Drain the swamp

Supporters of President Trump are encouraged by the idea that we must "drain the swamp."  President Trump is an outsider fighting an entrenched bureaucracy and career politicians in both parties with vested interests in maintaining deficit spending, favoritism, and failed policies.  The slogan is powerful, as most objective observers have long recognized that the federal government is wasteful, corrupt, sclerotic, oppressive, and a hindrance to economic growth and creativity.

In response, the cleverer Trump opponents pretend to oppose the "swamp" also.  Their stated objection is that Trump is the "swamp" and that getting rid of Trump is the key to draining that "swamp."  They point to contrived claims against the president that have been endlessly investigated with no result for four years.

So we all supposedly agree that "the swamp" is bad and must be drained.  The Democrats' feigned opposition is clever, but not clever enough.  Adopting the Democrat position would mean there was no swamp before Trump became president.  The federal government was fine, uncorrupt, and fully responsive.  If we would only get rid of Trump, we could go back to the time when the following activities took place without interference or exposure:

  • Foreign governments could buy influence and receive favorable trade deals and military technology in return.
  • Entrenched bureaucrats could exercise the only real power in Washington and pursue their policies despite changes in administrations and new mandates from the voters.
  • Congress had no real power to stop bureaucratic excesses and, in many cases, no desire to stop those excesses.
  • Federal appellate courts wrote their opinions for the purpose of excusing or justifying every government initiative or social engineering experiment regardless of the Constitution.
  • Bureaucrats and politicians cooperated with corporate media to suppress information about scandals, waste, or counterproductive policies.
  • Bureaucrats owed their allegiance to political parties or foreign ideologies and would bring false criminal charges against innocent Americans in an effort to suppress reform.
  • Government agencies (e.g., "the Intelligence Community") were used as a rubber stamps when politicians allowed the sale of uranium to foreign countries in exchange for their own personal gain.
  • Government programs were used for the benefit of foreign invaders, with the resulting increase in crime and the overwhelming of local governments and schools.

These activities have not actually stopped.  But at least now they are controversial and face a greater risk of public exposure.  The swamp's batting average is no longer 1000.  Those who favor individual freedom over state control are encouraged by recent appointments to the federal bench.  A few bureaucrats have publicly lost their jobs.  Trade deals favorable to foreign governments are no longer rubber stamped.  The border wall is partially complete.  The voting public is beginning to learn of the connections between corporate media and big government.

The swamp is large and will take many years to drain.  But one thing is clear.  Returning to the days before Trump is not the answer.  Trump did not bring the swamp with him to Washington.  Those who claim to oppose the swamp cannot, in good faith, oppose President Trump.  The issue is not as muddy as the left would have us believe.  Either we oppose the swamp or we do not.  Those who oppose President Trump, in fact, support — whether they admit it or not — every corrupt item on the above list. 

Image: Calmuziclover.

Supporters of President Trump are encouraged by the idea that we must "drain the swamp."  President Trump is an outsider fighting an entrenched bureaucracy and career politicians in both parties with vested interests in maintaining deficit spending, favoritism, and failed policies.  The slogan is powerful, as most objective observers have long recognized that the federal government is wasteful, corrupt, sclerotic, oppressive, and a hindrance to economic growth and creativity.

In response, the cleverer Trump opponents pretend to oppose the "swamp" also.  Their stated objection is that Trump is the "swamp" and that getting rid of Trump is the key to draining that "swamp."  They point to contrived claims against the president that have been endlessly investigated with no result for four years.

So we all supposedly agree that "the swamp" is bad and must be drained.  The Democrats' feigned opposition is clever, but not clever enough.  Adopting the Democrat position would mean there was no swamp before Trump became president.  The federal government was fine, uncorrupt, and fully responsive.  If we would only get rid of Trump, we could go back to the time when the following activities took place without interference or exposure:

  • Foreign governments could buy influence and receive favorable trade deals and military technology in return.
  • Entrenched bureaucrats could exercise the only real power in Washington and pursue their policies despite changes in administrations and new mandates from the voters.
  • Congress had no real power to stop bureaucratic excesses and, in many cases, no desire to stop those excesses.
  • Federal appellate courts wrote their opinions for the purpose of excusing or justifying every government initiative or social engineering experiment regardless of the Constitution.
  • Bureaucrats and politicians cooperated with corporate media to suppress information about scandals, waste, or counterproductive policies.
  • Bureaucrats owed their allegiance to political parties or foreign ideologies and would bring false criminal charges against innocent Americans in an effort to suppress reform.
  • Government agencies (e.g., "the Intelligence Community") were used as a rubber stamps when politicians allowed the sale of uranium to foreign countries in exchange for their own personal gain.
  • Government programs were used for the benefit of foreign invaders, with the resulting increase in crime and the overwhelming of local governments and schools.

These activities have not actually stopped.  But at least now they are controversial and face a greater risk of public exposure.  The swamp's batting average is no longer 1000.  Those who favor individual freedom over state control are encouraged by recent appointments to the federal bench.  A few bureaucrats have publicly lost their jobs.  Trade deals favorable to foreign governments are no longer rubber stamped.  The border wall is partially complete.  The voting public is beginning to learn of the connections between corporate media and big government.

The swamp is large and will take many years to drain.  But one thing is clear.  Returning to the days before Trump is not the answer.  Trump did not bring the swamp with him to Washington.  Those who claim to oppose the swamp cannot, in good faith, oppose President Trump.  The issue is not as muddy as the left would have us believe.  Either we oppose the swamp or we do not.  Those who oppose President Trump, in fact, support — whether they admit it or not — every corrupt item on the above list. 

Image: Calmuziclover.