This morning I put “Donald Trump” into my Apple iPad search engine and got anti president reports from England’s The Guardian and Russian-oligarch-owned , The Independent. Other media organizations also wrote disparagingly of the president. Many were complaining of his travel expenses and apparent laziness. Some told of how his supporters were losing heart and complained that of all the places in the world he could have chosen for his vacation, he’s spending his 17 day holiday in New Jersey, U.S.A..
Then I checked the Drudge Report on my Dell computer’s search engine and through a couple of links found a Politico article giving some administrative perspective about America’s 17 year war in Afghanistan that shows the not-so-lazy president questioning the need to play safe and continue that war for 17 more years.
Though the Politico report seems objective (not full of derogatory media rebuke)its make-him-look-bad header implies that there is nothing of substance worth reading just the typical dysfunctional White house and “A president who doesn’t want to be there”/ doesn’t like his job?
The Trump White House’s War Within
His national security team wants a stepped-up fight in Afghanistan. There’s just one problem: A president who doesn’t want to be there.
By SUSAN B. GLASSER
July 24, 2017
Anyone, me for instance, who saw those television captions blaring 300 billion dollars in deals made in the kingdom of Saud might have thought that those deals were the result of President Trump’s first trip abroad to make America “great again”. When I woke up this morning those deals sent to oblivion by captions informing of the FBI’s investigating his son-in-law, I recalled my initial surprise at the many big corporate names like too-big-to-fail banker Dimond who had accompanied him. I recalled that those corporate leaders were keeping their corporations great by maintaining the House of Saud’s means of mining, marketing and protecting its resources, and that the President of the United States of America was simply their sales rep.
“…A nation? says Bloom. A nation is the same people living in the same place.
— By God, then, says Ned, laughing, if that’s so I’m a nation for I’m living in the same place for the past five years…”
(Leopold Bloom and Ned Lambert of 1904 Dublin in James Joyce’s Ulysses)
Tony Blair former British Labour Prime Minister expresses a faith in a notion of globalism that marries economics and trade with religion and spirit. But enthusiasm for global connectedness ignores the basis of most civil institutions’ separateness: language, custom, law, and even national religion. For a nation‘s characteristics are manifest in the ways individuals are taught to behave and think in accord with their countries’ institutions. So despite global trade’s sometimes overruling such principles of national, civil behaviour, the struggle for nationhood continues. In Palestine of the Middle East, in African territories, in Canada’s Quebec and even in Texas of the USA, almost as an anachronism of modern Europe in this contemporary world where national tariff confines are bending and dissolving in a sea of international manufacturing, the desire to maintain a state identity persists. Ignoring prospects for gain made possible by global trade a strange preoccupation with where you’re from and what people make and do there still seems a greater concern for many than getting more than one’s neighbours have in the global market place.