@snood,
Quote:- the ascendancy of dangerous know - nothings like Trump and Carson,
Quote:THE VOTERS WHO put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor.
But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons.
Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried.
Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.
Glennon cites the example of Obama and his team being shocked and angry to discover upon taking office that the military gave them only two options for the war in Afghanistan: The United States could add more troops, or the United States could add a lot more troops. Hemmed in, Obama added 30,000 more troops.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/18/vote-all-you-want-the-secret-government-won-change/jVSkXrENQlu8vNcBfMn9sL/story.html
I do believe that this is true, so I dont have a whole lot of fear that I would be putting my life and that of my family at risk by voting in a Trump who knows next to nothing on national security. This government is too big for a president to personally manage anyone of it. Those who have tried like Obama and Carter have fucked themselves in the process, We need someone who can manage the bureaucracy, not make the decisions for the most part, and that requires management skills not subject matter expertise. Trump would hire the right people, he would listen to his choices, read the briefing book to study those choices, maybe ask a few questions (which it is said that Bush almost never did), and then be the decider.
And we are at the point were we need to take some risks to get the elites back on the job looking out for Americas interests. China is coming on fast, our economy is getting shredded, our schools still dont work, the medical system costs are eating the nation and Obama just made the problem worse, global warming might be a problem...we need to start working on making America great again, now. I judge that it is going to take a revolt from the little people to get the ball rolling. Is a Trump going to be anymore incompetent than Bush was or than Obama have been? Maybe, but I dont think that is likely. And really that is the bottom line, with as poorly as the alleged pro's are doing lets put a well chosen amateur in to see what he can do. If he sucks and makes bad choices someone new will be in the chair in 4 years yo give us their go. Somebody will be up to the job. We sure need some different skills and a lot of new thinking from what we have had though,,,,,Trump might be exactly the fresh we need. Let's go, VOTE TRUMP, the political elite sure dont seem to have any body decent to offer as a choice.