BloggeRhythms

Despite the searching, digesting and analyzing the news of the world each day, the reactions of Democrat leadership to Donald Trump’s presidential win have been extremely difficult to comprehend. Primarily because rather than trying to learn from their losses, adjusting  and striving to regain popularity and stature, Democrat leaders have chosen to react like spoiled children, pouting, whining and becoming totally obstreperous.    

Then, this morning, like a bolt out of the blue the reason for the Democrats reaction crystallized as I recalled a concept known as the Peter Principle.   

Formulated and published in 1969 by Laurence J. Peter, the management theory states (according to Wikipedia) that “the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence."

Peter suggests that "In time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties" and [the corollary] that "work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence." 

Peter also noted that “their incompetence may be because the required skills are different, but not more difficult. For example, an excellent engineer may be a poor manager because they might not have the interpersonal skills necessary to lead a team.” 

And that certainly seems to apply directly to Schumer, undoubtedly to VP candidate Tim Kaine, Nancy Pelosi and without a shred of doubt, Elizabeth Warren and Diane Feinstein. Because not one of them can present an intelligent, rational, positive reason to support them, instead choosing to denigrate, vilify, smear and discredit Trump and all those surrounding him.   

What’s also glaringly obvious is that their individual plights cannot be corrected, improved or eventually tenable because the required talents are absent in all of them. Which means that the future most likely holds louder, brasher even more incomprehensible rhetoric from the professionally disadvantaged group.  

In a similar circumstance, the vast majority of the mainstream media seems to be precisely in the very same boat. That can be evidenced in an article by Adam Geller and Matt Sedensky of the Associated Press @yahoo.com via Drudge this morning.

The authors use a series of interviews around the nation to establish their premise that Trump is determined to recast the role of government with “a whiff of Reaganism, and his plays on divisions are reminiscent of Richard Nixon,” according to a historian.”

They then go on to frame his opening days as "governing-by-upheaval" which they opine is unsettling for many, “even to some who voted for the shake-up that Trump promised.”

An example comes from Pastor Mike Bergman at his church in Adrian, Missouri: “There is worry about some of the political rhetoric ... about how all that is going to cause the divide in the community to deepen and more bitterness to spring up between the people of our country. I wouldn't say we're really optimistic right now.”

Taking their premise further, the authors relate that “Trump is hardly the first president to take office promising wholesale change in the face of substantial skepticism. But Kevin Boyle, a professor of American history at Northwestern University who compared Trump to Reagan and Nixon, said the clashes set off by the administration are unique.” 

"I cannot in my adult life think of a moment that compares to this," he said. "The level of tension between these two competing visions of the country needs to be resolved in some way or another." 

And in that manner, the authors paint their picture of significant unrest and trepidation across the nation, intimating that a majority of citizens are greatly concerned about Trump’s future plans and actions. 

What’s most remarkable, though, is that the article was followed by 329 reactions, virtually all of them not only fully supportive of Trump to date, but receiving significant “Likes” from readers in agreement with those who posted comments. Here are the first five respondents in order:   

Reader trigger warning wrote: “A President follows the law and the Constitution and that is called "upheaval". The media is absolutely dishonest.”

271 liked the comment, 19 did not.

Michaelm posted: “For the first time in history, this President is going to keep his promises. No reason to wonder.”

229  Likes, 16 no’s.

jim wrote: “For all of the people angry with what President Trump is doing, in the latest poll 51% approve of his temporary halt to refugees and his handling of other business. This is why he was elected over that cr^ppy choice of Hillary.”

188 agreed, 12 opposed.

USAFDEAD1 wrote: “Fantastic job President Trump! Can't wait until week 3 to see what liberals will freak out over next!!!

166 Likes,  8 no’s.

American added: “Here's a clue for y'all...he's doing what he said he would. That is why he got voted into office.”

192 Likes,  8 No’s.

The totals are 1,046 "Likes," 63 opposed, equaling 6 tenths of  a percent. 

And that is a microcosm of what seems to be the case throughout out Middle-America, whereas while the Democrat party leadership and the MSM present purported evidence of dissatisfaction and unrest among the citizenry, citizens themselves feel precisely the opposite. Which is clearly why Trump was elected in the first place. 
  
Deepening the hole Democrats are digging for themselves at present, is the dilemma created when irrational positions are taken in the face of both, contradictory information and factual reality.

This can be seen in the current tirade against Trump's executive order on immigration whereas the seven Muslim-majority countries targeted were initially identified as "countries of concern" under the Obama administration. 

As reported by Kyle Blaine and Julia Horowitz, @cnn.com, “White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer on Sunday pointed to the Obama administration's actions as the basis for their selection of the seven countries. Trump's order bars citizens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.”

What’s more, "There were further travel restrictions already in place from those seven countries," Spicer said on ABC's "This Week."  

“In December 2015, President Obama signed into law a measure placing limited restrictions on certain travelers who had visited Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria on or after March 1, 2011. Two months later, the Obama administration added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen to the list, in what it called an effort to address "the growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters." 

“The restrictions specifically limited what is known as visa-waiver travel by those who had visited one of the seven countries within the specified time period. People who previously could have entered the United States without a visa were instead required to apply for one if they had traveled to one of the seven countries.”

So, here we have unrefutable evidence of steps already taken for good reason by a loved and revered Democrat president, Obama. But when a Republican does precisely the same thing he’s a deranged “loose cannon,” to those very same Democrats.    

Yet, all that Trump really did was take the first step through an executive order to ensure the entire system works. And that those coming in from places having a history that U.S. intelligence suggests we need to have further extreme vetting for are identified.

Although Trump's order is much broader than Obama’s whereas it bans all citizens from those seven countries from entering the U.S. and leaves green card holders subject to being rescreened after visiting those countries, it’s only in place for ninety days. 

The order states, "I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order."

Which brings us back to today’s opening premise which focuses on the imperative of intelligent planning and doing one’s homework. Something today’s Democrat leadership seems unwilling, or more likely, unable to do. And that is what will eventually come back to bite them. 

Because the things they are loudly railing and rioting against are not only necessary for insuring the nation’s safety and future, they were originally instituted by their own revered idol, Obama. 

And what’s worse for them is that, since Trump knows well that they will instantly take an opposing stance to whatever he utters, he’ll continue proposing those things that will make the nation great again. And in that way he’ll have Democrats objecting, railing, ranting and vehemently decrying all that the vast majority of American voters hope for and want, thereby fueling their own political demise.

That’s it for today folks. 

Adios