"Citizens" vs "Government": Which serves the "will" of the "people?"

 Violence recently visited our nation's Capitol.  Elected Officials responded with fear and outrage.  Some died.  Generally, the Media condemned the people who demonstrated anger with the Federal Government.

Does anyone else note the similarity and parallels of this event with the Boston Tea Party and other violent events in our country that proceeded the Revolution? 

For years, we have been surrounded by the attitude and claim that government exists to serve the people.  We even used to call our elected officials and other who get a paycheck from the Government as "Public Servants."  Not sure if that term survives in today's America, however. But is is curious how that concept was jettisoned universally in the wake of the demonstration of anger against what many today refer to as "the Washington Swamp."  Across the political spectrum, few deny that our elected officials no longer act and vote in a way that demonstrates that they represent those who live in the districts and states from which the were elected...ostensibly to represent the whole of those states and districts rather than serve their personal goals, wants, and desires.

No objective person believes that if Ms. Hillary had been elected anyone not "in the know" in Washington would ever have known about the weaponization of our security agencies, about the lying to the FISA court, and other self-serving motivations of those at the head of these Federal Agencies.  The hatred of a person coming to office that wasn't looking for or flattered by being offered a ":seat in the Washington 'club' " was not only natural but essential to the "swamp's" survival.  And survive they did,.

Perhaps, however, those who are members of and who value "the Swamp" might be wise to know that those who showed their anger can very well be described as a "small faction" of the electorate, but for each person who was protesting in anger there are 100 who could not attend and who are just as convinced that our government no longer serves or cares about us but instead exists to create power and financial security for themselves.  They act and speak as if none of us notice how our elected officials come into office with average self-worth, are paid salaries that barely cover the cost of living in D.C., yet retire with vast fortunes...the source of which is never explained or questioned.

For now, "the Swamp" abides.  But I wouldn't bet the farm on just how much longer its control will survive.  And the Media is seen as just as corrupt.  Tomorrow is another day.  As investment firms advertising always says (quickly, in small print or too fast to actually hear) "past performance is no guarantee of future performance."  I would add to that "or of survival." 

The "Establishment" Politicians on both sides still don't "get" it!

Perhaps it is because they see any success by President Trump as "Armageddon" to their elite political existence.  I find it hard to imagine that with the myriad professional politicians with elite educational credentials are unable to see the true reason for the election of a businessman with considerable baggage, personally and in business,  to the highest office in the land in preference to a life-long political operative who had so much in common (with, of course, ideological differences) with those on both sides of the aisle.Can they all hold the conviction that Secretary Clinton lost because she was a bad candidate and had at least as much baggage as Mr. Trump?

While it is clear that all professional politicians motives, even as they each deny them, include self-aggrandizement, accumulation of power, money and a sense of an elite status, not one of them seems to have the ability to sense, much less analyze and conclude, that the American voter is fed up with the lying and failure to actually care about the things that the voters who put them in office truly care about.

Some of them seem to think that because they were re-elected even as Mr. Trump won in last November's election they were not seen by the voter the same way that hindsight seemed to indicate those same voters saw Mrs. Clinton.  One wonders if they have any inkling that if in their own races there had been 3 or more choices (including a brash, non-politician) that they might have suffered the same fate as Mrs. Clinton.  Because with very few exceptions, it is clear that such would have been not only possible but likely.

Those of the political establishment have for years...decades, actually...gotten away with making promises that were clearly abandoned as soon as the election results were tabulated.  In some cases it is clear that those promises at the time they were made were clearly lies.

Now that President Trump has held office for almost a year, it has been clear to every citizen capable of voting that every other person elected to the Congress of the United States of America acts to prevent any significant accomplishment by the new President...every one, even those who ran on a Republican ticket.

For eight years, Republicans claimed they had a better way of providing Healthcare in America and were prevented from providing relief for the American people because of the veto threat from a Democrat President...FOR EIGHT WHOLE YEARS!  But once President Trump took office, having promised that when the Republican controlled Congress presented the bill to him, he would sign it...that Republican-controlled Congress failed to pass the promised legislation. That is too egregious to be an oversight, a mistake, or something slipping through the cracks!  They lied.

Meanwhile, the Democrats for the previous eight years had proven over and over again that they also were lying to the American people.  They also were moving further and further to the Left, as they took the side of demonstrators who took to the streets hurting people and destroying property and even attacking, hurting and murdering police.  They claimed such violence was only "sporadic" and that it was all part of "free speech."  Somehow they missed the concept of the guarantee being for the right to avoid prior censorship, but not consequences for what was said.

It is unfathomable that professional politicians do not recognize that the majority of the country see them as the equivalent of an invading, occupying force that holds office through subterfuge and fraud while exercising their power to obliterate individual freedom(s) and control both speech and action.

Clearly, the citizens of this country do see that as the truth, hence the election of President Trump.

Instead of colluding with each other to try to take Mr. Trump down...instead of investigating the election, obstructing real partnership to get reasonable legislation passed...and colluding with a clearly "Leftist" media for the same purpose, they should recognize, admit, and act to prove they are prepared to abandon their lust for money, power, and status by actually listening to and acting on the wishes of their constituents.

If they do not, the next election cycle will see a lot of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle facing challenges from candidates that will make President Trump look like an agreeable teddy bear.  And those candidates will win.

The "People" are both angry and private

Progressive Liberal Democrats are depressed.  I can understand that; they have been spoiled by having things pretty much their own way for almost a decade now. Their President has used Executive Orders to create a country that he devoutly wishes he could have brought into being with laws, but made do with his pen.  The good news for the PLD folks was that they got the country they wanted.  The bad news is that is wasn't and isn't permanent.

But that is just the ideological view.  What is much more important is that this election revealed the depth of the voters' anger at the entire political establishment...all sides...is tremendous.  It showed in the Republican primaries.  It showed in the Democrat primaries.

The fact is that the political establishment deluded itself, talking itself into a presumption of control and power based in part on a disrespect for the independence of the American voter.  That presumption was ill conceived, presumptuous and just wrong.  And our politicians have earned the anger.  You can be sure it will not be easily assuaged.

The other factor that makes this election a surprise to so many is that the American public can be really private about what they think, especially if revealing their true feelings might cause their friends and business associates to disrespect them.  Clearly, this flumixed the pollsters.  I personally know two individuals who were polled and told the pollster they were voting for the Democrat candidate, yet told me that they were voting for Mr. Trump because of Mrs. Clinton's lying, inabilities, and what they see as her treating Classified information as unimportant when it collided with her desire for secrecy and control of her private affairs.  The view her as inherently corrupt.

Politicians, Washington (D.C) and the power structure in this country had better adjust quickly and treat the citizenry with the respect that they have not granted for several decades.

Blame the "Protectors" but not the "Doers?"

It often appears as if the so-called civilized world has lost its mind.  One of the recent news articles said that those who erroneously allowed the truck driver in Nice onto the road where he killed so many people were being blamed...at least in part...for the deaths.  The anger in France...or in any country where terrorists act out...should be focused on the terrorist(s), not those who do their level best to protect others.  The French are not alone in their apparent desire to ignore the actual "doer" of the atrocity in favor of attacking those who were trying to prevent such occurrences.

In America, I have seen minorities "cop and attitude" with police when approached for almost anything.  In an era where minorities have ambushed and assassinated police, those who serve as police are logically on alert.  When they approach someone and issue an order (such as "don't move your hands" or "keep you hands where I can see them") and that order is not obeyed, I know of no logical person who wouldn't react as if there were a developing threat and react accordingly.  But in the aftermath of these events, even our President accuses police of "overreacting" ...or even of discrimination.

Today, in America it is not hard to get a cop fired.  This administration will virtually require local police departments to punish and/or fire any officer who is complained of by any minority.  The logical action, then, would be to behave very quietly when approached by any member of the law enforcement community and then bring it to the attention of the police department and the Justice Department.  Instead, some just insist on not obeying commands and/or mouthing off as they move their hands in ways that could constitute a threat.

Who is blamed?  Why, the law enforcement officer(s) of course.

Over the years, I have been approached by police nine or ten times.  Each time, I responded as I would have to any person with authority: directly and politely.  Was I uneasy?  Sure...in some cases I wasn't sure what I had done wrong, in others I had been speeding and was chagrined that I had been "caught."  Another time there had been a "hit and run" and I was questioned if I had seen a particular color and make vehicle.  And one time, coming home from school, I had a brake light that wasn't working.  Big Deal?  Not really.  Life goes on around us and sometimes we're the hammer and other times we are the nail.

What I don't understand is why the human race seems bent on allowing those who initiate behavior that results in consequences feel that it is appropriate to deflect consequences on the responder instead of the "doer" who's actions began the whole thing.  I can understand how the people involved would like to accomplish that...but not society as a whole, each member of which should know better.

Trump is the Republican's Obama

For the third Presidential election cycle we are experiencing an abandonment of reason by American citizenry.  That this can happen in a world where data is virtually unlimited and effective research no further than your laptop is astounding and does not speak well for homo sapiens.

Mr. Obama was elected twice on emotion, with virtually no vetting or inquiry as to his experience or training to handle the rigors of the job.  "Hope and Change" was the motto.  Never did Mr. Obama define those terms, so quite naturally every voter inclined to wish him well interpreted those terms to mean what the voter expected it to mean.  Salesmen for years have used that tack and one expects some success with it...but not total success.  The old adage was that you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but never all of the people all of the time.  So...how did Mr. Obama not only win, but be re-elected four years later when it had become clear that he had his own definitions that were not influenced by the electorate and further that he was disposed to dis-ingenuousness (that means, lying),

The press almost universally failed to inquire of Mr. Obama specifics, nor did they suggest to readers, listeners or viewers that they might want to make such inquiries.  Whether this was failure on their part, or conspiracy with Mr. Obama's supporters I will leave for others to consider.

But one thing is crystal clear:  Mr. Obama's election and re-election was based on emotion, not logic or knowledge.

One might be excused for believing that, having seen the result of emotional indulgence, the public might be a bit more oriented toward logic, inquiry and thorough vetting the third time around.

Apparently, not so much!

There was once a time in America when the voting public acted much as a jury; they listened to the promises, they looked at the past record of behavior, they evaluated whether the promises were ones that could be kept, they even evaluated the moral behavior and reputation of the candidate for public office.  One candidate withdrew when it was discovered that he had a girlfriend in addition to his wife...and without any proof of physical infidelity.  Such a person was not fit for public office...then!

Since then we've had a President who seduced and intern, another who has been proven to have lied to the American people multiple times,  and failed to even try to keep promises made multiple times.  And in this third election cycle we have the leading candidate on the ideological right (well, he says that he is on the right!),  who until less than a year ago was demonstrably a political liberal and until days ago denied that he was involved in any bankruptcies, only to know admit that companies that he controlled did, on four occasions, declare Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and...seriously...now claims that having done so will help him solve the country's challenge of reducing and eliminating a National Debt that exceeds Nineteen Trillion Dollars.  No joke!

And on the other side of the ideological aisle, we have two candidates: one has a track record of enabling a womanizer while claiming to be the perfect person to defend women against a claimed "war on women" by her opponents, has a proven record of lying about events in which she was involved while holding high appointed office, and is under investigation for potential violation of the United States Espionage act by failing to keep Top Secret documents and information safe.  And her opponent on the same side is earnestly is promising to redistribute income, taking from those who have earned it legally to redistribute it to those who have not, on the basis of claiming that such earnings were and are immoral; who is promising that college education for all should be "free"...to those receiving it, but with no realistic suggestion of who or how the cost will be paid; and who is an avowed Socialist.

What provides the most consternation is that these three people are serious candidates for President of the United States of America!

We are about to see the third Presidential election in a row determined, not by the American Voting Public sitting as a Jury but by an emotional mob.

Mr. Obama's first election was by a Happy, Enthusiastic, Optimistic mob, looking for high standards and statesmanship on the part of a supremely educated member of a minority race.

His second was less Happy and Optimistic, but was still a Mob that had "Faith."

Now the Mob (on both sides of the political aisle) is angry and turning on the "usual suspects" to a remarkable degree.  They are identifying on an emotional level with those who are confirming their own unhappiness with the government.  That unhappiness has nothing to do with Truth, or Logic, or a thorough vetting to statements and promises being made.  No, it is still emotional and reason has been thrown away.

Mr. Trump is the Republican's Obama, and he is being seen and treated with the same emotional mind-set with which the Left treated Mr. Obama; merging of their anger with his statements of anger, independent of and absent any evaluation of his past positions.  Ms. Clinton is a continuation of the policies of Mr. Obama, but without the "blackness" which benefited him.  Sen. Sanders is all emotional promises of "free stuff" to young voters who already are emotional by the dearth of opportunity in a stagnant economy and are prime for any promises of a better life, regardless of whether those promises are practically possible.

The Mob Rules...still.

We have nine months to see if any logic or sense will return to the political arena.  There is no apparent reason to be optimistic.  And if all continues, there will be an emotional hangover and we all will suffer the longest headache of our lives.

Why do we Disrespect Congress?

I will admit to disrespecting Congress...a lot.  If I want to be totally truthful, it usually rises to the level of hatred.  But lately, I am stung by the question, "why?"  Oh, I can complain about their actions (or perhaps I should say inaction).  I can marvel at their ability to squander money that we as taxpayers had to work hard to earn, only to watch our politicians treat it like so much dirty water...to be splashed about and not even clean anything up.

It occurred to me earlier this week that I was blaming the forest, instead of the individual trees...and by doing so, was insuring that nothing would ever change.  And it can be argued that most of us in America do the same thing.  Of course there are reasons for this:  we are busy earning a living; we believed and expected our Congressman (or woman) and Senator to do what they promised; others know more about the governmental challenges than do we.  These are all legitimate points and facts.

But...it is our government. At least on paper.  We are the ones doing the voting.

Perhaps we have our priorities wrong.  Maybe checking on whether or not our Congressman and/or Senator is doing his job is a bit more important that watching that third football game of the day.  Maybe writing or calling our Representative and asking why he voted for or against a particular bill...and asking directly (Yes,...or No) if he actually read it before voting is a mite more important than that tv movie.

Maybe our anger should not be at Congress, but at our own (the guy or gal that is supposed to be serving us, protecting us, listening to us, fulfilling their promises to us) particular member of the House of Representatives and/or our United States Senator.  Perhaps it is time to tell them that their allegiance should be to us, not their party and certainly not the leaders of their party.  We didn't elect a party...we elected a person.  That person made promises and took an oath.  We should be checking to see if they are keeping their promises, if they are fulfilling their duties to which they took that oath...instead of feathering their own or others' nests or making self-serving deals and not respecting our wishes and our needs.

Oh, they will scream bloody murder...much as our children do when we check on them and insure that they are doing their homework and keeping the right kind of company.  But if we are going to serve ourselves and meet our own obligations to both us and our country, we need to treat our elected officials just as we do our children: trust...but verify.  There are some that are doing their job for us.  There are others that will only do it if we monitor them and hold their feet to the fire...or whatever other euphemism you want to use.

We should get on with it.

"Trump" is an idea, an attitude, but not a President

I must admit that our Federal Government has infuriated me for a minimum of six Presidential terms of office.  We have descended morally, financially and civilly.  I have watched misbehavior in the White House (always, I am sure, present to some degree at different times) become endorsed as acceptable and understandable and not cause for censure by the multitudes.  Our Federal Representative and employees have shown disregard for responsibly balancing the federal budget and for actually working an honest work day properly for some pretty good wages.  And now we see all our Elected officials lying with unprecedented frequency with not one hint of embarrassment.

But when anyone shouts out in anger and disappoint, stating these facts out loud, the media and multitudes shout them down as being "disrespectful."  Seriously?  Such behavior warrants respect?  In what Universe?

And into this remarkable state of affairs comes one Donald Trump.  He doesn't work for people; people work for him.  That has been true for most of his life and he has made money...a lot of money. He has gotten quite used to his word being law and, to quote a recent, once successful actor, "winning."

He has, like many of us, become unhappy with our government.  And he states his anger with no filter.  What is most wonderful to many of us is that the media actually reports these comments.  And these are comments we have made for years to each other and not one reporter, not one elected official has ever done more than nod in what was supposed to be seen as sympathy, ... and then ignore us and our anger.  To see the consternation on the part of media at this is cathartic...it makes me feel wonderful at not being able to shut down his comments.

So...why am I uneasy?

Because anger, when unchecked, becomes the ignition for mob attitude and behavior;  such anger becomes the rationale and excuse for excesses that go beyond those that are the immediate source of that anger.  It can be dangerous...like watching a back-fire you thought would stop the big blaze suddenly turn into an even bigger danger.  Be careful what you wish for...

Trump's comments are expressions of frustration...but they are not solutions.  When asked for specifics, he replies with a torrent of comments which all come down to two things: "I'll build a wall" and "Trust Me."  The first is only a first step to protect our borders and is by no means comprehensive.  "Trust Me"????

We are completing 6 1/2 years of an administration that was elected on the basis of "Hope" and "Change."  Everyone I have spoken to interpreted those words as meaning what each individual saw as hope and as change.  Turned out that no one ever actually demanded that our "President" tell us how he defined those terms.  That has not turned out very well.

Now I watch a firebrand and hear him saying "trust me."  I don't think so, Skippy!  Been down that road before and I won't do it again.

But that ignition is still operating and I watch, hear, and read the tremendous emotion of his followers, acolytes and minions declaring that "the whole thing needs to be turned down."  They are the reverse image of the followers of our current "President"; facts mean nothing, questions are not allowed, discussion is useless, and behavior is crude and uncivil.  Any challenge is perceived as personal, not related to policy of accumulation of fact.

We have a President right now that sees his power as exponential, by-passing Congress on everything, including items that are clearly withing the purview of Congress; who is so thin-skinned that whenever anything...anything...he says is challenged in any way, you can see the rise in both blood pressure and  pulse rate.  Mr. Trump has the same reaction to any challenge, only his verbal skills are far more crude and direct; Mr. Obama will internalize that and then seek retribution in some way that does not leave any evidence.

I don't want a hot head in the oval office.  I don't want a liar in the oval office.  I am looking for a President that is honest and has a sense of NOT being the smartest person in the world; one who will always welcome questions and disagreement...both of which expand understanding and lead to better decisions.

Does anyone who has watched the ideas and attitude that is "Trump" feel that such attributes apply?