Donald Trump says that he inherited a mess at home and abroad from the last administration. I as a ordinary citizen and supporter of the previous president take offense to that, because it was plainly President Obama who in 2008 inherited the mess. In 2008 the economy was tanking with the highest loss of jobs since the Great Depression, a collapse of the stock market was already in play, the auto industry had its hand out, and American families were losing their homes to crooked bankers. Americans were losing their lives fighting in two wars, one of which was discretionary, and America had lost much of its luster abroad.
The administration of Barack Obama turned all of that around. It handed off a much improved economy and a dialed-down war situation, though still with a dangerous terrorist threat. But what you gonna do when the white boys in Congress won’t work with you?
Now to have this orange clown say that he inherited a mess is highly offensive when the facts are plain: The United States had seen 72 months of consecutive private-sector job growth, rising corporate profits, and stabilized stock markets under Obama’s watch. Twenty million more Americans have health care insurance than before Obama. The wars may still be going on, but it’s difficult to tell judging from press coverage. Trump didn’t inherit a mess, he is creating many messes. What allows him to lie to us about something that we all can see is wrong?
Trump’s bizarre behavior may lead to some new rules for the presidency; a congressman from California is considering proposing legislation that would require a White House psychiatrist, presumably to monitor the mental condition of the this and future presidents. I have a plan (see below) to end dishonest claims about the state of the union at hand-off time. And before long there will be other fixes that would prevent the outrageous claims being make by Trump.
Anyway, I have a solution to the problem of false claims about the condition of the government at transition time. I propose what I’ll call a presidential walk-through of the state of affairs at the time of transition, much as when someone leaves an apartment or condominium the owner and tenant walk through the property listing the conditions and all damages so that it is clear who is responsible for what.
A presidential walk-through would work like this: The outgoing president and his department heads would meet with the incoming president and his proposed department heads to survey together the state of all aspects of the government, the economy, national security, etc. They would evaluate the condition of the country matter by matter to reach an agreement on the condition of each aspects. When they agree on a condition, the new president will sign a statement that this is how that condition is. When they can’t agree on a condition, the new president will have a place to note his dissatisfaction. The outgoing president and the new president will hold a brief joint news conference to publicly acknowledge a document that details the condition of the country at the time of the transfer of leadership – no more bullshit.
The biggest guessing game in America today is the one where everyone is trying to figure out what makes Donald Trump tick; is he a con man, is he mentally unstable, is he simply immature?
I’m a former longtime New Yorker. I think I recognize Trump’s stripe. He is a hybrid between a Garment Center factory boss and a street-level wise guy. His instincts are those of the factory boss who lies to a client that an order left the factory hours ago, and then goes to the process room to hurry the completion of the order. His mannerism is that of the tough New York wise guy trying to make his bones. Not many New Yorkers voted for Trump because they recognize him and they can distinguish Trump’s character from what they want in a president – it’s the rest of the country that lacks this ability. Or maybe not. Trump once famously said that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue (I’ll continue to remind you of this statement until it happens) without losing any support. That appears to be a true statement, but it still should be tested – any volunteers?Powered by Sidelines