[TheRealThing]

I read it but I didn't see much news in the article. I follow the news very closely, TRT. I am aware that there are conservatives that elected not to vote for Trump in the election and that some of them very actively oppose parts of Trump's agenda, and a few seem bent on opposing everything that he tries to do. I don't find that surprising at all. Obama had opposition in his own party who didn't think that he was liberal enough. No president manages to win 100 percent support within his own party.

So, it is not a matter of me finally seeing the light. I was never a William Krystol fan before the 2016 campaign and I believe that he has acted in a very petty way since the election. The same goes for many of the other well known NeverTrumpers. But as a conservative American, I respect their right to support or oppose whomever they choose. What purpose does it serve to call them names and disparage them as if they have any real influence over the general electorate?

Donald Trump is a very polarizing figure, not because his agenda is extreme - in most cases I don't find him conservative enough - but because he and so many of his supporters go out of their way to offend people who agree with his agenda 80 percent or more of the time. I know that you and JP do not see Trump as a divider, but the fact that millions of Republicans do see him that way is a problem for him, and it is not a problem that NeverTrumpers, RINOs, the media, or Democrats created.

As the greatest Republican president in the modern era said, a person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally, not a 20 percent traitor.

Kind of seems like you're being a little petty yourself there Hoot. Instead you might try properly assessing the sloth and covetousness with which the traditionally convicted of this land are beset. Our national slide is being presided over by somebody, someplace, and it certainly isn't the President. Any remote possibility it could be the oppositionist political establishment? Instead of the honest governance of their charge for which they are being paid, the left and RINO's choose to spend all their time rather in pursuit of the resistance. They disguise their continual Trump attacks, as informed critiques of the one man in modern times with the courage to identify our ills and speak out irrespective of the fusillade of incoming he has been willing to endure. And he hasn't done this because of ego or any other selfish motivation. On the contrary, he has suffered the afore mentioned indignities on behalf of the millions being force fed the monkey puke now for decades. Dan Coats comes to mind. I thought he should have been fired for the comments he made following the Helsinki Summit. Last eve I heard several of the Congress say Coats should now be canned for the Intelligence Assessment he made to the Senate.

And for the record, I saw the unvarnished truth in that article.

From the bolded onward, I disagree with you completely. Liberals are the ones fomenting divide. They as you point out, have had the microphone now in this land for decades. Their base are those who like to lay in bed till noon, and lay the blame for their personal ills on others. And their leaders all like to lay the same sort of stuff usually associated with cattle. You already mentioned Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite and all those coming after, of the media. They hated the mindset of the right, which I firmly believe emanated down through time directly from the founders themselves. Further, I believe the present state of rabidity characterized by the extreme left of state and federal government, was encouraged by the efforts of the media as their openly hostile opposition to our traditionally conservative origins have clearly and steadfastly demonstrated.

I don't know how conservative Trump really is, but any rational minded man knows for this land to thrive we must strike a reasonable balance with our opposites. The idea being, those from the left very often at some point choose of their own volition to come to the light. Unfortunately that choice has become far more problematic owing to the greatly exacerbated level of contempt. Said contempt is in vogue in every imaginable venue, from the indoctrination campaign being waged in our educational system, to many Churches, to the Academy Awards, to late night TV, to Union Halls, to stand up comedy. We are awash in it. Now, you can blame President Trump for all of this and you no doubt will, but it's just a shade larger an issue than the character and attitude of one man. However, if you want to hang blame on the one man to whom blame could reasonably be confirmed, you might try some remedial refresher therapy regarding the actions of one micro managing Barack Obama. Nonetheless, Kristol et-al were cooing contentedly in the Bush backwaters with they're delicate sensitivities untroubled for the 8 years of his moderacy. And frankly, I didn't say much and I don't remember you saying a lot either.

I like what Reagan said too, and agree with him completely. But your analysis that the particulars of the impasse we face, revolves around Trump as if he caused the impasse, doesn't hold water. It's because he's the one tasked by the people to take the fight to those who are causing the problem. It's called an election. It's no secret though that every cause needs a face, and the left's propaganda campaign as of Nov 8, 2016 has been to make that the face that of MR Trump. Logical. But if pressed to identify some of the players, I might start with the ones already mentioned here, along with the likes of George Soros. Not the only guy in modern times with the courage to even mention the root causes and name some of the actors in a public setting. In contrast for example, Obama foreign policy shot warnings out like unguided drones into the cybersphere without naming names. Not only did those to whom he invisibly referred completely ignore his warnings, they laughed him to scorn. And he totally deserved it BTW.

No, you go ahead and rationalize on, my Guile-O-Meter is pegged.