The Best People

It has been 100 percent predictable as well as immensely amusing to watch the four constituencies try their damnedest to denigrate Donald Trump's summit with the Nokos. The same elite constituencies who were, no more than six months ago, suggesting that Trump would undoubtedly get us into a full-blown nuclear war are now gravely concerned (frowns and furrowed foreheads all around) that Kim Jong-un got some TV time, or that our flag and the NoKo flag were sitting next to one another, or that "there aren't enough details" in the loose commitment to denuclearize or that Trump was played (gosh, those same elites seemed remarkably sanguine when Barack Obama actually was played by the mad Mullahs of Iran), or that we've committed to cancel war games (oh, the humanity) in an effort to show good faith, or ... I know, this does get tedious.

Because Trump has made more progress with North Korea in 18 months than Clinton, Bush and Obama made over a period of 24 years, the Trump Derangement Syndrome crowd doesn't know where to turn. At CNN and MSNBC (along with the vast majority of main stream media sites), the trained hamsters are demonstrating a combination of bias and idiocy that will do nothing to polish the already abysmal public perception of their "journalism." They are beclowning themselves, and they don't even know it.

They drag in "foreign policy experts" who have been consistently wrong about everything associated with NoKo (and most other international issues) and encourage them to criticize Trump's efforts. They question Trump's stability, intelligence and sanity, but lack the humility to recognize that their own stability, intelligence and sanity did not insulate them from failure after failure—some catastrophic.

Matthew J. Peterson comments on all of this expert (and unhinged) criticism with an understandable dose of cynicism:

Assuming North Korea has some desire to reform itself—admittedly, the very assumption we are now testing—the biggest obstacle to peace on the Korean Peninsula is the disastrous legacy of Hillary-Obama foreign policy, which mimics decades of earlier, similar American failures.

Even if Kim Jong-un is willing to make a deal trading in nukes for becoming the hero and leader of a potentially burgeoning economy, thanks to the previous administration he’s worried about getting killed with the assistance of the United States government as happened with Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi.

Gaddafi gave up his nuclear program in Libya in exchange for the promise that we wouldn’t depose him during a Republican administration. He kept his part of the bargain. When Obama and Hillary came into office, and Hillary supported the rebellion against him, they helped cause a continental humanitarian refugee crisis after his death.

“We came, we saw, he died,” Clinton publicly joked of Gaddafi’s ouster. But, of course, she and Obama were surrounded by all the best people. They were all very smart. Very well educated. Perfectly competent. Rational. Professional. Not like the nasty Trumpsters.

Meanwhile, the human slave trade is thriving in Libya.

Of course, Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, so I suppose it was all Hillary’s fault.

But you still worry that Trump is constitutionally incapable of living up to the expert wisdom and Nobel Prize-winning peace of the Bush-Obama legacy?

It amazes me how all of the "best people ... all very smart. Very well educated. Perfectly competent. Rational. Professional" can be so consistently wrong about so much.

The DTS crowd turns to these failures for commentary and direction. The deplorables reject their incompetence, their hubris and their blatant bias and instead are willing to risk another, admittedly disruptive, approach.