All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Perhaps the dumbest WSJ column ever

From the stuffy Wall Street Journal's opinion pages:
Trump Agonistes
Surprise, he didn’t run his campaign any smarter than his government.


Hahahaha.

Trump ran his campaign so lousy that he beat the candidate that the Wall Street Journal's own deputy editorial page editor wanted to win all 50 states and D.C. too.

President Donald Trump the First spent half as much money and won.

And another thing, what in the heck does the Wall Street Journal think is wrong with the way President Trump runs the government?

That is an opinion without facts.

President Trump has signed 37 executive orders that among other things protect fracking, coal-mining, and raising chickens without fear of the EPA shutting you down because rainwater drains off your land.

He signed 14 congressional acts that roll back last-minute regulations by Obama.

He has appointed Cabinet secretaries and allowed them to do their jobs with little interference. They can even disagree with him publicly.

In other words, as president, Trump has done everything the Wall Street Journal said it wanted a president to do.

Said.

Trump is not a politician -- but he beat them all, didn't he?

The Journal bitched when President-elect Trump got companies to commit to more manufacturing jobs in America.

The Wall Street Journal is a shell of its former self.

Sir Rupert Murdoch and his editorial board at the wall Street Journal have inhaled too much globalism.

From the Journal:
Many decisions by the Trump-for-president campaign were ill-advised. Certainly that goes for a meeting between the president’s son and a Russian lawyer who claimed to have dirt on Hillary Clinton but was really trying to get her foot in the door to lobby the Republican nominee against the Magnitsky Act.
The Washington Post celebrates the latest revelation as a “grave new set of facts.” Maybe this really is the beginning of the end, but an awful lot depends on the email bluster of a former British tabloid journalist who apparently was the go-between.
Before keeling over, remember what else was going on at the time. The U.S. media even then were getting ready to pour considerable resources into trying to corroborate lurid “Trump Dossier” accusations explicitly attributed by the dossier’s author to Russian intelligence, and assembled at the expense of Republican and Democratic opponents of Mr. Trump.
A lot of what you’re seeing is just naked political warfare, at which Team Trump is failing badly, in fact getting buried.
Who does the Wall Street Journal think it is fooling by running this tripe about Trump's campaign and governance that editorial writer Holman W. Jenkins Jr. wrote?

Did nobody say, hey look, kid, Trump ran against a well-liked incumbent's party, an opponent who spent twice as much money, and the press -- and he still beat us. Maybe -- just maybe -- he is as good at politics and running the government as he is at building resorts, writing books, and making TV shows.

But no.

The once prestigious Wall Street Journal has a joke editorial board that learned nothing from 2016 when it was wrong about the primaries, the nomination, and the election.

Since the election every single nonsensical, foolish, Russian conspiracy has fallen apart and yet, the Wall Street Journal doubles down on the latest batch of drivel.

Where are the urinating hookers?

Magnitsky Act? Sounds like the Emoluments Clause, anti-nepotism laws, the Logan Act, and all those other straws the media grasped.

With the publication of this piece, the Journal on Wednesday leaped right into impeachment, as he ended it:
Yesterday, Democratic and news media types were already pronouncing the verdict treason. We can’t resist ending with Mr. Rich’s 1974 quote from Elizabeth Drew about Nixon, which applies as much to some of Mr. Trump’s critics today: “There was no one to challenge his assumptions, to set him straight in his confusion of political opponents with enemies. He didn’t recognize boundaries. He never learned to observe limits—anything went.”
Seriously, they think they can remove Donald Trump from the presidency and people in 30 states won't object?

The nakedness of their desperate attempts overturn the 2016 election alone dooms their effort.

President Trump and his progeny should take this craziness serious, but the rest of us peons don't have to.

He ran his campaign like he runs his government. Quite well.




Caution: Readers occasionally may laugh out loud at the media as they read this account of Trump's election.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.



Caution: Readers occasionally may laugh out loud at the media as they read this account of Trump's nomination.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.

Autographed copies of both books are available by writing me at DonSurber@GMail.com

Please follow me on Twitter.

Friend me on Facebook.

15 comments:

  1. "Trump is not a politician -- but he beat them all, didn't he?"

    He is, however, very aware of the political world, knows how to play politically and has been his entire life.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Trump campaign gets the best return on investment of any campaign in recent history and the newspaper supposedly devoted to business somehow thinks it was shoddy. Those people know nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Word, Don. You just took the WSJ to the woodshed.
    Well done.

    Perhaps someone else from the WSJ wants to follow Bret Stephens to the NYT?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I used to kinda like the WSJ, but it's lost me now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. They want to evoke Samson Agonistes? Well, then, let them remember how that story ended: with Samson blinded and dead, yes, but with the Philistine ruling class dead along with him. If that's what they want...

    ReplyDelete
  6. My President is smart enough to not have any money invested in the WSJ or NYT.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Certainly that goes for a meeting between the president’s son and a Russian lawyer who claimed to have dirt on Hillary Clinton but was really trying to get her foot in the door to lobby the Republican nominee against the Magnitsky Act."

    She came, she made her sales pitch, she left empty-handed. That's a fine example of something, but agreement or meeting of the minds it is not.

    -Mikey NTH

    ReplyDelete
  8. " The U.S. media even then were getting ready to pour considerable resources into trying to corroborate lurid “Trump Dossier” accusations explicitly attributed by the dossier’s author to Russian intelligence, and assembled at the expense of Republican and Democratic opponents of Mr. Trump."

    So getting information from RUSSIANS is fine as long as your name is not Trump.

    Duly noted.

    -Mikey NTH

    ReplyDelete
  9. So the Wall Street Journal has also decided to join the Democratic Asslicker Brigade? More's the pity. I thought that paper was supposed to cover, uh, you know, like, THE STOCK MARKET? I guess they've transcended that. You're missing a great game, clones. Another new record for the Dow today? Wow - not bad for an incompetent president. Oh, and anyone who believes that the Demmies treat us as political opponents rather than enemies should be admitted to the Trans Allegany Lunatic Asylum. Kathy Griffin, Johnny Depp, Maxine Waters, et al...stick em up your ass, WSJ.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Since I no longer waste money on the Journal I didn't read this and won't so I can speak from near perfect ignorance, but I live in New York so I'm not out of touch.
    Murdoch never liked Trump. He had backed HC in her senate race. Like the boys at Goldman at a later time, he wanted a comfortable relationship with someone he knew
    would not only take his calls but also do his bidding for money. Mergers and acquisitions with content providers are key to expanding a media and telecommunication empire wherein government regulation is always so tiresome.
    In the election, Trump was a wild card who Murdoch, like most in media, expected to lose. The insults piled on Trump by his ideologic flagship, even though Trump was a Republican with a reasonably conservative agenda, not only reflect this but were never matched in similar vitriol against his opponent. They were in fact really paper mache sacrifices of ideology to hide his own solid expectations from a Clinton victory. After all, he could say to HC and her supporters when she won that he helped suppress the Trump vote, and to conservatives he held to ideological purity. In fact, Even his right wing tabloid the NY Post, which I do receive, never endorsed DT. Now it too has become rat faced, trashing DTJr as "criminally stupid".
    Rupert was a great Aussie entrepreneur who made a fortune putting real tits and ass on page 3. It was alchemy for the print press never seen before and the foundation of a vast empire.
    Later he wanted prestige. He bought The golden broad sheet of conservative journalistic integrity for 5 billion and promised its former owners to make it greater than the NYT. He has now transmuted his prize into lead, a remarkable feat of alchemy again, but one also accomplished by the Dark Lord Bezos for 1/20 the cost.
    All of us of a certain age have seen the world change remarkably and I perhaps dwell too much on it, but I do anyway. My 4th grade teacher came to California from Utah in a covered wagon . We built a log cabin in her classroom, then carved guns out of balsa wood and had a shoot out with the girls who were the indians. Unthinkable now
    In the 40 years after us kids had cabin fever,
    The WSJ was a fine if stogy paper. It was owned by a family of integrity and in the Reagan era had a really great editor, in my opinion the best of all papers of all times, Robert Bartley.
    Perhaps Fortunately for him, he died before Murdoch let the present hack piss onto his beautiful and trenchant editorial page whiney, lame, futile screeds. Indeed Rupert himself seems to have debased the whole paper, merely for an empty political promise of yet more coin or maybe some social acceptance for his sons from the smart set in NYC. He will never reignite its former broad golden sheets, now forever Never Trump lead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well written. Bigly. Love to hear reporting from the front lines. I just continue to be flummoxed by the ways these so-called geniuses of business seem intent on deliberately shutting out a potential audience by saying things they know are gonna piss us off. Is the social acceptance really that important to them? Pretty sad. REALLY sad. And dumb.

      Delete
    2. I do not know anybody close to Murdoch, ZR. But when O'Reilly was "exposed" by the NYT his newly empowered Fox scion is reported to have been most distressed that the scandal was reported "on the front page of the NYT" and openly bewailed his embarrassment . It was the fact that the NYT had done it that shamed him, not the "crime". In NYC the NYT is the Vatican of respectability for the neuveaux seeking social Grace. It's approval means you are somebody of true Worth, and will avoid the fate of all the benighted,the social Jaws of Leviathan, disapproval, nobody nohow, doomed. It is of interest that it's soft beams of love have never fallen upon Trump or any member of his family.

      Delete
  11. Me, I want to line up a Jurassic Park brontosaurus and a WSJ reporter, kick 'em both in the tail, and see which nerve impulse gets to the respective walnut-sized brain first.

    ReplyDelete