George Will says he doesn’t even know what knowledge is:
As president-elect, Trump did not know the pedigree and importance of the “one China” policy. About such things he can be, if he is willing to be, tutored. It is, however, too late to rectify this defect: He lacks what T. S. Eliot called a sense “not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence.” His fathomless lack of interest in America’s path to the present and his limitless gullibility leave him susceptible to being blown about by gusts of factoids that cling like lint to a disorderly mind.
The problem is that he thinks he has “a very good brain.” This is Dunning-Krugerish.
But I’m still relieved that she lost.
I completely agree with your sentiment of relief that HRC lost.
I got to the point where I couldn’t bear to read any more of George Will, except when he wrote on the subject of baseball. This essay reinforces my thinking along those lines. George Will is an insufferable moral narcissist.
Hey, this article will keep him on the invitation list for the DC cocktail circuit.
Well, I have to say I agree with Will. But I’m still happy she’s not president.
Certainly I can’t defend Trump regarding anything Will reported in this article. And I hope I don’t come across as keeping score with ‘gotchas’ that were reported about Obama, GWB, Clinton, and so forth. The issue is more complex.
Trump had, perhaps still has, a fairly significant Populist appeal. He clearly is not up to speed on beltway politics, hasn’t surrounded himself with enough folks who are, and his self-branded style of communication makes him a rich target for the press. But his direct appeals to people, such as his press conference about a month ago, still come across quite well.
I don’t think he, or anyone else, has the skill to overcome the institutional inertia of DC. Spending will never slow down, there are no cuts to any department or program that can survive the howls of protest.
I still say the GOP is the biggest obstacle to change. Exactly what is the point of the Republican party these days?
Because I have always associated George Will with a conservative outlook, I couldn’t find a whole lot that he had to say about Trump putting Goresuch onto SCOTUS, which I had assumed he would support. I did find an opinion piece where Will hoped that Goresuch would correct Scalia’s position where he wrongly had elevated the US Constitution above the Declaration of Independence. I will have to give that some thought…just shooting from the hip I also would have placed the authority of the Constitution above the Declaration.
Jiminator, I missed George Will’s column on the Declaration of Independence. Thanks for the reference. For anyone who wants to read it, it is here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gorsuchs-chance-to-correct-scalia-on-the-constitution/2017/02/01/765d2980-e8b6-11e6-bf6f-301b6b443624_story.html?utm_term=.115686b48c21
My reaction: I really got a laugh out of it. It is a rare column that manages to get me to nod my head in agreement as it quotes Robert Bork and Antonin Scalia and , but this one did it.
I was particularly intrigued by Will’s reference to the Declaration of Independence as part of US law because of it is part of US Code. Well, it is, at least in some sense — see http://uscode.house.gov/browse/frontmatter/organiclaws&edition=prelim
And as you can see from the link, the Articles of Confederation are similarly part of US Code. Using George Will’s theory of these laws work, the States could insist on their rights under the Articles of Confederation… … and general hilarity would ensue!
That should have read “Using George Will’s theory of *how* these laws work…”
“George Will is an insufferable moral narcissist.” How so? Not saying you’re wrong, although I don’t know what a “moral narcissist” is. What is it, and what examples of it do you find on Will’s writings?
I never liked him in his more statist-conservative incarnation; but he seemed to grow more libertarian. And during the campaign I would occasionally hear him comment on Trump and the Dumb Trumpkins, and from what I heard he was spot on.
I believe Roger Simon coined the term. Essentially it is the chasm between intentions and results, where as long as your intentions are good then the results don’t matter. Also, the person claiming good intentions is the only one who is allowed to define those intentions.
George Will did express grave concerns when Trump announced his list of nominees for SCOTUS, when a rational person would have expressed significantly greater concerns over whomever HRC would have nominated.
Will also should have been far more concerned about immigration policy under HRC.
The elites (of which I include Will) simply abhor Trump, and I consider that to be a Trump feature, not a Trump bug.
I find Trump abhorrent, too. Does that make me an “elite”?
Heh! I was referring to the GOP elites who were willing to support HRC over Trump in order to maintain the status quo (Bush, McCain, Graham, Scowcroft, Colin Powell, et al)
Because going all out, over the top against the only candidate that could stop the Clinton crime family and put the Bush dynasty to bed qualifies as an inflexible dogmatist which is as near as dammit to a “moral narcissist” as I can think of. The Bill Buckley school of conservationism remains butt hurt that the influences of the conservatives they threw off the boat had come back to put them out of the mainstream picture.
One China.
Is this a stupid thing that smart people know.
Does every educated person know the answer to “How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?” because they have read Orwell?
My office neighbor, the adjunct who teaches the Digital Design classes, suggested that the multi-billion price tag today of the “next-gen fab” is so steep that Intel would do better to buy a slightly used Nimitz Class aircraft carrier to “take care of” TSMC. After he explained to be that TSMC is Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (I teach (Analog) Circuits, not digital design), I then naively asked, “Couldn’t the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) take care of this?”
I hear now that Samsung has bested Intel in microchip sales. Do you suppose Trump’s sabre rattling on the Korean Peninsula is the president being smarter than all of us?
I’ve considered that myself more than once. If China ever decided to simultaneously invade South Korea and Taiwan they would capture a substantial part of the semiconductor manufacturing capacity in the world today. Causing a global semiconductor shortage for several years at least. At a minimum it would take 4 years for the industry to recover but it would most likely take over a decade. It’s not just TSMC and Samsung either.
As it is China has been trying to build significant enough domestic capacity that they will eventually push the other Asian semiconductor manufacturers out of the market. SMIC is one example. As we speak Foxconn is in the race to buy Toshiba’s NAND business. Foxconn is supposedly a Taiwanese company but their CEO has deep links to the Chinese government and most of his business is actually located in China. Foxconn already got Sharp’s LCD manufacturing business some time ago.
The Chinese have been aggressively trying to break the semiconductor business for several years now but lately they’ve been a lot more overt about it.
A lot of the Taiwanese industrialists can’t be trusted. They’ve been bought or co-opted by the Chinese Government and have moved a large proportion of their business there already.
Jeepers. I feel awful about this. One of the Coastal Elite disapproves of Donald Trump. /sarc
He must not remember WF Buckley’s statement that he would rather be ruled by the first thousand names in the Boston phone book… Or did it not occur to him that the first thousand names might not be up to speed on the way Washington works?
This is what we wanted. My problem is the opposite: Trump is not breaking things fast enough.
All through the election, the Trumpists were gaga over the guy thinking he was going to solve all our problems.
I and others kept repeating that this guy is no Conservative; he is unpredictable and no Trump supporter has the SLIGHTEST idea what he will do.
I see no reason to change my view.
Said view also includes agreement that I’m glad Trump won.
I voted for Trump; but I carried no expectations that he would do what I want. Now you see writers like Coulter who were gaga over Trump starting to complain. See her most recent article. I have no sympathy for her on this.
There was absolutely zero reason to think Trump would do what Conservatives want them to do.
I wanted Walker because he was experienced and successful in defeating RINO’s and Marxists/Socialists politically and legislatively. Cruz was my second choice.
We have a guy in the White House who, so far, has shown he doesn’t know how to handle a feckless RINO-infested GOP.
AS an aside, I agree that George Will has become insufferable.
I agree, we have no idea what Trump will do. We absolutely do know what the Clinton bint would do. I’m good with Teh Donald.
This generation has a knowledge problem. Facts are whatever the mob chants the loudest. But it’s not just the leftist mob. ‘Conservatives’ have their own smug chants.
Trump has been accused of being intellectually incurious. It is believed so strongly by some that it is a heresy of faith to question it. But put it to the test and it falls apart.
‘Trump doesn’t know about the nuclear triad!” Perhaps because there has never been such a thing. Just because people talk about a triad (air, land & sea) or put it in a position paper, doesn’t mean it’s based on the reality which is that nuclear deterrent includes a lot more than a triad. The shorthands we use to convey concepts gloss over the (very important) details that can lead to tragedy.
Asking fundamental questions (like a child might) is how you get to real truth. Bias happens because people ‘already know the answers.’
Trump is doing to politics what Elon is doing to space… neither is afraid of looking foolish to those that already have all the answers.
Coulter Quotes from her latest article:
SWAMP PEOPLE: 47; TRUMP: 0
“But as soon as he got into office, Trump started giving away his miraculous, unprecedented power. Hey, Wall Street! Even though you didn’t give me any money, is it too late to be your friend?
Remember? There would be so much winning, we were going to get “sick and tired of winning,” and beg him, “Please, please, we can’t win anymore. … It’s too much. It’s not fair to everybody else.”
We’re not winning. We’re losing, and we’re losing on the central promise of Trump’s campaign.”
Quelle Surprise. Sorry Ann – you let yourself get carried away with his bluster. Well you weren’t alone.
I would add that the moment – THE VERY MOMENT – someone starts to tack on the words “Believe me” onto some statement, is the moment I start to disbelieve them.
Considering that the One China Policy is a matter of debate even on Taiwan, I’d say it doesn’t have much importance at all.
If only the Democratic party hadn’t sold the Chinese down the river like they did the Vietnamese a quarter century later, we wouldn’t have to worry about it.
I think your visceral dislike of the man colors your impression of his capabilities. Are you familiar with The Diplomad?
He has a great perspective on Trump’s first 100 days. Still lots of winning going on. Nobody’s perfect but if you believe a word the MSM says you’d think he’s an utter failure.
And George Will is now a jerk – he used to be pretty good but he’s been co-opted by the elite.
I’m not going on what the MSM says. I’m going on what the historically ignorant idiot says. It’s recorded.
No Rand, you are not basing your beliefs on what he says, You have made it absolutely clear that you have judged him to be an ignorant idiot and simply pick out confirmation of your bias.
To prove this you just have to wait for the results over time… then explain how he accidentally keeps getting things right. The results over time will be impossible to ignore.
The news that isn’t being reported is the thing to watch.
Politics is a Gordian knot that even Trump doesn’t have the knife to cut… but note the progress.
Progress that is easy for the MSM to conceal.
I don’t like the new law and am very critical of it, but we need to acknowledge movement.