Charles Krauthammer's Take on Trump...(modified)

[Alberta Patriot]

"Charles is back, (partially), after many months of battling post surgery complications and enduring lengthy rehabilitation. Please read his message about Trump, about whom he has not been kind at times with his observations. This article is interesting for all who may want to see what Dr K has analyzed during his lengthy absence…(We now know he only has a few weeks left of his incredible time here on Earth)
This is from Charles Krauthammer who did not go for Trump, read what he thinks of him now!

Now there are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.


Charles Krauthammer's interesting take on Mr. Trump:
To my friends "of a different persuasion" I'm not trying to sell anything or anyone but I do feel this is an interesting take on our very controversial president who I truly believe is not Republican or Democrat.
A TAKE ON DONALD TRUMP ...
A different take on Donald Trump: (a non-political agenda)
Trump Is Not A Liberal or Conservative, He's a "Pragmatist." (Definition: A pragmatist is someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. A pragmatist usually has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract him or her.)
We recently enjoyed a belated holiday dinner with friends at the home of other friends. The dinner conversation varied from discussions about antique glass and china to theology and politics. At one point, reference was made to Donald Trump being a conservative, to which I responded that Trump is not a conservative. I said that I neither view nor do I believe Trump views himself as a conservative. I stated it was my opinion that Trump is a pragmatist. He sees a problem and understands it must be fixed. He doesn't see the problem as liberal or conservative, he sees it only as a problem. That is a quality that should be admired and applauded, not condemned. But I get ahead of myself.
Viewing problems from a Liberal perspective has resulted in the creation of more problems, more entitlement programs, more victims, more government, more political correctness, and more attacks on the working class in all economic strata.
Viewing things according to the so-called Republican conservative perspective has brought continued spending and globalism to the detriment of American interests and well being, denial of what the real problems are, Weak, ineffective, milquetoast, leadership that amounts to Barney Fife Deputy Sheriff, appeasement oriented and afraid of its own shadow. In brief, it has brought liberal ideology with a pachyderm as a mascot juxtaposed to the ass of the Democrat Party.
Immigration isn't a Republican problem, it isn't a Liberal problem, it is a problem that threatens the very fabric and infrastructure of America. It demands a pragmatic approach not an approach that is intended to appease one group or another.
The impending collapse of the economy wasn't a Liberal or Conservative problem, it is an American problem. That said, until it is viewed as a problem that demands a common sense approach to resolution, it will never be fixed because the Democrats and Republicans know only one way to fix things and the longevity of their impracticality has proven to have no lasting effect. Successful businessmen like Donald Trump find ways to make things work, they do not promise to accommodate.
Trump uniquely understands that China's manipulation of currency is not a Republican problem or a Democrat problem. It is a problem that threatens our financial stability and he understands the proper balance needed to fix it. Here again, successful businessmen, like Trump, who have weathered the changing tides of economic reality understand what is necessary to make business work, and they, unlike both sides of the political aisle, know that if something doesn't work, you don't continue trying to make it work hoping that at some point it will.
As a pragmatist, Donald Trump hasn't made wild pie-in-the-sky promises of a cell phone in every pocket, free college tuition, and a $15 hour minimum wage for working the drive-through at Carl's Hamburgers.
I argue that America needs pragmatists because pragmatists see a problem and find ways to fix them. They do not see a problem and compound it by creating more problems.
You may not like Donald Trump, but I suspect that the reason some people do not like him is because:
(1) he is antithetical to the "good old boy" method of brokering backroom deals that fatten the coffers of politicians;
(2) they are unaccustomed to hearing a president speak who is unencumbered by the financial shackles of those who he owes vis-a-vis donations;
(3) he is someone who is free of idiomatic political ideology;
(4) he says what he is thinking, is unapologetic for his outspoken thoughts, speaks very straightforward using everyday language that can be understood by all (and is offensive to some who dislike him anyway) making him a great communicator, for the most part, does what he says he will do and;
(5) he is someone who understands that it takes more than hollow promises and political correctness to make America great again.
Listening to Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders talk about fixing America is like listening to two lunatics trying to "out crazy" one another. Jeb Bush, John Kasich and Marco Rubio are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the bankers, corporations, and big dollar donors funding their campaigns. Bush can deny it, but common sense tells anyone willing to face facts is that people don't give tens of millions without expecting something in return.
We have had Democrats and Republican ideologues and what has it brought us? Are we better off today or worse off? Has it happened overnight or has it been a steady decline brought on by both parties?
I submit that a pragmatist is just what America needs right now. People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance, but that is common among those who have never accomplished anything in their lives (or politicians who never really solved a problem, because it's better to still have an "issue(s) to be solved," so re-elect me to solve it, (which never happens) and those who have always played it safe (again, all politicians) not willing to risk failure, to try and achieve success).
Donald Trump put his total financial empire at risk in running for president and certainly did not need or possibly even want the job; that says it all. He wants success for the U.S. and her citizens because he loves his country."

[

[Wizzard]

I like Charles,, too bad his days here are numbered. I liked his opinions and his commentary.   

[RDKLL]

I wanted to believe it...but found this instead while looking for the original story to keep from copying and pasting it.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/krauthammer-interesting-take-trump/
https://www.truthorfiction.com/charles-krauthammers-interesting-take-on-president-trump/

[Wizzard]

Thanks for pointing it out. I usually ck these out myself but had not had time yet. I still like Charles and  his commentaries though!
His time here on earth is not going to be long.

[Alberta Patriot]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

[¿spoom]

Mr. Krauthammer will always be the smartest man in the room, even if the room is a stadium. Such a shame that somebody had to borrow on that for a false story.

[Alberta Patriot]

Mr. Krauthammer will always be the smartest man in the room, even if the room is a stadium. Such a shame that somebody had to borrow on that for a false story.

True, and I believe that whoever "Switched The Attribution should step forward and name themselves, but we all know that won't happen.

[Wizzard]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

 

[¿spoom]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

Then perhaps it shouldn't be a thread titled, "Charles Krauthammer's Take on Trump" since it apparently isn't. Seeing how Mr. Krauthammer is a brilliant man who has not been a fan of Trump, the real story here is purported to be, "Trump has won over Charles Krauthammer" which is not true until we see/hear Mr. Charles Krauthammer state that himself.

[Alberta Patriot]

A column by political activist and commentator Mychal S. Massie has been incorrectly labeled “Charles Krauthammer’s Interesting Take on President Trump.”

[Alberta Patriot]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

Then perhaps it shouldn't be a thread titled, "Charles Krauthammer's Take on Trump" since it apparently isn't. Seeing how Mr. Krauthammer is a brilliant man who has not been a fan of Trump, the real story here is purported to be, "Trump has won over Charles Krauthammer" which is not true until we see/hear Mr. Charles Krauthammer state that himself.

Absolutely Correct and I certainly am sorry I posted it under his name without fact checking it all myself, and am leaving it up with the (Modified) title as a lesson to myself about posting too quickly.

[Wizzard]

We are all still learning,, when we stop,, we are dead. 

[¿spoom]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

Then perhaps it shouldn't be a thread titled, "Charles Krauthammer's Take on Trump" since it apparently isn't. Seeing how Mr. Krauthammer is a brilliant man who has not been a fan of Trump, the real story here is purported to be, "Trump has won over Charles Krauthammer" which is not true until we see/hear Mr. Charles Krauthammer state that himself.

Absolutely Correct and I certainly am sorry I posted it under his name without fact checking it all myself, and am leaving it up with the (Modified) title as a lesson to myself about posting too quickly.

I did the same with a well-doctored picture of Whoopie 

[Wizzard]

Again...There are fact checkers out there who say that Charles Krauthammer did not write this and examining what I read here that may very well be true, but the substance of what is written still stands on it's own, no matter who wrote it.

Then perhaps it shouldn't be a thread titled, "Charles Krauthammer's Take on Trump" since it apparently isn't. Seeing how Mr. Krauthammer is a brilliant man who has not been a fan of Trump, the real story here is purported to be, "Trump has won over Charles Krauthammer" which is not true until we see/hear Mr. Charles Krauthammer state that himself.

Absolutely Correct and I certainly am sorry I posted it under his name without fact checking it all myself, and am leaving it up with the (Modified) title as a lesson to myself about posting too quickly.

I did the same with a well-doctored picture of Whoopie 

Lol  she would make a freight train take the highway as is.

[Gryphon Rider]

I'll say up front that I'm not blaming 7th_son for the misattribution, but rather the person who originally attached Krauthammer's name to Massie's opinion.

The problem with misattributing writing is that it deceives readers into attaching the intelligence, motivations, and personal integrity of one man to the work of another man, who will have different intelligence, motivations, and reputation, the misattribution serving neither of the men involved.  It is also a disservice to the reader, because now he is either swayed to agree with an opinion that is not as well-considered as it would be if it were actually produced by the man it is attributed to, or now the reader's opinion of the attributed writer is diminished because the piece is not as well-considered as other pieces the writer has written.

[RDKLL]

I'll say up front that I'm not blaming 7th_son for the misattribution, but rather the person who originally attached Krauthammer's name to Massie's opinion.

I agree 100%.

[Alpha Dog]

A column by political activist and commentator Mychal S. Massie has been incorrectly labeled “Charles Krauthammer’s Interesting Take on President Trump.”

Never heard of this Massie person.  I read this yesterday and said to myself this does not sound in any way like Mr. Krauthammer.  I like Charles a lot but he is a kinder, gentler establishment type that writes papers and gives opinions. He on with Brett Baier's panel almost every night during the last election cycle and got it miserably wrong because he has been in the beltway so long he too does not understand the sentiment in between the coasts. I do love his sense of humor.   My guess is he wanted to see Jeb Bush, but not sure.

Back to Massie.  This person must be eaves dropping on Rush Limbaugh as Rush has stated this almost verbatim since the fall of 2015, starting with Trump does not see himself as a conservative but as a pragmatist that sees problems and goes about correcting them.  I do agree with an interview that Bryan Kilmeade  had with Dinesh D Souza last winter in which Dinesh stated that Trump is even more conservative than Ronald Reagan was and went about explaining the reasons of which I already new, as I have seen Trump this way for almost 18 years.