Inclusive or Patriotic? Trump seems bewildered that even though his economy is doing well the numbers still indicate people don't like him. But I think it's pretty simple, really. The Republican program Trump supports is more patriotic than inclusive. Why do Democrats, the schools, the media, the entertainment all support a more "inclusive" model of politic? It's because the more "inclusive" model attracts more people, more political support, more customers, more money, more listeners, etc.
The more "patriotic" model has standards and may appear to look judgmental and racist. It may look bigoted. This is clearly going to look "hateful" to many people--particularly to people who don't *want* to have moral standards, or who want to live in lawless, less-confined ways. Democrats define their version of "democracy" as "inclusive," and wish to stitch together a wide assortment of disaffected people, or minorities. They wish to invite in illegal immigrants to stack up their census numbers of sanctuary states so that more congressman are permitted, growing the numbers of Democratic congressman, forming majorities in Congress.
Entertainers want support from a larger number of people, drawing from liberals who appeal to all, politically, religiously, and morally. That way they sell their product to more, and not less, people. The same with company executives who want to sell their wares to more, and not less, customers. Sports heroes, actors, musicians all want to sell to the highest number of people, without excluding the lowest common denominators. "Patriots" are going to lose out to a non-discriminating mass of people. Public schools are going to be oriented to the more "democratic" model because they are designed to apply to all. Higher Education wants to attract all, from any country or group, and not just those who support our Constitution.
So even if our economy is doing well, the campaign to take down Trump and his "patriotism" is going to have "teeth." No matter if his policies are healthiest for America, and in support of a true constitutional form of Democracy, he is going to be questioned by the media and branded "uncompassionate" and "bigoted." Putting America first seems more intuitive, but does not take hold where there are media blitzes that taint the political message. Perhaps 80% of America rejects the lawless inclusion of illegal hordes coming into America and doing damage to our society and schools. But looking these "illegals" in the eye draws upon compassionate hearts, and crime is ignored in favor of "inclusion."
Without standards, however, all the wealth we gain from selling to "all" will be "cheap money earned," and the money will be spent in a worthless, self-destructive way. It will be like sand spilling out between our fingers. I'm for a fewer, more quality-oriented politic. I'm for the obviously-needed "lawful behavior." I hope you feel the same?
The more "patriotic" model has standards and may appear to look judgmental and racist. It may look bigoted. This is clearly going to look "hateful" to many people--particularly to people who don't *want* to have moral standards, or who want to live in lawless, less-confined ways. Democrats define their version of "democracy" as "inclusive," and wish to stitch together a wide assortment of disaffected people, or minorities. They wish to invite in illegal immigrants to stack up their census numbers of sanctuary states so that more congressman are permitted, growing the numbers of Democratic congressman, forming majorities in Congress.
Entertainers want support from a larger number of people, drawing from liberals who appeal to all, politically, religiously, and morally. That way they sell their product to more, and not less, people. The same with company executives who want to sell their wares to more, and not less, customers. Sports heroes, actors, musicians all want to sell to the highest number of people, without excluding the lowest common denominators. "Patriots" are going to lose out to a non-discriminating mass of people. Public schools are going to be oriented to the more "democratic" model because they are designed to apply to all. Higher Education wants to attract all, from any country or group, and not just those who support our Constitution.
So even if our economy is doing well, the campaign to take down Trump and his "patriotism" is going to have "teeth." No matter if his policies are healthiest for America, and in support of a true constitutional form of Democracy, he is going to be questioned by the media and branded "uncompassionate" and "bigoted." Putting America first seems more intuitive, but does not take hold where there are media blitzes that taint the political message. Perhaps 80% of America rejects the lawless inclusion of illegal hordes coming into America and doing damage to our society and schools. But looking these "illegals" in the eye draws upon compassionate hearts, and crime is ignored in favor of "inclusion."
Without standards, however, all the wealth we gain from selling to "all" will be "cheap money earned," and the money will be spent in a worthless, self-destructive way. It will be like sand spilling out between our fingers. I'm for a fewer, more quality-oriented politic. I'm for the obviously-needed "lawful behavior." I hope you feel the same?
