Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 8/2/2017 at 9:13 PM, DonRocks said:

I was told, by someone who really knows the situation, to read this:

"John Kelly and His Son's Memory Bring Decency to the White House" by Michael Daly on thedailybeast.com

I don't know if that article was meant to scare me but it sure did! He has a real holier than thou attitude about him. Political meddling by legislators? It's their JOB! This guy sounds like he'd be fine with a dictator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought his reference to "political meddling" there had to do with the bloviating that some members of Congress do without ever accomplishing or even attempting any change. Right before that paragraph he said, "If lawmakers do not like the laws they’ve passed and we are charged to enforce—then they should have the courage and skill to change the laws." Can't really argue with that.

Regardless, I doubt I agree with General Kelly on many policy issues -- especially immigration-related ones -- but he seemed competent and sane, and I felt like DHS made out pretty well in the initial round of cabinet appointees. (Yes, the bar is that low.) As a DHS employee I'm terrified to see who comes next!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2017 at 8:57 AM, MC Horoscope said:

I don't know if that article was meant to scare me but it sure did! He has a real holier than thou attitude about him. Political meddling by legislators? It's their JOB! This guy sounds like he'd be fine with a dictator.

The article describing Marine General Kelly  struck me.  There is a level of service through the military that is so remarkably different than my own experiences that it was startling.  Having not served in the military, having grown or age during the period when the Vietnam war was raging, having been faced with a draft for a war that was highly controversial, wherein 10's of thousands of young Americans died and 100's of thousands were injured, under conditions which millions of Americans debated and which questioned the wisdom and honesty of our leaders, I had no interest in serving.  I was simply spared a decision or taking actions because I was young enough to be draft eligible when the size of the draft had diminished and then was ended.  I didn't have to act.

But the time and period were so etched in my brain that serving in the military was something far removed from my reality.

Having said the above the article that described General Kelly's devotion to service, country, the Marines etc was powerful and imho deserving of tremendous respect.  Citizens such as me owe citizens such as General Kelly respect.  

There appears to be a level of respect and reality in his words.  I'm far happier Seinfeld someone like Kelly in his current position than others.  I wouldn't be surprised if his immense devotion to duty is being down to try and protect us from a dangerous nut case.  (There are reports that he and Mattis made a pact to that effect.

I suspect my politics are night and day different than his but I have new respect for his integrity and reality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MC Horoscope said:

I don't like talk like the greatest people on Earth are military. Is there a scale or contest?

Definitely not, but I'm pretty sure the greatest people on Earth are at least sane, and regardless of ideology, it seems like a lot of people are banking on him not being batshit crazy. 

If the greatest people on Earth are military, does that include the military of other countries too? (He did say "Earth," right?)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2017 at 11:14 AM, DaveO said:

There appears to be a level of respect and reality in his words.  I'm far happier Seinfeld someone like Kelly in his current position than others.  I wouldn't be surprised if his immense devotion to duty is being down to try and protect us from a dangerous nut case.  (There are reports that he and Mattis made a pact to that effect.

I suspect my politics are night and day different than his but I have new respect for his integrity and reality

Dammit.  Danged quartet of mobile, fat fingers, auto fill, and not paying attention.  Sorry

15 hours ago, MC Horoscope said:

Just me but Kelly scares me as much as G. Gordon Liddy. I don't like talk like the greatest people on Earth are military. Is there a scale or contest?

Having seen some of your posts on non foodie issues I sensed we might agree on a good many issues.  Not this one though. 

The article's description of Kelly floored me.  My own perspective is vastly different.  Frankly it impressed me.  I'd rather see a person with that level of integrity in his position than others, at least as the article described his devotion to service and level of sanity and balance (in general).

Are the greatest people on Earth military???   Not that I'm aware, nor does the article suggest Kelly being one of the "greatest people".  Nor would I personally tend to rank them at that level (some exceptions might be merited depending on time and circumstances).  I suppose we might just agree to disagree.

Meanwhile this article was what I found terribly alarming; not that those two did that, but that they early on decided it was critical.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is fascinating and somewhat connected to the topic.  On Sunday an article came out in which a series  of tweets from various US generals in leadership were dissected.  The generals tweeted their opposition to Trump's initial response on the Charlottesville march

The article reviews the history of the US military as to its integration and speaks to how the Generals acknowledge a need to assure all personnel that their perspective was not the same as that of the President.

I'm not suggesting Kelly or any of these generals are "the most important people in the world".  After all, following the Charlottesville incident and the President's response, his business and arts advisory councils disbanded.  Members disagreed with him.  There was plenty of disagreement across a wide swath of the population, including notable members of the GOP.

Good bit of history in the article let alone analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thoughtful comments!

If I may lower the bar here for a moment, I am reluctant to wish Kelly a lot of luck. I kind of feel like his position is comparable to Billy Crystal's helping Robert De Niro in Analyze This. To paraphrase, what's his goal here? A happy, well-adjusted gangster!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MC Horoscope said:

If I may lower the bar here for a moment, I am reluctant to wish Kelly a lot of luck. I kind of feel like his position is comparable to Billy Crystal's helping Robert De Niro in Analyze This. To paraphrase, what's his goal here? A happy, well-adjusted gangster!

😂.  I suppose so. Haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to beat this issue to a dead horse, but.....

Charles Lane wrote an editorial in the Washington Post  

that further touches on the general topic; not so specifically on Kelly.  An interesting read from my perspective.

To sum up he basically says the "generals" are more mature, sane, responsible and trustworthy than Trump.   He also briefly reviews the history for fearing the rise of generals within a nation, our appropriate fears for this type of situation, references the historical problems in Latin America, etc.   I certainly would have a fear of giving too much power to generals.  Its a perspective learned through our history.  We are in a different situation now than in previous times.

We really are facing vastly different circumstances, in fact circumstances I never could have imagined.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any movement here on Kelly since last August? 

Did I say I think he is very contemptuous of civilians, which does not even comport with his military mission?

Was he himself "LAZY as a Dreamer" (think "DRUNK as an Astronaut") about the character of his chief assistant? Wow, was that ugly to imply a lot of the Dreamers are just plain lazy? Was he referring to Dreamers who actually served in our military? Because there ARE some. What does he propose to do with them? Deport them? I thought military people were the greatest people in the world! Remember that kind of talk?

You don't have to be a partisan Democrat to reject such an uncivil tone from Mr. Kelly.  I am just blowing back here. Don't mean to be uncivil. Just as HARSH as possible!! As HARSH as him!

Did he himself "get off his ass" to care about wife beatings by his assistant? Does not look like it!

This is mind boggling. The mind boggles at this.

Do NOT understand the respect for him "chaperoning" a man such as T. Let T fail. He MUST fail for the good of us, in my opinion. Am I a target of the people T supporters want to "get back at" by voting for him? 'Fraid so! If you knew me you would see how ridiculous that is.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MC Horoscope said:

Any movement here on Kelly since last August? 

Yes

The more I and the public see(s) of Kelly the more his political nature and personality emerge.  

I personally find it unattractive and at times disgraceful.  

Still he remains a step above and at times a restraint on Trump but that is such an absurdly low and ever falling bar that it is neither  praiseworthy or noteworthy.  We have fallen to disgusting and possibly dangerous lows.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“'He Was F---ing Pissed': With Rob Porter Gone, the Heat on John Kelly Is Increasing" by Gabriel Sherman on vanityfair.com

More drama from this moronic administration.

How the fuck does a former fucking model and fucking socialite have any fucking power in the fucking White House? Maybe 45 could give Paris Hilton a call and get her onboard. Hell, I'd rather have her as prez.

My head hurts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would someone, without partisan commentary, link to a couple of articles that explain General Kelly's recent decline? I hear him on the news all the time, but I *still* can't place my finger on exactly what he's doing. Is this a partisan viewpoint, or is it general consensus that he has fared poorly of late?

(I understand that this particular era in our nation's history goes beyond merely being "partisan," which is why I'm not discouraging some discussion about certain events that I would have frowned upon in both the GWBII and Obama Presidencies. Sometimes, it takes a lot of willpower not to chime in myself, but I'm going to continue to try and maintain an even hand here as moderator - my personal views can be found elsewhere.)

---

[Edit: Mike, I'll look at that article you just posted - I should be able to walk back through some of the links in it, and get the whole picture.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DonRocks said:

[Edit: Mike, I'll look at that article you just posted - I should be able to walk back through some of the links in it, and get the whole picture.]

A better and more detailed article:

Unwelcome Attention for John Kelly, the Man Enlisted to Bring Calm  by Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman from the NYT

I wouldn't say I have any love for the guy, but I thought he'd at least keep a leash on 45. If a retired USMC General can't reign him in, who can?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, DonRocks said:

Would someone, without partisan commentary, link to a couple of articles that explain General Kelly's recent decline? I hear him on the news all the time, but I *still* can't place my finger on exactly what he's doing. Is this a partisan viewpoint, or is it general consensus that he has fared poorly of late?

Here is a start:  Unwelcome Attention for John Kelly, the Man Enlisted to Bring Calm, by Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, Feb. 8, 2018, on nytimes.com.  Maggie Haberman is all over this White House.  We need to support responsible journalism like the New York Times, The Atlantic, and The New Yorker.  As we are all learning, freedom is not free after all.  We need to work at it.  Democracy Dies in Darkness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience Trump sets such an incredibly low bar.  It is unprecedented.  I heard about him ripping off businesses and people first from a real estate industry colleague in a Philadelphia office then later from another in a NYC office.  That was back in the earlier 1980's.  I heard from a relative of him doing a similar thing to a friend/client.  That was in the early 90's. 

The type of thing he did to others was done to me in the 80's by someone local. It turned out to be so odious and costly at the time I pushed it out of my memory, only to come to grips with it again by virtue of some recent conversations that got me to recall all the details.  The cost to me was in the low  five figures.  To fight it I would have had to employ excellent and expensive legal assistance and the laws then and now are such that even if you win on a commercial case of that sort you cannot sue for damages.  So even if you win there are expensive legal fees and the unaccountable costs of time.  You end up deciding if the case is worth it or not.  Moreover the person/institution who did this to me had legal staff who would argue and prolong the case.  It really doesn't cost them anything more.  It costs me (or you or anyone else) tons more in legal fees from delays and motions and legal time.  The same SOB who did that to me did it to a small business with which I'm familiar.  Fortunately for the smaller business their principle had been either an associate or partner at one of DC's most prominent firms and his friends/former colleagues were giving him legal expertise at a tiny fraction of their real cost.  Because of that he prevailed but it took an interminable long time running up to about two years and I was the "sucker" that closed the deal, being willing to take a partial commission haircut to get everyone to ultimately agree.

Trump has an unprecedented volume of thousands of law suits of this nature.  They don't include all the situations where he wasn't sued but someone whom he took advantage of settled for a payment that was worth pennies on dollars.  In business there are fortunately a very very small minority who engage in this behavior and none others of which I'm aware who have done it on a serial basis over decades.    The theory is that if one gets labeled with the branding of such a crook, others won't deal with you.  In reality Trump has shown future such people that the market is huge and "crooks' can get away with this in a very vast environment.  That alone doesn't bode well for the future of the business environment.  It would render all contracts and agreements unenforceable.

None of what he did made that huge of a public and publicized splash before he entered politics.  Who knows why.  None of that has any reflection on other elements of his personality or character that became public in the course of the election and afterwards.

The bar he sets is amazingly low.  Kelly rises above that bar.  Admittedly we are speaking of the lowest conceivable bar.

I was struck by the "nobility and level of service" in the article sourced in the opening post.  I still believe that is a rare and valuable element of character.  As I've learned more I see that Kelly's perspective and politics are very different than mine.  Still he has such an unbelievably low bar to rise above that whom he is serving.

We are living in unbelievable times.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, maybe we can reach back in time and get President Ford's Chiefs of Staff.

I heard, from an extremely reliable source, pretty much the day that Reince Preibus became Chief of Staff, that both he and Sean Spicer were in *way* over their heads, and that neither could possibly survive; Kelly, coming in, seemed like he might be the ballast needed to steady this ship, and get the albatross off the neck of the Presidency.

"And I had done an
hellish thing,
And it would work 'em woe:
For all averred, I had killed the bird
That made the breeze to blow.
Ah wretch! said they, the bird to slay
That made the breeze to blow."

-- Samuel Taylor Coleridge, from "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner"

On a brighter note, Julie Newmar portrayed what was arguably the first-ever hippy on television in the 1962 "Route 66" episode, "How Much a Pound Is Albatross?"

(I guess you didn't see that one coming, did you.)

Things seem to be in such disarray, that I'm not sure you can judge any one "thing" in isolation - maybe this wife-beater (which is another name for, ironically, ironically (not a typo), a tank-top (*)) is the lesser of two evils or something. In the NY Times article, Kelly said, "he [Rob Porter] is a friend, a confidant, and a trusted professional" - recall James Carville's book, "Stickin': The Case for Loyalty": This might be an example of that (I'm not assuming a position; merely trying to explore possible scenarios).

(*) Picture a picture of those three together, Kelly, Trump (wearing the genuinely ugly "Make America Great Again" cap), and Porter, with arrows pointing to each person, left-to-right, and captions that say: "Tank-Top," "Red-Top," "Wife-Beater." The picture can be titled "Ewe Essay: Skudde, Wiltipoll, Beltex."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kelly offers account of Porter exit that some White House aides consider untrue, by Philip Rucker and Josh Dawsey,  February 9, 2018, on washingtopost.com.  Clearly the only way to reclaim his credibility is blatantly to lie about the situation.  I wonder where he learned that trick?

And now the topper...  Trump says he wishes aide accused of domestic violence well, hopes he’ll have a great career ahead of him, by Associated Press February 9 at 1:05 PM, on washingtonpost.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DonRocks said:

On a brighter note, Julie Newmar portrayed what was arguably the first-ever hippy on television in the 1962 "Route 66" episode, "How Much a Pound Is Albatross?"

Death  of  Hippie.  To some it is a pejorative word.  Peter Coyote was a Digger.   So was Emmett Grogan.  He wrote a fine autobiography - Ringolevio: A Life Played for Keeps - which may or may not be completely accurate.  It was out of print for a long time, but is available again on Amazon.  If you are interested as to how Haight-Ashbury operated under the covers, it is a must read.  In New Jersey Ringolevio was a popular pastime around my neighborhood.  Free association over.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
×
×
  • Create New...