Jump to content

Trump's Cabinet

disgruntledemployee

By disgruntledemployee
in Squadron Bar

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 527
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ViperMan
ViperMan

Yes, many. Among them are the UN Charter, the 1975 Helsinki act, the 1990 Charter of Paris, and the 1997 NATO-Russia founding act. None of which place any limit on NATO's expansion or which exclude Uk

ClearedHot
ClearedHot
ClearedHot
ClearedHot

Pete Hegseth named to be SECDEF....WOW! He was labeled a threat/extremist by his Guard unit for vigorously supporting Trump.  I hope he turns the building upside down!

Posted Images

VigilanteNav Crew Dawg

VigilanteNav

Posted
Posted

Hegseth dropping out in 5,4,3,2....

Got to say, DeSantis a way, way, way better choice on the whole. He'll sail through the Senate confirmation process as a non event.  Has actually run a large organization. Has been in the House so knows that everything the DOD needs to get better on actually needs to get legislated through the House.  Decent cultural warrior for those that care about that stuff...but, knows when to say when...(ie...his backing off on the war on Disney).  The downside for the USAF perspective is that being a Navy guy one can assume he's not going to push for any big changes to get the USAF the more funding (relative to the Army and Navy) that it surely needs to modernize quicker than the status quo. That's the real concern for the USAF that the likes of Deptula, etc have been preaching (not whether or not we can or can't have beards).           

  • Like 1
ViperMan Gray Beard

ViperMan

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, VigilanteNav said:

Hegseth dropping out in 5,4,3,2....

Got to say, DeSantis a way, way, way better choice on the whole. He'll sail through the Senate confirmation process as a non event.  Has actually run a large organization. Has been in the House so knows that everything the DOD needs to get better on actually needs to get legislated through the House.  Decent cultural warrior for those that care about that stuff...but, knows when to say when...(ie...his backing off on the war on Disney).  The downside for the USAF perspective is that being a Navy guy one can assume he's not going to push for any big changes to get the USAF the more funding (relative to the Army and Navy) that it surely needs to modernize quicker than the status quo. That's the real concern for the USAF that the likes of Deptula, etc have been preaching (not whether or not we can or can't have beards).           

That would be good.

Next up: replacing Tulsi. I'm not sure who's a candidate, however.

Lord Ratner Gray Beard

Lord Ratner

Posted
Posted

Y'all sound like the board of every major corporation in America today looking for a CEO.

We want someone who's really going to shake things up, take this company out of its rut and into the future as the leader in our field!

Ooh, that guy, no he's a little bit too controversial for us. Besides we want someone with more experience in this type of company. Let's go with established-safe-guy-in-a-suit. 

Fast forward a couple years 

I don't understand, why is our company still stuck unable to innovate or change direction?

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 5
FourFans Gray Beard

FourFans

Posted
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Y'all sound like the board of every major corporation in America today looking for a CEO.

Seriously.  Let's really move some stuff.  Shawn Ryan for Vet Affairs, Mike Rowe for Labor, Joe Rogan as Press Secretary (every briefing obviously labelled 'Explicit'), Ray Dalio to advise on China, Peter Ziehan to advise on econ and to fight with Dalio, and leave the rest as insider experts.

Edited by FourFans
Lord Ratner Gray Beard

Lord Ratner

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, FourFans said:

Seriously.  Let's really move some stuff.  Shawn Ryan for Vet Affairs, Mike Rowe for Labor, Joe Rogan as Press Secretary (every briefing obviously labelled 'Explicit'), Ray Dalio to advise on China, Peter Ziehan to advise on econ and to fight with Dalio, and leave the rest as insider experts.

Agreed. And let's stop calling people experts. If a given field has knowledge sufficient to require expertise, then it has a title that already conveys expertise: doctor, counselor, captain, engineer, etc. 

 

That word has caused an awful lot of mischief over the past decade. Time to retire it.

Edited by Lord Ratner
  • Like 2
ClearedHot Gray Beard

ClearedHot

Posted
Posted
On 12/6/2024 at 4:43 AM, VigilanteNav said:

Hegseth dropping out in 5,4,3,2....   

Not so fast...

They even built a PAC to run ads in his favor.

Lord Ratner Gray Beard

Lord Ratner

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, streak said:

John Bolton is not a Kash Patel fan.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/kash-patel-doesnt-belong-at-the-fbi-cabinet-nominee-5ef655eb?st=RKnmfX&reflink=article_copyURL_share

These guys wrapped themselves in the blanket of "being faithful to the Constitution" because they believed their holy purpose was to thwart Trump's agenda. Maybe they should have just turned down the job, since they didn't agree with the policy objectives of the duly elected president. There's no way to be "the resistance" against Trump's agenda without also being the resistance against the American populace that elected him. They are pretty, wannabe dictators, and it's a relief to see the Trump team change course. 

 

If you aren't loyal to Donald Trump, you have no place in the cabinet. There is no constitutional position on Ukraine, the middle east, immigration policy, etc. So no, you aren't defending the Constitution by subverting the president's agenda. You are in fact shitting on it. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
bfargin Gray Beard

bfargin

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Investigative Journalist recap of decades long look into Tulsi, her "cult", it's suspected money laundering and other antics, and retribution against their critics ala Scientology methods.  Should make for some good theater at the confirmation.

https://www.spytalk.co/p/my-battle-with-tulsi-gabbards-cult

The "intelligence" swamp trying to prevent a little spot light being directed on their lies and manipulation/circumvention of our laws. I trust her more than I trust any of our agencies.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
disgruntledemployee Gray Beard

disgruntledemployee

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, bfargin said:

The "intelligence" swamp trying to prevent a little spot light being directed on their lies and manipulation/circumvention of our laws. I trust her more than I trust any of our agencies.

But she's a Democrat in R clothing.  I thought you don't like lefties (well, maybe not far left, I don't think she like LGBT+/-*=×@# types).

Edited by disgruntledemployee
bfargin Gray Beard

bfargin

Posted
Posted

I’m def more conservative than she probably is, but she’s not a leftist. I’d probably place Tulsi more as a classical liberal with nuance on a spectrum of topics. Even i am probably not completely predictable on some topics though i am fairly consistent on desiring government to foster an atmosphere conducive to human flourishing putting the traditional family in its proper place as the bedrock of society. That doesn’t mean outlawing other structures but it also doesn’t mean encouraging/celebrating destructive behavior and ideologies. Encourage normal while also allowing for (not encouraging) some of the “abby normal”.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Smokin Gray Beard

Smokin

Posted
Posted

Based on the fact that she was a Democrat and is now a Republican, she is likely fairly centrist unless she had a massive swing in her beliefs or is a slimy politician (redundant?) that saw an advantage by switching sides and went full tilt right. 

Saying that she is a D wearing R's clothing is not very enlightening considering how far many Rs (like Trump) are from historical core conservative principles.  I'm starting to think that all it takes to be an R in Washington these days is to adopt the D's platform from 10 years ago.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
BashiChuni Gray Beard

BashiChuni

Posted
Posted (edited)

good points smokin. hell trump just sided with the longshoreman union, a position unimaginable from a republican president.

party dynamics are changing rapidly

Edited by BashiChuni
  • Upvote 1
disgruntledemployee Gray Beard

disgruntledemployee

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 hours ago, Smokin said:

Based on the fact that she was a Democrat and is now a Republican, she is likely fairly centrist unless she had a massive swing in her beliefs or is a slimy politician (redundant?) that saw an advantage by switching sides and went full tilt right. 

Saying that she is a D wearing R's clothing is not very enlightening considering how far many Rs (like Trump) are from historical core conservative principles.  I'm starting to think that all it takes to be an R in Washington these days is to adopt the D's platform from 10 years ago.

Well, based on your "feelings" I suppose our IC is in great hands.  I wonder what someone closer to the issue thinks.

The Hill reporting that her Senator meetings aren't going well.  Themes are: unprepared, she's got a lot to learn, nobody likes her.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5038091-tulsi-gabbard-struggles-senators/

Smokin Gray Beard

Smokin

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Well, based on your "feelings" I suppose our IC is in great hands.  I wonder what someone closer to the issue thinks.

The Hill reporting that her Senator meetings aren't going well.  Themes are: unprepared, she's got a lot to learn, nobody likes her.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5038091-tulsi-gabbard-struggles-senators/

I didn't say anything about "feelings", so strange to bring it up and even stranger to put it in quotes as if I said it.  Thoughts and feelings are very different and far too many people confuse the two. 

I don't put any trust in rumors, especially rumors from DC from 'someone closer to the issue' (apparently I only get to "feel", while they get to "think").  Assuming the rumors are true, which is a monumental assumption, needing to learn and people not liking her are no problem.  Likeability is not a qualification for a cabinet position.  Needing to learn sounds like an insider critique of someone that isn't an insider.  Washington, and thus our country, would be better off with fewer insiders.  Unprepared is a different matter, but I think (not feel) that it would be far easier to walk in prepared for a meeting with the President on a specific subject than to walk into a firing squad that can ask anything they want.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...