who may not know about Willis Eschenbach and how brilliant he is, please check out his many excellent articles here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/10/the-doe-vs-ugly-reality/
LikeLike
Superb Willis. I always enjoy as well as learn from your posts and comments. At 75.4 I can only hope that I’ll be around to see the results of having someone who actually knows how to successfully manage a very large enterprise. Trumps “memo of discovery” to the DOE is yet another promising start to not only a better form of administration, but also hopefully a significantly better way in which the entire federal government will (finally) WORK and will be a blueprinted for future generations. Thank you.
R. Hornbeck
LikeLike
“…he said that after spending time meeting with General Mike Kelly, he had changed his mind on the matter of torture …”
Let’s just hope Al Gore and Leo DiCaprio were less successful in persuading him..
LikeLike
No worries on that score, Leo. Take a look at my post “The DOE vs. Ugly Reality” over at Watts Up With That.
w.
LikeLike
Mr. Eschenbach,
Torture is “double-plus ungood” on your planet meaning that torturing miscreant walking afterbirths who mutilate the genitals of young girls, routinely rape and beat women, stone them to death for adultry (in spite of the Herculean efforts of Hillary the Hideous Hypocritical Harridan to enforce their basic human rights), fly commercial airliners full of passengers and loaded with jet fuel into high rise office buildings filled with thousands of people, behead journalists, burn prisoners of war live in cages, throw homosexuals off roofs and crucify Christian women and children, “Is not who we are as a people” because “we are better than that” and doing it “makes us the same as them”? Seriously? What would you propose as an alternative; bribing them with safe spaces, red flannel onesies, hot mint tea, Play Doh, soccer, conjugal visits with the goat they left behind and anything else they desire?
LikeLike
Nealstar, thank you for your thoughts. I am as concerned about Islam as you are, perhaps more so. However, in the fight against what I see as a terrorist ideology, it is critical that we do not become terrorists ourselves.
There are four problems with torture. The first is the most important, and I suspect it is what General Kelly told Trump. Except in rare and unique circumstances, it doesn’t work as well as other methods. We waterboarded Sheikh Muhammad over 150 times … do you think that was because he talked? In addition, torture always produces lots of false confessions and false information.
The second is that it allows our enemies to point at us and say “Well, the US tortures people, why shouldn’t we?”
The third is that the enemy can use that to justify torturing our own soldiers … hard to argue with. So you are putting our soldiers in harms way with your proposed actions..
The fourth is that in a fight against something like Islam, it is all too easy to become what you fight against. Your diatribe reminds me of my favorite line from this election, a woman who wrote:
As you can see, the woman behind that quote has become what she hates.
It’s the old ideal about “hate the sin, but love the sinner” … my dad was really good at doing that. He loved his eight kids deeply, even though he was a Victorian gentleman who was deeply shocked by how we lived and what we did, and he couldn’t abide and violently disagreed with what we believed in. But he still supported all of us wholeheartedly and loved us dearly.
In the same manner, we need to distinguish between the ideology of Islam on the one hand, and the followers of Islam on the other hand, and to hate the sin and love the sinner … but dang, when the men of ISIS burn prisoners of war alive in cages, and chop prisoners heads off on the beach, and keep sex slaves, and post the videos online, it is mighty tough to do so …
However, if we are not able to distinguish between the sin and the sinner; if we sink to the level of hating the sinner and not just the sin; if we insensibly grow to wish upon them the brutality they inflict upon us and others, then we would be no better than those we oppose. We face the hoary problem that you tend to become what you fight. We must learn to fight brutality without becoming brutes ourselves.
My best to you,
w.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mr. Eschenbach,
The quote you posted, “You are a hateful bigot! I hope you die!”, is hypocritical as it was posted by someone who, by implication, was not hateful. I claimed no such thing. I hate our enemies and those who perform the acts I mentioned. They do those things to innocent people as well as to combatants. Those whom we torture are not innocent. I flat out believe that those who wish us harm and attack us should be dead. Torture may, or may not, be an effective means of extracting useful intelligence from our enemies, but it assuredly causes them discomfort, pain and, if it ends in death, prevents returning to the battlefield and serves as an example of what to expect to ululating IslamofascistJihadis prior to their meeting with Allah. The question isn’t so much whether we are better, the same, or worse than our enemies, but who survives to breed. You cannot draw a moral equivalent between radical Islamic extremism and a Constitutional Republic, which as a tenet of its founding promises, “…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” You will find NO equivalent in the Koran. If you truly believe that our torturing those under discussion, “makes us no better than those we oppose”, then you contend we are either equal or worse than those we oppose in which case you would fare no worse were you living in Tehran, Damascus, Baghdad, Riyadh or Sana’a.
To quote Pamela Geller, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, you support the civilized man. Defeat jihad. Support Israel.”
Being civilized does NOT mean abandoning self defense in the struggle to survive.
Ever been under extended hostile fire? If so, with what branch of service and in what conflict?
Hare Krishna!
LikeLike
Nealstar, you say:
Obviously, I was not clear, my apologies. I did not say you were hypocritical. I said that there is always a danger of becoming what we fight, and I used her as an example of that, not of hypocrisy …
Gosh, Nealstar, it’s wonderful to learn that we’ve never, ever tortured an innocent man … not.
Here’s the part you seem to misunderstand. Somewhere in the Middle East there’s a guy named, oh, I don’t know, I’ll call him “Abdulstar”. Tonight, Abdulstar is sitting by his fire cradling his AK-47 and he says:
I know my writing is not clear at times, but I hope that that illustrates for you that in your anger and bitterness, you are becoming the very people that you hate …
This is why I said it is so important that we learn to hate the sin but love the sinner, lest we become as brutal and uncaring as those we fight against.
Regards,
w.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mr. Eschenbach,
There was no “Reply” button in your most recent reply to me, but that’s a benefit of owning the medium, isn’t it? You sir, are cherry picking parts of my response to reinforce your own fallacious arguments while avoiding answering direct questions as well as avoiding responding to the more salient points. Just answer my last question, “Ever been under extended hostile fire? If so, with what branch of service and in what conflict?” so I’ll know if you had any real world experience with those intent on killing you or if you’re merely another one of those who says they support the warrior, but not the war, avoiding the obvious fact that the root of warrior is war and one can’t support one without supporting the other. I doubt there were any ancient Spartans who supported King Leonidas and his valiant 300, but detested his actions against King Xerxes.
Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis who is to head the Defense Department agrees with me:
“The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some a—holes in the world that just need to be shot.”
“You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them.”
“Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they’re so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact.”
“No war is over until the enemy says it’s over. We may think it over, we may declare it over, but in fact, the enemy gets a vote.”
As far as Abdulstar, were we to have dropped the equivalent of what we sent to Hiroshima on Damascus, Tehran, Baghdad, Riyadh and Sana’a on 12 September 2001, there would be no Abdulstar and everyone else past the edges of the fused silicon depressions would be doing everything possible to avoid attention.
Hating and wanting our enemies dead is a normal response and I admit to it. Bitterness usually indicates disappointment and envy and the only thing that disappoints me is the fact that within less than a century the beautiful dream of our Founders will be no more than a memory because of the dilution of the testosterone of the male members of our society by Leftist “journalists” and “educators”. As for envy, I envy no one and wouldn’t trade places with anyone living or dead although I greatly admire SSG Travis Mills who I’m sure would be very interested in the compassion you feel for our enemies. https://www.travismills.org/
While you are on the right side of the climate issue, you’re dead wrong on national defense.
One more time, “Ever been under extended hostile fire? If so, with what branch of service and in what conflict?”
Om Shanti
LikeLike
Nealstar December 12, 2016 at 4:07 am
There was no “Reply” button on your most recent reply to me either … that’s how it works. When the threading gets to a certain depth, you just have to go back up the thread to the previous reply button, duh. You sure you know how this “internet” thingy operates?
Now, what you had was just a simple misunderstanding about how the “Reply” button works. It had nothing to do with me. It could have been cleared up with a quick question … but noooo, you had to immediately jump to accusing me of bad faith.
Your ugly first unquestioned assumption, that this was something that I did specifically to mess with you, is one of the reasons I’m not going to answer you any further on this subject. I did nothing of the sort—that is just your sick fantasies taking over.
The other reason I’ll pass on this subject is your whole unpleasant point of view. I’m happy to debate ideas. I have no interest in playing “my patriotic dick is bigger than yours”. You’ll have to find someone else to bump chests with and argue whose life experience is more noble. I’m not interested in the slightest.
I’ll discuss other things with you, but not this one. Obviously, the mere mention of this subject has unhinged you to the point where you accuse me of things I neither did, nor had any intention of doing, nor would ever do. Perhaps you do that kind of deliberate stuff, Neal.
I don’t, and I don’t put up with being falsely accused of it by some anonymous internet popup. You want to discuss ideas with me, I’m your man, but I’ll thank you to keep a civil tongue in your head.
Pass …
w.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Nealstar
December 12, 2016 at 4:07 am: The last two generations of my family spent 10yrs fighting and beating some real big enemies, who had many savage habits. But Dad and Pop etc.displayed no wish for vengeful mistreatment of them out of combat. It would have lowered them, they knew it, and they imparted that to us.
An Uncle captured by Rommel had respect for his kindness concerning his wounds, even. Dad meantime was fighting RommeI too e.g. ‘The breakthrough at Alamein’, and his belief that ‘the only good one was a dead one’, stopped when they were captive.
I had to serve too, towards the end of our 30yr struggle against the Reds in Asia, though not fight as it turned out, thankfully. We would be wise to keep prosecuting war crimes, not committing them. Yes, it is true that torture does not gain useful info, but skilfull intel does, and that has won us much. I for one am thankful for the 5-Eyes we share. In the end, brains beats brawn if well-armed and led.
LikeLike
A simple “no” would have sufficed.
Merry Christmas!
LikeLike
Pingback: The Big Game | Skating on the underside of the ice
What a brilliant analysis Willis. It showed me a new perspective on the man, who I’ve supported from afar ever since he announced his intention to run. What happens in the USA is going to impact countries far removed from that continent, such as NZ.
LikeLike
Hi Mr. Eschenbach!
You have been misled about Trump changing his mind instantly on the strength of one comment by a General. He did NOT change his mind. Initial reports were incorrect, and later reports were like the lies that followed Trump through his campaign.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/11/trump_says_was_impressed_by_mattis_torture_opposition_but_that_s_not_the.html
I never did believe that story about him instantly changing his mind on the strength of one OPINION. And, Mr. Eschenbach, it doesn’t even fit with your unique analysis of his recent behavior. He listens. And we both know he didn’t argue with anyone he heard, and they walked out thinking, “Well, maybe.”
Any media that doesn’t pay you to reproduce this article is doing a disservice to their customers. There is only one article I’ve read (and I read about politics a lot) that would deserve the same treatment. And yours is more insightful.
You know far more about some subjects than I do, but I am a political expert with plenty of time. I’ll never be able to intelligently argue GW, because it would take me too much time to learn the subject. I’ve picked the experts I believe, and they are, like you, skeptics.
Because politics is even more complicated, trying to discuss political matters with the 99% reminds me of the story: A friend asked his very smart companion: “What’s it like being a genius?” His smart friend replied “You ever try to talk to someone when they’re just waking up? That’s what it’s like for me most of the time talking to others.”
Your out-take on torture is not up to your usual standard. I’m working on a project right now, and don’t have time to get into the weeds on this (it really is more complex than anyone has so far discussed on this page.) I could write pages on what you wrote about this.
I can’t resist one point: You make the same mistake here as the warmists do when calling us deniers. Reciprocity is Persuasion 101. We know that. No torture advocate would want torture used if there were something better, and I believe NO person, including you, would not want it used if it were urgently needed. And waterboarding is not torture. Re-read book 1984 to remind yourself what real torture is. (Hint: It involves rats).
Your article is a genius insight.
Best regards from an admirer,
Peter
LikeLike
Peter, thank you for your kind words, as well as your point of view. Regarding torture, it is immaterial to me whether he changed his mind after talking to General Mattis as Trump says or not. My point was that he has gone back to school, he is learning, and torture is one of the things that he has learned about.
As to whether waterboarding is torture, we tried and convicted Japanese soldiers for among other things waterboarding US servicemen … you might want to rethink that one.
As to whether torture is “urgently needed”, the occasions when that occurs are very few and far between. You have to capture someone that you are sure has current actionable information that will prevent casualties. Does happen, but the problem is that information is more perishable than fish, and they say fish and guests start to stink after three days. After that, plans change, your captive is missed, people move on, the information is worthless.
Most professional interrogators I’ve read say that they get better results with honey than with vinegar. I have not read General “Mad Dog” Mattis’s view on it, but if a guy named “Mad Dog” has reservations about torture, that should tell you something. My guess is that he knows that if we torture their men and women they will assuredly torture our men and women.
To summarize. IN EXTREMIS, would I kill one to save ten? Of course, but only if I was damn sure that I’d be saving ten. And IN EXTREMIS would I torture one to save ten? Yes, but NOT AS A POLICY. That is a much larger and more weighty action. Look, everyone agrees that exceptional situations require exceptional actions, and everyone would do just about anything legal or illegal to save their child’s life. But we don’t set policy based on that.
And if I were President, I’d damn sure want to know about it before it happened.
My best to you,
w.
LikeLike
Hi Mr. Eschenbach!
This reference just popped back into my mind. It perfectly illustrates the point you were making with Trump, but one doesn’t have to take it on faith that Trump is doing the right thing, because everyone knows Sam Walton (Walmart) did what worked.
Excerpts:
no matter what nonsense you have heard about “The Secret” or the power of positive thinking, immense wealth comes mainly from MASSIVE knowledge and skills. I have 12 business partners and if I listed them from most successful to least successful it would follow an exact pattern. The most wealthy are the most knowledgeable and skilled and the least wealthy are the least knowledgeable and skilled.
Don’t get me wrong, there are times when the power of positive thinking is useful. But it’s nothing compared to the power of knowledge and skills.
Sam Walton attributed much of his success to the fact that he was an insatiably learner. In fact he spent most of his time getting in his little airplane and flying himself around the USA and investigating what his competitors were doing.
Sam talks about how he started, “…I learned a lesson which has stuck with me all through the years: you can learn from everybody. I didn’t just learn from reading every retail publication I could get my hands on, I probably learned the most from studying what John Dunham [his competitor] was doing across the street.”
His wife Helen says, “It turned out there was a lot to learn about running a store. And, of course, what really drove Sam was that competition across the street—John Dunham over at the Sterling Store. Sam was always over there checking on John. Always. Looking at his prices, looking at his displays, looking.”
There is a funny story that even after he was one of the richest men in the America he got caught walking around his competitor, The Price Club, with a little pocket recorder taking notes to use for his Wal-Mart stores.
Sam says: “Once I was in the big Price Club on Marino Avenue in San Diego, and I had my little tape recorder with me—like I always do—and I was making notes to myself about prices and merchandising ideas.”
But a big security guard walked up and confiscated his little recorder. Sam had to write his friend who owned The Price Club and promise he wouldn’t spy anymore to get it mailed back to him. No matter how successful he got he always stayed humble enough to be a lifelong learner.
Sam’s wife said she remembers whenever they had a little BBQ party at their home she would find Sam asking every guest, “Hi, do you know anything about discount retailing.” It drove her nuts but guess what, Sam’s hunger for knowledge made their family the richest in the USA.
“A Brazilian businessman once told me how he’d sent letters to the heads of ten U.S. retailers in the 1980s, asking to visit to see how they ran a retail operation. Most didn’t bother to reply, and those who did sent a polite ‘No, thank you.’ All except Sam Walton.
When the Brazilian and his colleagues stepped off the plane in Bentonville, Ark., a white-haired man asked if he could help. ‘We’re looking for Sam Walton,’ they said, to which the man replied, ‘That’s me.’ Walton led them to his truck and introduced his dog, Roy.As they rumbled around in the front cab of Walton’s pickup, the Brazilian billionaires were pummeled with questions.
Eventually it dawned on them: Walton had invited them to Bentonville so that he could learn about South America.
Later Walton visited his friends in Sao Paulo. Late one afternoon there was a phone call from the police. Walton had been crawling around in stores on his hands and knees measuring aisle widths and had been arrested. The story encapsulates some of Walton’s greatest strengths, notably his hunger for learning.”
I have a friend who is one of the best sales copywriters alive. He makes tens of millions of dollars a year. But he isn’t complacent. He told me that every time he sees any competitor advertising something online he transcribes it down by hand and dissects and outlines every word they say, even if it takes hours of work.
He is looking for any little edge they might have over him. Even though he is at the top of his industry he has the humility to keep learning. Amazing, and a great part of why he has immense wealth at such a young age.
===
Smart people solve problems. Geniuses make connections between things that nobody else recognizes are connected.
For me, that’s what makes your article not smart, but genius. Many recognized Walton’s drive as leading to success — nobody else that I know of connected the seemingly unconnected (almost bizarre) parade into Trump Tower with Walton-type success.
Best regards from an admirer,
Peter
LikeLike
Hi!
Sorry about that. Cut and pasted that ad. Didn’t notice until I read what I sent, instead of reading before I sent it.
Many apologies.
Maybe you can cut it out at your end?
Sorry
Peter
LikeLike
Peter Kostyshyn December 11, 2016 at 11:00 pm
Fixed, thanks.
w.
LikeLike
Trump seems to have three redeeming characteristics coming to light from under all his boorish history: 1) he’s not wedded to an ideology that doesn’t work and refuses to see creative alternatives, 2) he doesn’t let the weasels get away with their sneakiness, 3) he’s impervious to insults. All should serve him well.
Congratulations on the blog. Your posts are always an interesting read.
LikeLike
He’ll need more. He has an entire army of goons in high places to overthrow. Can this even be done? Simply getting college principals (e.g.) to understand they don’t get state dosh without obeying the law shows the extent of corrupt public service attitudes. How can anyone succeed against babies in power? The Electoral College is currently the most powerful constitutional body to signal its lukewarm appreciation of democratic process. But the rot is wider and deeper than anyone can imagine
LikeLike
Pingback: The Pre-President versus the Swamp Denizens – Skating on the underside of the ice
Pingback: How A Businessman Takes Over A Different Industry – Skating on the underside of the ice | Cranky Old Crow