Where Is Trump Getting His Cabinet Picks?

Surprisingly (at least to me), he’s poaching Galt’s Gulch.

[Wednesday-morning update]

Robert Tracinski (who actually is an Objectivist) isn’t impressed:

The problem is that Hohmann is trying to fit the Rand angle into a narrative about the supreme awfulness of the supremely awful Trump administration. “The fact that all of these men, so late in life, are such fans of works that celebrate individuals who consistently put themselves before others is therefore deeply revealing. They will now run our government.” Are you frightened now? Because I’m pretty sure you’re supposed to be frightened.

Hohmann would have been better served by asking what these business leaders took from Rand as the message that inspired them. Again, there are a few hints. Puzder says that it’s about encouraging his kids to live “the kind of lives of achievement, integrity, and independence that Rand celebrated in her novels.” Congressman Mike Pompeo (referred to in the article) explained that Rand’s impact was because, “I spent my whole life working hard,” a virtue her novels promoted, and because, “I eat and breathe small government and freedom.”

Oh, no! Important figures in the new administration have been influenced by an author who advocated freedom. And integrity. Does that perhaps sound a little less frightening?

It does to people who hate those things.

24 thoughts on “Where Is Trump Getting His Cabinet Picks?”

  1. So far, the only pick he’s actually made that I heavily object to is Tillerson. And what I object to there most of all is the timing; why now, when the media is all wrapped up in the orchestrated false frenzy over “Russia hacked our election!” Now, IMHO, is not the time to nominate a guy with connections to Putin. At least wait until after the electoral college votes… but Trump did not.

    Regarding Tillerson’s Putin connections, he could, and IMHO should, be made to do some explaining at his confirmation hearings.

      1. Totally agreed – but it’s a valid question regarding how he feels about Russia, and that’s what confirmation hearings are supposed to be for (and I hope will be). We don’t need another SecState who has blinders on regarding Putin (the way Clinton and Kerry did, and Obama did as well, until it suited him).

        On the other hand…. the head of the world’s largest oil company is probably the perfect pick for dealing with things like scuttling the Paris climate change accords.

        1. Why would Tillerson want to scuttle the Paris climate accords? He’s not big coal. Ok, maybe he is a supporter of free markets, but I’m fairly certain he’s in no hurry to stop a forced change in the market that benefits his business.

          1. “Ok, maybe he is a supporter of free markets, …”

            Or maybe not. I know nothing about him but for any selection of a businessman I’d have to ask the question:

            Is he a crony capitalist? Does he conspire with government to shut out the smaller companies?

          2. We should start with the conclusion that business wants to exclude its competition. We don’t get a better economy because business people are saints. We just need to keep the barriers to enter into competition low.

          3. Gregg, most of ExxonMobil’s stated opposition to the Paris Accord was the company’s preference for free markets. It is in their press releases on the subject. For a global company like ExxonMobil, there is not a lot of advantage to having trade wars between various countries.

            But you do have a valid question to ask. My own personal opinion is the major oil and gas companies quietly support the Paris Accords, because most have large reserves in gas and have gotten real good at caputuring it, liquidifying it for transport, and are prime to make a lot of money if only their was a larger market, for example China, which was apart of Kyoto but is apart of the Paris Accords. That’s cronyism when you think of it. However, of the major oil companies that spoke in favor of the Paris Accords; ExxonMobil did so only after it was written and they could examine the deal. BP, Shell, and TOTAL actively lobbied for the Accords during development.

        2. Putin is evil, but also rational. We have an opportunity to get Russia as an ally (which they once were briefly.) Russian people have been brainwashed but not more than today’s American left. There are tons of Americanized Russians living in this country (that are very entrepreneurial… they aren’t mafia usually) It’s time we influenced their country for the good. The Russian communists are a lot different from the Chinese.

          Probably the difference is economic, but that still doesn’t mean the opportunity to influence Russia to be better isn’t real.

          In Russia, big business is the boogieman. An Exxon executive could be just the thing we need to restructure that part of the world.

          As far as the electoral college… It seems a weakness to corrupting influence, but may not be. I will feel better when their job is behind us.

    1. Now, IMHO, is not the time to nominate a guy with connections to Putin.

      Doesn’t matter. They would invent a relationship with Russia if there wasn’t something this scant to go on or they would just make something up.

      The claims made by the Democrat media don’t have to serve reality but rather the Democrat party.

      There is absolutely nothing that Trump can do that will avoid the Democrat’s media from attacking him. It is just like during the election.

    1. Don’t take anything for granted, but so far signs are good that Team Trump intends to systematically dismantle the democrat machine in government.

      1. It’s also possible that you’ve bought into the media’s portrayal of Trump. It may be he is everything you imagine him to be except NOT dialed up to eleven. It may be he has good qualities you overlook.

        The tell (that our perspective of reality is not accurate) is the same for us as it is for the leftist… ‘unexpected’ when it isn’t.

    1. I would say in 2020-24 but knowing our friends to the left, this era will live on for decades to come in film and books.

    2. How deplorable Edward… how dare you accuse them of what they actually did! Next thing ya know you’ll be telling us Hillary lost the election!

      But seriously, we need to punish every criminal in her many organizations. I want to see heads explode and sources of funding dry up… not the shell game they always play.

      1. “we need to punish every criminal in her many organizations”
        But that might net so many high level Democrat insiders and financiers that it shuts down the party. … Make it so.

  2. I see that the WaPo pays by the word. Hohmann certainly typed an awful lot of them about a subject which has little evident significance. In fact, it’s an awful lot for someone whose familiarity with Rand’s work seems to be that of someone who overheard a stranger on the Metro mention that his or her son might have read the Cliff Notes for The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged.

  3. If this were true, you know what would be the worst consequence? If you have people running the government who actually believe in Rand’s principal ideas, and put those ideas into practice,. we could have A FREE SOCIETY!!!! O the horror!

Comments are closed.