CBS Hyperventilating Over Trump

Unlike my usual short ‘dip’ into “opposition research” land short listen to various news, this morning I put it on CBS News and left it there trough a couple of cycles. (Why? Well, I was playing with stoves ;-)

It’s a bit stunning how much they are hyperventilating over Trump and building “drama” over stories.

Right now it’s a story about some Islamic attack in France. Pushing the notion that online speech needs to be censored by Facebook, Twitter, et. al. to “protect” us from “ideology” and “radicalization”. Well one simply must ask: What is the evidence that “radicalization” happens at all? That is based on the assumption that Islam is not itself a radicalizing force. If you read the Koran, you see that it clearly is. Delivering that via the internet or via the Mosque is not relevant. Anyone who buys-into the hard-core interpretation of the Koran from “radical clerics” is going to ‘go there’, regardless of communications medium.

Then they spent a very long time on the Bimbo Eruption plot where a couple of women (each under a non-disclosure contract, at least one paid) are publicly violating their agreements. So they not only are happy to cheat with a married man but happy to violate contracts too. Such morals… Now I have no idea if Trump diddled them or not; nor do I care. Just like I really don’t care if Kennedy got Marylin in the sack. Unless I’m a participant, what other folks do in the sack is of no interest. Nor does it control national defense policy. Yet they are hyperventilating over it.

Frankly, given how both of them look (can you say “professional model”? Karen McDougal was a Playboy model) I can’t imagine many guys could say “No” if she expressed interest. I’ve had zero extra-marital anything (not even a kiss) so it’s not like I’m “weak” on my vows; but I’m not sure what I’d do with that dilemma with a 10+ on offer. I’d like to think I could “just walk away”, but you never know until faced with the decision. So can I criticize Trump if, being incredibly rich, he finds himself face to face with her and an availability offer? Well, no. A bit of envy, maybe ;-)

Then there’s the hyperventilation over Bolton and various “adviser” swapping. All sorts of loaded language. Things like “unstable” and “unpredictable” and worse. Apparently they can’t come to grips with the idea that the White House is holding information close to the vest. “No warning” also means “can keep a secret”. Frankly, I like that. The Press ought not to know a week in advance that some staffing changes are in progress. The first time anyone ought to have a clue is when the leaving and arriving parties are told the change is happening and even then nothing ought be public until the press release. CEOs go to jail if they leak information that would move a stock price prior to the formal announcement. This is normal and good behaviour.

And, of course, much hand wringing over China and a “Looming Trade War!!”. Well clue stick time (whack whack WHackity WHACK!!) when you are LOSING with MASSIVE TRADE IMBALANCES against a rabid MERCANTILIST having a bit of a ‘trade war’ is a GOOD THING. It wakes up your parasitic partner to the fact that being bled dry is no longer acceptable, hurts them much more than you, and is a great opening tactic for negotiating more balanced trade practices. The alternative is to roll over, open your shirt, and hand them a knife and fork.

When you are being eaten alive, it’s a good thing to first stop the process. It really is that simple. THEN you can work on a more balanced relationship that is a ‘win-win’.

Sigh. I think I need to change the channel. What with a bit more coffee than usual today (stove testing ;-) and this aggravation (so much media stupid – in so little time), I need something a bit more calming for a while…

Subscribe to feed

Advertisements

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in News Related, Political Current Events and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to CBS Hyperventilating Over Trump

  1. Larry Ledwick says:

    If folks did not buy into this sort of hysteria so much it would be funny, but it is really like teasing a cat with a laser pointer. The major media have a bunch of gullible consumers that all they have to do is push the button and wiggle the red dot and they go nuts.

    Sad really but the ease with which a portion of the public is manipulated is stunning.

    As far as job changes:
    If you look at President Trump as a construction contractor, his moving through different people on his team is really not all that surprising. Need new carpets ? You bring in a carpet layer. When he is done you bring in the painter to paint the walls. When that is done you call the decorator to finish the room.

    What if he is just fitting the special skills, background and connections of his staff to the jobs he wants them to accomplish. McMaster was a no nonsense military guy, his job was to help Mattis take down ISIS and slap around the military side of the house to make them get their house in order after 8 years of playing political patty cake with the previous highly politicized administration.

    Now you bring in the hard nosed ex ambassador to the UN who knows how the political game is played around the world to get a consistent and coherent foreign policy to deal with some long term negotiation problems like Korea and Iran.

    Looked at from that perspective the changes don’t look excessive or problematic at all. You cannot simply come in a fire everyone, you need to work out a strategy to get a handle on the way things were being done before you start fixing things.

    I suspect the President is being far more strategic about his moves than the media is giving him credit for. He has to try to take down a deeply imbedded system of manipulators and sycophants, and like a game of Jenga if you pull the wrong piece at the wrong time or in a clumsy manner you can collapse the whole system.

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    Extending your analogy:

    He’s just acquired a very nice but very old and rodent infested mansion.

    He’s doing a renovation while living in it, and trying not to do a “demolish and rebuild” from the ground up…

    Tricky to do, but doable. Yet to do it right takes many different specialties and folks who can both paint over an already in-place carpet (without dripping on it) AND demolish the bathroom / rebuild on a weekend…

    Related:

    Another story CBS was hyperventilating over was that 70% of folks in Belgium were worried about “Fake News” and didn’t trust the media AND that was one of the best media trust ratings in the EU (if I understood their poor reporting correctly).

    You would never believe it from the media reports themselves. I watch France24, Sky, DW, EuroNews and some others so It’s not like I’m un-exposed to European news. They paint a picture of a strong EU with folks reasonably happy and satisfied with their government and society. Though with a couple of “trouble spots” being worked on. (cough, Greece, cough, Spain, cough, Brexit, cough,…)

    Shifts the perception some to think the BEST the media have “on side” is 30% … and that most of Europe is deeply skeptical of the “show” they are being sold.

    It starts with suspicion, moves to distrust, then to “bristle” and grumbling, then groups of dissenters form up, then comes the resistance and eventually revolt stages. Looks to me like we’re at “distrust” and some “dissenters” in Brexit land.

  3. RICKA says:

    The bimbo eruption is funny.

    But I wish Trump hadn’t paid off these women just before the election.

    That makes it an election issue.

    Who cares who Trump slept with in 2006 or 2007?

    Nobody – that’s who.

    He would have won anyway – and look at the trouble this will create.

    Lawsuits, depositions, defamation claims, potential election issues and it all could have been avoided by just letting the women tell their stories.

    Trump would have denied the stories anyway – as he is doing now.

    Oh well.

  4. jim2 says:

    Like you, I’ve never fooled around on my wife. And kind of like you, I’ve thought all these hot women coming out of the woodwork claiming to have slept with Trump is, in a way, making him look pretty good. For all I know, he and his wife could have an open marriage or some other similar agreement. I think most men realize humans are only marginally monogamous. At any rate, kind of fun to watch.

    I’m more concerned about the contents of the latest budget bill, though. I so wish the ReDimowits would nuke the filibuster rule. It’s not like it’s in the Constitution or something.

  5. philjourdan says:

    While I still do not support Tariffs, the “trade war” with China will not last long. As you noted, they sell to us. But do not buy from us.

    I have been watching Trump and laughing at those who keep misdiagnosing his actions. But I am not adept enough to understand his grand plan. I only know he has one (that has been shown enough). Just when the YSM thinks they have him cornered, he checkmates them. So the latest (the budget deal) is one of those. I do not think Trump is a conservative. Nor did I vote for him because I thought he was. I know he is not going to do things “my way”. My joy is in watching the idiots self flagellate every time he skunks them.

    So yes, I have had a lot of joy. And expect more too.

  6. Richard Ilfeld says:

    They used to be Hard Rock, Thirty Rock, and Black Rock. Now they are all Pet Rocks to the left. I am waiting for the journalistic dust scattered into the webiverse to coalesce into some new planets worth visiting.

  7. gallopingcamel says:

    Trump is gathering people who may differ with him on some issues but support his broad agenda. People who will do a great job explaining why we need his agenda.

    Wilbur Ross is brilliant but his TV persona is reminiscent of “Droopy”; he will soon be in a tag team with Larry Kudlow. They will be a dynamite duo.

    His legal team has been augmented by Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing. These folks will point out that the “Deep State” is trying to frame Donald Trump for imaginary crimes while ignoring the real crimes committed by the Clinton crime cartel. I suspect that Hillary and Barack will soon regret that they did not shuffle off into the gloom while they had the chance. Their reward for attacking Trump will be “…..a .blaze of unwelcome light”.

    Then there is John Bolton the cure for Obama’s “Strategic Patience” (aka inaction) and the antidote to appeasing repressive regimes in China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and the middle east.

    The Yellow Stream Media will obsess on “Golden Showers”, Stormy Daniels and similar nonsense which will render them ever more ludicrous. They will declare that Trump is hiring a bunch of “TV personalities” and that will be true but they are TV personalities with more tangible achievements than the likes of Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow can claim.

  8. David A says:

    Excellent post E.M. I am often amazed at how you can take an overview snap shot, which in my view this post was, and then go into extreme details if needed.

    Regarding Trumps sex accusers I think you are spot on. I well remember Tiger Woods long and IMV sincere apology ( yes there was the element of hanging on to some spinsors) and I had long noticed his wife very rarely traveled with him.

    Tiger had joined the social circle of Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan, and adopted their extreme life style. When some work acquaintances had criticised him severely I reminded them of some recent catcalls they had made to regarding some provocatively dressed babes. I then asked if they knew anything about the Woods marriage life. They admitted they did not. I then asked how would they do on the road, perhaps in a difficult marriage, and beautiful women pursued them openly, offering themselves with great desire. ( something very few men are tempted with) Their moral superiority softened.

    Regarding China, how do you think Trump can move to a more equitable balance of trade without doing serious harm to the Chinese economy? I am not looking for a win win here, as the trade is so currently so far off balance now. This article illustrates some of China’s weakness, but does not show how to give the bully a decent out. Some of the comments are over harsh, as in expressing a desire to crush China.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/03/23/gordon-chang-discusses-president-trumps-plan-to-remove-the-panda-mask-from-the-chinese-red-dragon/

  9. E.M.Smith says:

    @David A:

    It’s an Aspe thing…

    Per China:

    Well, yeah they get hurt. Take away a few hundred $billions a year, even China will notice. Just like a pick-pocket is “damaged” when you take away the purse hook and retrieve your gold coins…

    So how to make that more “fair”? The usual things…

    Stop the managed exchange rate and really let the Yuan float. The loss of Chinese trade advantage will be matched with lower cost of imported materials and goods.

    Refuse the shakedown ploys of handing over IP (Intellectual Property) and mandatory 50% Chinese ownership.

    Simply require that all rules be symmetrical.

    There may be more, but that’s the big lumps.

    Initially Chinese growth would slow, but not stop. Profits for folks importing $5 things from China and selling for $20 would take a hit too. Economic growth outside China would improve though, and as that happens other strife would abate and demand for goods increase. (Think Spain & Greece doing a bit better with more demand from China for their goods – instead of fake Chinese olive oil coming to Europe, real European olive oil sold to chefs in China.)

    So China has been running about 12% growth. Recently that’s slowed some. The EU and USA have been in the 2%+ range. With currency rates more sane, those would tend to 6% and 3%, then eventually reaching more like 4% globally and evenly. (Dropping in recessions). Now China would much rather have 12% than 4% or even 6%, but that is still gaining value; so the “hurt” or “damage” to their economy is only in the projected future rate of wealth gain.

    Then they would be subject to the same economic forces as everyone else. For example, when (yes, it’s a ‘when’) your exchange rate adjusted wage rates are no longer low (i.e. the same in Yuan as it was before, but no longer 20 ¢ / hour but instead $4 / hour) things like sewing will move to the lowest cost labor market (likely India or similar). Was that evil when it moved from England to the USA? From USA to Asia? We survived, they will too. Is it “damaging” to the EU economy that they have to pay to use US Patents? (And we pay them to use theirs..) or that they have to pay to buy a copy of a US movie? Mostly that means we get a dozen different designs of products as folks avoid the patents and come up with new ways, or they cross license patents from each other and both makers products improve. How “damaging” is that? China can live under that set of rules too, and do well.

    The #1 thing I observed in many years of working closely with Chinese is that they like to push any rule to the absolute limit for personal gain. If allowed to cheat, they like to cheat. Now I made my share of money out of the process, but there were times when my “partner” was straying from “sellers puff” into outright lying for effect, and I would squirm while he would smile. I’ve reported to a VP who was an escapee from Mainland China before it opened to the west. She was happy to use deception… So it goes. Anyone who expects a “fair deal” out of a Chinese partner is a person who is inexperienced with China. You can get a fair deal and be treated fairly, but only if you can make it clear that cheating will be spotted and YOU are not going to be the mark. Toughness and self interest (and an alert checking up on things) will be respected. Expecting fair treatment, not assuring it, and being surprised at the results WILL have you “marked” as the pigeon to be plucked. Doing the British thing of “we’ll show them by example” and being nice, polite, and letting slide minor abuses will get you major abuses. Doing the Chinese things of a minor “tit” for every detected “tat” (but politely) gets you less attempts at abuse. (Don’t do the big outrage thing, just if you find there’s an expense report from your partner of $50 for something that was not bought / done; then you explain he’s buying dinner since he’s so good at expensing things, and give a tiny smile).

    So that’s how you must play the game. Enforce your fair treatment.

  10. Glenn999 says:

    David A
    Here is good explanation of your question.

    Love me some Wilbur!

  11. Larry Ledwick says:

    Some relevant items from twitter yesterday on china:
    The author of these comments speaks fluent Chinese and has lived there.

    Jack Posobiec
    ‏@JackPosobiec
    12 hours ago
    People often miscalculate China bc they view them through an American lens. China doesn’t care who our President is. They care about where their GDP will be in 2098

    Jack Posobiec
    @JackPosobiec
    13 hours ago
    At 22, I was living in Shanghai and learning Mandarin
    China’s plan is to overtake us in the next 100 years and put America where they were in 1989

    Are we going to let them?

    Jack Posobiec
    @JackPosobiec
    13 hours ago
    A Chinese colleague once told me, “One day, Chinese families will adopt American babies”
    I’ve never stopped thinking about that, and how certain he was

    ———————
    When you think in terms of centuries minor set backs and delays of a decade or so are no big deal, just keep moving toward the goal inch by inch.

    A friend of mine worked in banking and talked about negotiation tactics. He would sometimes make a comment about “the asian method of negotiation” – take a totally ridiculous position and stick to it until the other guy gives up fighting for a better deal.

    He would then tell stories about this in practice where they would do that in the real world, they would have a day long meeting. The opposition would fight them tooth and nail all morning, then after lunch one by one the opposition would soften on all the contentious points and gradually give away most of the points for face saving my meaningless counter positions.

  12. Larry Ledwick says:

    A bit on Trump’s approach to the recent Omnibus legislation stated 4 years ago.

    Donald J. Trump
    @realDonaldTrump
    23 May 2014

    Sometimes by losing a battle you find a new way to win the war. Don’t ever get
    down on yourself, just keep fighting – in the end, you WIN!

    – – – – –
    There have been a lot of posts on twitter in the last 24 hours about how President Trump could pull an Obama on the Democrats and Uniparty. The bill he signed yesterday is not “a budget” which by constitutional provisions he would be bound to follow the guidelines for spending. An Omnibus bill is open to a great deal of executive branch discretion on how funds are spent.

    He can re-allocate funds almost at will within the proposed legislation, slow walk funds he does not support, construe the boarder wall as a national defense priority and have the Corp of Engineers build it, or let the military build segments of it as training in combat engineering, or declare it part of his fight against opioids and use anti-drug funds to build it. etc.

  13. Another Ian says:

    CBS will need a puffer when they get this

    “4D chess Grandmaster Donald J. Trump outwits the Democrats and Republicans yet again!!! With the omnibus spending bill he signed he can use the Army Corps of Engineers to build the wall through the DoD budget!#Winning #4DChess#Q pic.twitter.com/PqAtPNKPt5″

    Comment at CTH

  14. jim2 says:

    “But publicly humiliating anyone for consensual adultery is draconian, and wrong. It teaches children cynicism. What they see is how little respect there is for privacy, and how gratuitously and harshly adults will harm one another to gain a little power. And using adultery or any aspect of consensual adult sexuality as a weapon in political battles is more abhorrent than the act itself.”

  15. jim2 says:

    “”Is It Only About Sex?” wrote the New York Times in August 1998.”

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/28662/flashback-msm-deemed-clinton-lewinsky-affair-joseph-curl

  16. Larry Geiger says:

    “They used to be Hard Rock, Thirty Rock, and Black Rock. Now they are all Pet Rocks to the left.” This!!!! :-)

Comments are closed.