Trump has commenced the shake up of the American system. I do expect all of his nominees to eventually be confirmed or at least given recess appointments – this is what the American people voted for. Most estimates indicate that not only will Trump win the popular vote, but will end up just at or slightly over a majority of all votes cast. The people spoke: change is coming. And it really needs to be embraced.
I know plenty of very smart, knowledgeable people on the Right who have varied objections to this or that Trump nominee. Gaetz, of course, has the most open opposition and I get it: that is, I understand the underlying reason for being dismayed. But hear me out on this: Gaetz, or someone very much like him, is precisely what is needed. To get the change we need requires a clear and clean break from the past. Those placed in charge of the departments must have zero loyalty to the current structure – the current leadership and the assumptions of that leadership.
It cannot be understated just how wrong we’ve gone – that what we have done, as a people, for many decades has been based upon mistaken or just plain false assumptions. To take one example: Russia. Step back for a moment and think about the situation in 1945: Russia controlled all of Eastern and Central Europe. An Europe that the Anglo-American alliance had proposed to free as a result of the Second World War. We could have done it. Russia was not all-powerful in 1945. The army they had along the Elbe was all they had, and it was weaker than the Anglo-American army right across that river. Russia did not have atomic weapons and had no means of striking effectively at either the UK or the USA. Russia, point blank, was at our mercy – and this before you consider that most of their industrial and agricultural production lay in ruins and the Red Army only deployed because of American trucks and American food. We simply could have ordered them to clear out – they would have had no choice but to obey or face a suicidal fight against us.
This was not done. There were various reasons we kept to the concept of alliance with Russia – some of it orchestrated by Russian agents in the US government – but the bottom line is that we still sought cooperation with Russia. Fine. It was a policy. Maybe a bad policy, but it was the policy. We basically consigned Central and Eastern Europe to Russian domination. And then we decided that this domination was bad and required us to go toe to toe with the Russians for decades. What on Earth for? To stop Communism? But we weren’t even stopping Communism in the United States. We let Communism conquer China. We left Communism in control of North Korea. We let Communism take over all of Southeast Asia. Cuba: still Communist! When you think back on it all it does seem a false show, doesn’t it? that the USSR eventually fell based on its own contradictions just makes what we did even stupider…but, we did it; and now here in 2024 we’re still supposed to stop the Russians (heirs of the Communist Russians) because…why? What are we defending in Ukraine? What are we defending in Europe? A British kid is about to spend years in jail because he attended an anti-immigrant protest…other Brits are being routinely visited by the cops for social media posts. Just what are we doing here?
We’re just keeping on based on the mistakes of the past, now enshrined as if they were holy relics never to be questioned.
We need to break from all that. To start afresh. What, really, is our desire? In both foreign and domestic policy? Perhaps we don’t really know? The only thing we do know is that everything that has happened has gone wrong – that welfare designed for a hand up has become a life style. That tolerance for the odd has devolved into drag queen story time. That welcoming the stranger has become the trial of Laken Riley’s murderers. That NATO morphed from defending the Fulda Gap into trying to eject the Russians from the Donbas. Its all a gigantic mess – and nobody who had a hand in making it or who has accepted this lunacy as normal can be in charge any longer. That we need people totally unconnected to it.
I often use Jacky Fisher as the exemplar for change – though a career Naval officer he was never part of the system of the Royal Navy. He lived in it, he loved it – and he knew it was completely useless for its intended task (maintaining naval supremacy), so when he got in charge of the beast he proceeded to change everything, holding loyalty to no persons or assumptions of the past because those persons and assumptions had all gone wrong. He built an entirely new Royal Navy – a much better Navy and one which saw Britain through the titanic struggles of two world wars. And do keep in mind that he was hated. With a white hot passion. Most of the senior admirals of the Navy despised the man – he was lower class (maybe even mixed race!), he was no gentleman, he was screwing with the stately progression of professional Naval careers and advancing other lunatics! You know: lunatics who thought that a warship should concentrate on combat effectiveness rather than spit and polish.
That is what Trump is trying to do here: insert people into office who are not at all loyal to what is and has been. I have called someone like Gaetz a hand grenade and there is that aspect to it…but he’s not just a grenade. He wasn’t chosen to be a bomb. Trump sees something else in him – maybe he’s wrong, but Gaetz wouldn’t have been picked just to say outrageous things…he was picked because he and Trump think that he can change the way things are done. In other words, that Gaetz has ideas for executive actions that will turn the Department of Justice around – to make it into something it currently is not. We know that nobody at Justice is remotely interested in the word…the whole system is designed to destroy identified enemies, increasingly those who are political enemies of the Democrat party. We want a Justice department that is dedicated to justice…we can’t get one with the current personnel under the current rules…we need someone who will go in, ruthlessly fire the worst actors, and simply insist that those remaining and brought in dedicate their lives to justice. Maybe Gaetz will fail, but that is why he was appointed…so, too, all the rest.
It is going to be a wild and bumpy ride! The hatred and fear of the current Ruling Class will cause them to try every expedient to thwart change. This will not be easy. We will lose a few rounds. But if we stand behind Trump and his team, they will have the underlying political mandate to continue. This doesn’t mean blank acceptance of everything Trump and Co do, but it does mean that anyone with an ounce of patriotism will be wary of contradicting Trump and only stand athwart on the most crucial of issues. That has to be our test, as a people: our willingness to ratify our own votes. We gave Trump a majority – we must sustain him in carrying out what we elected him to do. If we don’t, if we let the Ruling Class scare us off, then what we did 11/5 was meaningless.
Blogs For Victory 
As for the restructuring, there are many people who must answer for their actions and be prosecuted to the FULL extent of the law. As we’ve seen before, some aspect of the process will not be quick and many of the guilty will be shielded to some extent, though a few quick indictments and plea deals could break the dam. At least one good thing about cleaning up the problem is, the courts won’t need to be involved in some of the decisions as Trump being C-in-C will already have the full power to execute his wishes.
The next 2 years will go quick and enough action must take place so the swamp is never be able to gain control again. We need to be positioned to add more people to both houses of congress to be able to weed out the RINOs and/or simply bypass them. How encouraging to see the cabinet nominations being made early, the transition teams preparing, the agendas being well thought out and streamlined. As we’ve heard from Trump during the Rogan podcast, the sheer number of appointments that need to be made is daunting. I fully expect some of those will need to be changed along the way but I’m far more encouraged than Trump’s first term.
One thing about a culture of corruption is that not everyone in it is committed, but just going along. So when the axes start to fall, a lot will back out and go along with the new philosophy. Watching your boss’s boss and your boss get called out of line for a private chat while their desks are being cleaned out will make you rethink your commitment to what they have been doing.
We need to start NOW to explain what is happening in real time. I want to see JD Vance on TV for at least half an hour a week, in paid prime time, explaining what happened in the week—what Trump signed and why and its significance both in historical context and current affairs. I want him to explain why Republicans voted against a bill that had been presented as virtuous, as one intended to “feed the children” or “defend democracy” but one with hidden poison pills or billions for special interests. If not Vance, then someone else who is charismatic and easy to listen to, who can speak to Americans. Not lecture to them, but present facts in an easy-to-understand way.
We learned this election cycle how important it is to get out in front of a problem and not wait till it blows up and then scramble to catch up while playing defense. So get smart and play smart. Let’s say the GOP has bought network air time for half an hour every week, on Wednesdays. We have the power to schedule votes for Wednesdays, so the spokesman could get out in front of the howling headlines of “Republicans want children to starve” to explain how a bill had very little money for feeding children and no internal mechanism to administer these funds but billions for some pet project. Sign all EOs on Wednesdays so they can be explained that night. Force the Left to play catch-up, force the Left to play defense.
And have everything circle back to the constant refrain that it’s not the people, it’s not the issues, it’s the structure of the government that matters. People and personalities come and go, any issue can be addressed within the framework of conservative governance, but moving away from that is moving in the direction of tyranny.
Don’t have this weekly spokesman say it, but have the people who go on the weekend shows be bold about it—“you can’t be smart and still believe what the Agenda Media tell you”. Start explaining terms like fascism, as a Leftist construct due to its collectivist and central government structures, with power consolidated in the hands of a few elites. The Left had its mantras—-“democracy” for example. Ours should be the word “consolidated”. Drive that point home—that the choice is not between two people, or two approaches to an issue, but between keeping power spread out among the states and with the people or consolidated in the hands of a few.
The-Times-They-Are-A-Changin’
Prophetic lyrics.
You are the last person I ever thought would listen to, much less recommend, a Bob Dylan song. A few years ago when I said he had been an inspiration in my youth you said you had never been able to listen to him because of his voice.
Yes, he was something of a prophet, and if you remember the political and cultural chaos of the 60s you can realize how radical his music was, as he wrote this song and songs about racial prejudice and war. His were the first “protest” songs. And in his later years Bobby Zimmerman became a Christian and something of a conservative, so that, along with your posting of a Dylan song, is proof that yes, the times they are a’changin’.
I was going to post this rendition, but I thought it would be sacrilegious.
Too pretty and upbeat for a song like that. Fast peppy rhythm, lovely harmonizing, just not the vibe for a harsh warning about impending doom.
I love it! (hat-tip Jeff Childers)
We should heed Jeff’s summation:
While I totally agree with the spirit of this, I keep coming back to the big question of how, exactly, we think we can accomplish this. Because as long as we let the Left succeed in luring people in with the promise that Leftism is the shortcut to the Higher Moral Ground we will never defeat it. Truly good people will always aspire to virtue, which means that the Left is full of people who want to be good, who aspire to goodness, but who lack the insight or information to understand that the promises of the Left are illusions.
(This does not include those with personality disorders validated by the Left in its recruitment of the surly, the ragers, the haters, the bullies and the tyrants. These people, while the most visible and vocal of the Left, are a minority and can and should just be ignored.)
Intelligent and highly motivated people will find their own way as they step back to analyze the promises of the Left and compare them to the historical failures of the movement, but the complacent will be satisfied with the illusion. And we can’t just tell them to stop feeling good about themselves, to abandon that sense of moral superiority. You can’t succeed by telling people to stop doing what makes them feel good. You have to present the information they can use to realize on their own that virtue does not lie in merely opposing an Invented Other, or in being “FOR” something defined as “good”. This has been largely impossible on a big scale due to the influence of the Complicit Agenda Media, but as their influence is fading we need to fill the resulting vacuum with facts. And that is going to be a gradual process.
We need to start by defining terms, which will nearly always contradict the Left’s redefinition of terms. “Insurrection” for example is not just rioting or being obnoxious or even destructive. It is the effort to overthrow a legitimate government and assume its powers. When people on the Left start to understand this the whole J6 narrative falls apart, and the awareness of being lied to and manipulated can start to sink in. But take that a step farther.
IF an election is “won” by illegal means, putting an illegitimate government in place, is that an “insurrection”? Can a true insurrection be accomplished without violence? Or can it be accomplished merely by taking over the government and assuming its powers, by manipulation of the electoral process? This kind of discussion can lead, eventually, to an understanding of the true importance of legitimate elections and might even spur some on the Left to speculate that the growing evidence of chicanery in 2020 and the abundance of illegitimate votes might very well represent an insurrection by the Left, an overthrowing of a legitimate government to assume its powers.
Destroying the Left won’t, can’t, be done by brute force. The Left has not achieved its power in the United States by brute force, but by gradually undermining the foundation of understanding, and therefore believing in, the purpose of the government created by our Constitution. And we can’t destroy Leftism by just focusing on the negative outcomes of its governance—we need to dig down to the core tenets of the Left and make them clear.
I absolutely agree that Leftism is a cancer that might not ever be completely eliminated but which can be restrained if we understand the forces that allowed it to grow and expand, and which has to be excised as much as possible. So we need to define the choices. A choice between a healthy economy and what we have now is a choice between two temporary conditions—we need to make the choice between two diametrically opposed forms of government, one of which leads to economic misery and one which allows for prosperity. We need to explain that we shouldn’t vote on ISSUES but on the system we think is the best way to address those issues. In other words, we need to lead America into a thoughtful approach to government rather than a knee-jerk response to emotional manipulation. We shouldn’t vote for PEOPLE but for the person most likely to represent and implement the system we believe is best.
Cutting off the emotional basis for supporting Democrats will starve the Left, while frontal attacks will only entrench its defenders.
That is just brilliantly articulated.
Very excellent analysis of why, in the end, Harris still managed to get upwards of 74 million votes. We think about that and realize that nearly half the voters signed off on what would have been 20 million more illegals, medical mutilation of minors and endless wars around the world while inflation continued to eat away at purchasing power. In a sane society she wouldn’t have got 10 percent…of course, in a sane society she never would have got into more than one office (figuring that anyone can BS themselves in the first time). Biden would never have been President. Obama, never. Clinton, never. The last sane Democrat to hold office was Carter and he was, himself, a little mad.
But here we are – and, you’re right, this is going to take some real thought and care to overcome.
My contribution remains to put Disreali’s observation on steroids: “The right honourable gentleman caught the Whigs bathing, and walked away with their clothes. He has left them in the full enjoyment of their liberal positions, and he is himself a strict conservative of their garments.” That is, to do things which might seem like liberal virtue signalling but which in hard reality are massive reforms of a corrupt and cruel system. Like a Homelessness Reduction Act of 2025…it’ll provide health care! It’ll get them off drugs! Provide mental health counseling! Give them jobs! Allow them to build up a supply of money! And, sure, the teeth is that persistently homeless people (say, picked up for essential vagrancy twice in a six month period) are sent to work camps where all this good stuff happens and they earn their money at minimum wage cleaning streets and such…but for the casual Liberal Guilt person out there, the message is “care”…for us, the message is “get the lazy bums a job and teach them how to work.”…everyone’s happy, and we get the votes.
I would like to see, every time a conservative is on a talk show or panel with a Democrat (especially a “moderate” Democrat) ask the Dem, courteously and without being confrontational, “why are you a Democrat?”
The answer, if not totally avoided, will be some form of focus on ISSUES and some virtue signaling, but anything would open the door to followup questions, along the lines of “Why do you think the best way to address this issue is to expand the size, scope and power of the federal government instead of letting the states deal with it, as the 10th Amendment demands?” or “Do you think power should be consolidated in the hands of a few who govern from a massively powerful Central Authority, or that it should be kept closer to the people by honoring state sovereignty?”
These questions can be asked nicely, by some people, OF some people. It’s time to make Dem politicians own up to their core ideology, through a variety of approaches. “Do you disagree with President Trump’s position that laws should only be made by Congress because it is our only legal legislative body, instead of by political appointees in various agencies?” And refuse to let the Dem steer the discourse back to Identity Politics, name-calling and personal attacks.
Another tack I would like to see the Sunday morning pundits take is that of the practice of redefining words and holding Dems to the actual words used, not their interpretations of what was “really meant”. The howling of the word “insurrection” is a perfect example. “Is there a single statement by President Trump that his goal was to overthrow the government?” But he wanted to overturn the election! “Is that what he really SAID, or didn’t he say the goal of the January 6 rally was to petition Congress to postpone certification for the specific period of ten days, so they could look into some of the allegations of election fraud?” But but but what the MOB said…. “No, what PRESIDENT TRUMP said!” And back to the word “insurrection”. Did President Trump ever say a single word about overturning the government and assuming its powers?” And so on. Calmly and persistently coming back to the actual wording of what was said and the actual legal definition of the words used to attack him.
Do the same for everything the Left throws out there. They claim Matt Gaetz is a “pedophile”. Well, is there a single allegation that he had sex with a child who had not yet reached puberty? Then why use the word when it has absolutely nothing to do with what is claimed? If what is asserted about him is true, why do you have to lie about it to make it sound worse than it is? (This is the same dirty trick the Left used to smear priests, calling them “pedophiles” to imply improper advances to girls under the age of puberty, when in fact predatory homosexual priests were preying on boys who were post-pubescent, a totally different scenario than the one claimed.) Typical of the specificity of the allegations against Gaetz is “…allegations that he was part of a scheme that led to the sex trafficking of a 17-year-old girl.” “Part” of a “scheme that led to” an unexplained event characterized as “sex trafficking”. The committee’s review “….now includes whether Gaetz engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit drug use, accepted improper gifts and sought to obstruct government investigations of his conduct.” There’s a nice bundle of vagueness. What, exactly, is an “improper gift”? Who defines “sexual misconduct”? What kind of “illicit drug use”? Smoking weed, as Vice President Harris has admitted to doing, before it was legalized? As a general rule, when a statement is in the passive voice and does not identify the accuser or provide details, it is a smear campaign.
We HAVE to start demanding accuracy in the words used, because the Left is dependent on redefining the language to enable the implication of things that are not true. The dictionary would be our friend, if we paid more attention to it.
Ya gotta love this headline:
ENTIRE ENTRENCHED GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY TO BE DISMANTLED BY INDIAN GUY AND AUTISTIC AFRICAN-AMERICAN OBSESSED WITH ROCKETS
“”two total outsiders with weird names.””
Breaking the mold.
I’m not hearing much chatter about burning the country down. Do you supposed the billionaires who were going to fund it have realized that that’s one of the reasons they lost? Either that or the more intelligent radical activists are thinking that maybe this is the time that the Right pushes back. Either way, I’d be perfectly happy if things just got back to what we used to refer to as normal.
There are probably several reasons.
One might be the chatter on the Right about finally enforcing the laws on inciting and paying for riots, crimes amplified by crossing state lines and using public transportation and communication to do so. It’s one thing to have a contract with Rent-A-Mob and pay your thugs to fly or take trains to different locales to start riots, to pay for their rental cars and hotels and restaurant bills and the costs of providing fun riot equipment like face shields and bricks, when fellow thugs are running the country and you know there will be no enforcement of the laws. But now there is a huge risk in being the money man for riots, arson and destruction of property, and these guys are probably hunkered down hoping they covered their tracks during the years they were financing chaos.
The most obvious one is that the Right just doesn’t riot. This is a truism that points out the issues surrounding J6—yes, some Trump supporters did get caught up in the emotional firestorm of the event, but they did not go there with that purpose in mind, and they did not instigate the violence in the first place. That’s not excusing them for finally getting sucked into the hysteria, but there IS a difference, and that one riot involving conservatives is the only one, in contrast to the dozens/hundreds of Leftist events of violence, arson, assault and even murder. Heck, even when we DO go out in public to quietly murmur our concerns or issues, we then clean up after ourselves!
And the Left is just too stunned and demoralized to do much of anything but whine and make up stories about the Trump appointees. Oh, a couple of morons like Polis and Pritzger are bragging about how they will defy federal law and protect illegal aliens in their states, but the two of them together have about as much testosterone as Paris Hilton and backbone as any other invertebrate, and once indictments start coming in they will fold. There’s a little surly mumbling about maybe trying another #resist movement, but this time it’s lower-case and very feeble. Even Whitmer is steering clear of this disaster in the making, in spite of the valiant effort to dress it up as a “defense of democracy”. Yeah, nothing says “democracy” quite as loudly as bragging about defying a properly legislated federal law. Even the Designated Whiners like Schiff For Brains and the Waddler are mute, and all lame duck Schumer can do, peering over his Dollar Store granny readers, is mutter about some legislative maneuvering. AOC meekly took her pronoun choices off her website, and Ilan is hiding out now that so many Somalis have turned out to be Trump supporters.
Costs money to burn things down! Plus you have to be sure the local Blue DA won’t prosecute and apparently that word hasn’t been put out…
Some words HAVE been put out, and that is that there is a new sheriff in town and he has been picking out some tough deputies and a posse might just be headed toward people who incite/enable/finance rioting. The laws I have cited are federal, so local blue DAs don’t have much to say about arrests and prosecution, and that crossing state lines and using interstate communication devices like telephones and the internet have to be making some people a little nervous.
It’s funny how some things just fall into place to show patterns that might have been suspected but are now very clear. Such as that huge “vote” margin allegedly for Joe in 2020 that just disappeared, as if by magic, when the Right figured out ways to thwart cheating. Coincidence? Probably not. And now we are seeing what might be a pattern of riots just somehow, magically, not erupting when there are no paid agitators to get them started. Again, no hard proof, but it sure looks like there might be a connection.
Well, THIS is a big bucket of not good.
Makes one wonder if there should be some restrictions placed on an outgrowing President during the last 2 months of their presidency.
Foreign and defense staff trying to muck it up as much as possible before Trump gets in.
I think that is very obvious, and only the hard-core radicals will find it acceptable. The “pledge” for billions over the next three years is just performative theater—Biden knows it will never materialize and so does everyone else. The weapons thing is so clearly an effort to leave a massive military and diplomatic mess behind and leave the threat of nuclear war for Trump to clean up that it will fool no one.
Biden, et al, could save a lot of energy by just taking out a full page in the NY Times and LA Times saying “I am a petty old man who cares more about spite and malice than the future of this country, so I am setting up situations that can only harm the United States in hopes that the resulting damage will be blamed on Trump. You should have let me run.”