Is Trump a Captain Queeg?

Posted by  $  nickursis 3 months ago to Culture
62 comments | Share | Flag

I have loved the Caine Mutiny as a study in leadership, and I have come to the conclusion Trump will be ousted this year as President to be replaced by one more malleable by the politicians. But I see Trump as Captain Queeg, and the scene where Greenwald confronts Keefer is so applicable, if you place the lamestream media as keefer, and the rational part of the public as Greenwald. His description of how they railroaded Queeg seems so accurate as to what is going on, as the media is now proudly proclaiming anything Anti-Trump as "we are winning". I just hope someday someone sees that the media railroaded Trump just as Keefer railroaded Queeg, and led the rest of the officers to do so, and yet took no responsibility for his actions.
SOURCE URL: https://youtu.be/Jw6gwGawbXA


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by term2 3 months ago
    They tried to keep him from being elected. When that didnt work, they rioted in disgust hoping to show he was illegimate. When that didnt work, they started on this russian collusion thing. Thats proceeding with the expense of tens of millions of OUR dollars, but has not turned up any witches to date. Then they tried to impeach him for some sort of emotional instability. That seems to have died down too. Now they want to show he is a racist for a few words about what two groups fought over in Charlottesville. Meanwhile, we still have Obamacare, High taxes, and a lot of other disasters left over from previous socialist administrations which they wont let Trump fix.

    I thought Trump was our LAST chance to at least slow down the relentless advance of socialist and the eventual conversion of the USA into another Venezuela. If Trump is tossed out, I am ready to disavow the USA.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      That seems pretty much the spot we are in, but it is still a lot of it being because the Republicrats have not supported him or stood up for him. They have run like the CEO's because they cannot deal with the idea of not being politically correct, as gauged by the lamestream media. Media pressure will remove any CEO quickly.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 months ago
        Republicans never supported him really. If they did we would have repeal instead of replace
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
          We don't even have replace..we have..uh..nothing new that I know of...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 2 months, 4 weeks ago
            Their problem is how do you maintain the giveaways while maintaining the insurance bailouts and still paying the bills
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
              They can't, that IS the problen THEY have created by selling everything that isn't bolted down. Now, they owe big people, big time and none of that involves us. Until a large enough group of Americans wake up to the corrupt nature of our government, it will continue, or it will take control to survive, these are just symptoms, and Ayn Rand saw it 60 years ago.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months ago
    Trump is not Queeg. He's Hindenberg, heading the U.S. version of the Weimar republic. We don't have the impossible burden of Germany's WW I reparations to contend with, but we do have the exploding entitlements baggage and a national debt we will never be able to retire. There are warning signs of an auto loan bubble, a student loan bubble, and a new housing bubble, any one of which could trigger a huge adjustment in the markets. We already have rioting in the streets, egged on by a Marxist media, so an economic collapse may put us in an unrecoverable situation.

    Soros and Obama are gleefully supporting the destruction, hoping to gain control when things fall apart. However, history never seems to make things easy, and we may see an unexpected player step up to take the reins if Trump falls.

    If Trump is perceived as having been forced from office on false pretenses, we could be facing the second Civil war. Many of his supporters, including those in the military and law enforcement would likely refuse to acknowledge a phony impeachment. Once that gets started, look for the Russians and Chinese to decide which contingent they support, eager to gain control over the richest nation on the planet.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 3 months ago
      I would support a splitting apart of the USA at this point. I am DONE with the leftists trying to control my life. " Deplorables" UNITE. If half of the people are socialists and the other half "deplorables", its time to split the country into two sections.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months ago
        Actually, I believe the split is closer to 20% Marxist vs. 80% America loving regular people. The democrat party is losing on every front and their fund raising is in the tank. Trump is exposing the evil of the left. Even if it is unwitting on his part, he is doing a GREAT service to this country right now for that alone.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 months ago
          I voted for him and support him to do what he said he would do (the only one who even comes close to fulfilling his promises !). I would argue that its much closer to 50-50 though. Romney was right when he said 47% just want what the others provide. Since then, its more like 50%. Look at the necessity to "replace" obamacare and not just repeal it. Too many people want 'free' healthcare paid by taxpayers
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months ago
            The "replace" Obamacare idea has and is coming from the Dem and RINO elitists who want to keep control over our very lives. The 47%, yes, are bought and paid for. However, not all are stupid and the fascism on display since November is even turning them against the democrat party. My 20-80 split is probably overly optimistic. However, I don't think it's anywhere close to 50-50.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 3 months ago
              I hope you are right. It just seems so hopeless. Replaced Obamacare is just medicaid for everyone, which will destroy whats left of our health system. Already some of the best healthcare delivery places (like Mayo Clinic) are not making appointments for new patients on government insurance because they cant afford to give good service at the reimbursements offered by a bankrupt system.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months ago
                I think what we are seeing from the democrat party right now is desperation. The RINOs are and will always be the "stupid party". They just need to be voted out as they get decent primary challengers if we cannot get term limits. It may very well get worse before it gets better. However, if Trump can stay strong as he has, I'm positive it's going to get better.

                One last thing about Trump. He will never be perfect. He will probably never be anything but what he is as of now. However, he doesn't need ANY of this. He must love this country very much to put up with the crap he has. If he stays and fights it out to the end and runs again, he SHOULD have the undying gratitude of every one of us who loves this country.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      Doc, I agree that he does fit the model of a Hindenburg, but remember, Hitler waited for Hindenburg to die in office. That said, However the cureent model of support was what I was referring to, so it could be look at like this: Had Trump recieved the support of his party, completely, when he went into office, and they made the effort to gather him up and say, OK, you may be in charge but you need us, so you need to observe some basic rules, like no tweeting. Then make it clear that he cannot succeed without them, and he worked with them to control all his outliers like McCain, could he have been successful? A united front against the media may have broken them, if enough Republicrats went out and made them look like the fools they are, by citing facts and not fantasy. But they went with the media, and even jumped on the "You didn't show sorry enough" for the riot BS, and he is pretty much alone. That is my comparison point. It seems pretty clear this is an engineered coup in slow motion, and they will find a justifiable reason to remove him, and the military will not act, unless they can prove the Constitution is violated, and a lot of them may stay sidelined, if the SCOTUS says it's ok, as that then makes it a very fuxxy Constitutional issue. The military will stick to their oaths I think, and above lawful orders are the protect and defend clause, only.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months ago
        As retired military, I have to point out that our oath is to protect and defend the Constitution, not the government. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) requires us to refuse to obey any orders that are in violation of the Constitution. Failure to do so can result in legal action against the followers of an unconstitutional order as well as the person who generates the order. People wanting a coup against President Trump seem to lack the understanding of how the military operates.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months ago
          Ah, yes, Doc, I too, am retired military, and understand the oath, but there is the lawful orders of those above part that will trip it up. Say someone is told to cordon off DC and restrict access, and maybe even cordon seats of Fed gov't. Where does it become unconstitutional? What if the President orders it? I can see many, many scenarios where the constitutionality may be unclear, and seniors go to the sidelines to protect themselves. Treason is a heavy charge, if you are on the wrong side of a decision, even when you think you are right at the time.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months ago
            There are specific rules that determine military action in domestic circumstances. The Posse Comitatus law forbids the use of military in law enforcement roles. The exceptions to that rule are when an emergency has crippled the indigenous law enforcement or outstripped its capability, and the National Guard can't completely meet the need. The other exception is when a state is declared to be in a condition of insurrection, allowing the President to declare martial law. The latter is interesting, because the Insurrection Act (established in 1807) grants that power exclusively to the President as the authority who determines if a state is insurrectionist. Congress has no say in the matter. Theoretically, Trump could declare even DC as in a state of insurrection. I suspect the Insurrection Act fringes on being unconstitutional, but no one has sought to challenge it in over 200 years.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
              That could be interesting, I do not remember for sure but the plot of Seven Days in may I think had them as National Guard on active duty for a supposed "exercise".... I wish he would declare it in insurrection and arrest them all, and hold new elections.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by DrZarkov99 2 months, 4 weeks ago
                The Commonwealth countries have a little known interesting institution, the Governor-General, who is answerable only to the Queen. The GG has only one power: to dissolve the government of the country and hold new elections if the government acts against the well being of the country.

                I was stationed in Australia in the mid 70s, at a joint location with the RAAF. The Labor government had instituted single-payer medical care, and had badly underestimated the cost. The Australian constitution requires a balanced budget, so deficit spending is illegal. The Labor Premier and his Minister of Finance had slipped off to Switzerland to arrange under the table loans to cover the excess costs of single payer, but unfortunately one of their staff caught wind of what they were doing, and gave the GG a call. Even though the GG was a long time friend of the Premier, he did the right thing and called the Queen to inform her he was dissolving the Labor government and staging new elections. Because the Australian people were so appalled, the election resulted in a Liberal (which is really conservative) government being elected.

                Too bad we don't have similar institution.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Lucky 2 months, 4 weeks ago
                  Dr Z, good comments, but not quite.
                  The G-G is legally constrained by rules among which is to get advice from the prime minister before acting.
                  This was not done. I understand G-G John Kerr did not inform the Queen who by reputation would not have sacked a
                  government. The G-G did that as there was an impasse, a vote approving supply (the key items of budget) was voted down.
                  It is interesting to compare this situation with what happens in the US.
                  When congress is deadlocked over a budget vote there is no appeal to authority, congress has to talk and argue until
                  some sort of deal emerges. A better arrangement?
                  In my view, in Australia etc, this is what would normally happen. The current monarchy is highly respected and does have reserve powers but the strength of the institution is that the reserve power is never or seldom used.
                  So, going by precedent, not being able to pay the public service, the police, or meet financial obligations does not call for dismissing an elected government. I suppose violent insurrection would trigger such dissolution. As I read it, in the US this option is not available to any individual, it is public opinion that must demand action.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by DrZarkov99 2 months, 4 weeks ago
                    Thanks for the corrections. You have to remember, these are the result of a Yank unfamiliar with Commonwealth government trying to recall an event more than 40 years in the past. Things happened so fast, and even our Aussie compatriots were somewhat bewildered at what had just happened. Like Americans, they didn't have a complete understanding of exactly how their government worked, so the explanations to us were a bit scrambled and contradictory.

                    We tend to wax a bit arrogant about how our legislative body, Congress, is superior to a parliamentary system, primarily because it is so stable. We can't get rid of the pack of fools even when most Americans don't trust them and want to clean the Augean stables of the House and Senate. We view the parliamentary systems, where a vote of no confidence can bring everything down and cause early elections, as less workable, but in my view, it means the offenses of each elected member are still fresh in the voters' minds. Our system gives the miscreants time to let the memories fade, and convince the public of how great they are well before the next election. Something to think about.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
                      Good points both of you, showing some of the weaknesses of our system we have become inured to, I think. I like the idea of the no confidence vote, although it is a hair trigger I have seen pulled several time in England. But the budget process should be a balanced one, and I would love to see an end to deficit spending, it is one of the current tools they are using to bamboozle the peasants, who don't care where they get their bread and circuses...
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by DrZarkov99 2 months, 4 weeks ago
                        Some things to think about for a Convention of the States: term limits, including for judges; balanced budget; zero base budget, with line item veto. There are definitely more things to be considered, but those seem the most in need of correction.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  CBJ 2 months, 4 weeks ago
                          A balanced budget will not work unless we return to a hard-money standard. Within a productive economy, a continuing increase in the money supply is a natural and necessary means of providing a reasonably stable unit of account and medium of exchange.

                          Under a gold standard, the government provides a mechanism for this necessary increase in the money supply: turning gold bullion into coins. Each gold coin minted increases the amount of money in circulation, even though the existing amount of gold in the country and the world remains the same. And the government can transform any amount of gold into coins and release them into circulation without creating an imbalance in its budget.

                          The exact opposite is true in a fiat money system. An increase in the money supply requires a budgetary deficit, since the amount of new money released to circulation equals the amount of government spending not covered by tax revenues.

                          For a balanced budget to work in practice, a gold standard must be reintroduced at the same time.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months ago
        Things may get very interesting if an attempt at impeachment proceeds on questionable grounds. The President has the right to demand the SCOTUS make a ruling on the grounds for impeachment, and they could very well invalidate an impeachment if no "high crimes and misdemeanors" are discovered. The Republicans need to think this through very carefully, as siding with Democrats on shaky grounds could poison the government badly. There are a number of RINOs whom I suspect are already in risk of being defeated in the primaries, and further careless action could endanger others. The result could be a Republican party in name only, replaced largely by conservative populists (much like how the Democrats are being replaced by socialists).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 months ago
    Does the semi-rational left (assuming it exists) really want to replace Trump with Pence? I don't care for Pence's social conservative views at all, but I think he has the smarts and temperament to easily defeat any Democrat in 2020 if he becomes the incumbent president before then.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      Well, they may be in a rush to exterminate him, just as the officers of the Caine may have been, as Barney points out, had they supported him when he came to them, the ship may have survived without the mutiny. Maybe the same is with Trump, maybe he made a similar gesture to to both parties who refused to work with him and who have united to remove him, with the media as their Keefer.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Animal 3 months ago
    "...and I have come to the conclusion Trump will be ousted this year as President to be replaced by one more malleable by the politicians."

    Why do you think this, and how do you suppose he will be replaced?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      I have seen 98% of every media stroy is slanted against Trump, I thought his Monday speech was right on, and his handling of the media idiots appropriate for their low level. He cannot say a word without it being ridiculed, and even his own party (which he admittedly hijacked from under them and they hate him for it) came after him for not being whiny enough. They have been working to alter public opionion just enough to allow them to get away with either impeachment or forced resignation without a civil war. I think it will be one or the other before the end of the yer. Trump has no supporters in the political machine, which means he cannot get anything done, except by Executive order.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 months ago
        I'm curious to see if Trump will crack and start looking like Queeg.
        Hope he can hold up in defiance of all the craven cowardly backstabbing little weasels who promised to repeal Obamacare and now seeks to appease a media that reminds old dino of a horde of screaming chimpanzees, who toss their own feces as they excitedly jump up and down.
        Who can hold up against all that unrelenting defamation that piles up as it goes on and on and on? Not many . . .
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Animal 3 months ago
        I'm certain he won't be. Not this year. His own ego won't allow him to step down voluntarily, and the GOP Congress won't impeach him - for one thing, despite all the screeching hysterics from the professional protesters, he hasn't committed any impeachable offense. Neither Ryan nor McConnell would allow impeachment proceedings to move.

        No, Trump will be there in the Imperial Mansion on Dec 31st.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jhagen 3 months ago
          Agreed. I don't see how the Dems and the Rhinos can possibly sway the people who are fed up with them. They elected Trump, in large part, because they don't trust career politicians.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by wiggys 3 months ago
        have you any idea of the uproar that will take place in the country if they try to do that. I just don't see it, ever though he is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't act. I just do not think he will submit to them.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months ago
    A fine comparison Nickursis.
    I hope.... you are wrong about Trumps tenure.
    To the collectivist media the first thing that goes, in a communist take over is you. You are no longer "useful idiots" when the take over is final.
    History shows the loudest mouths are the first shot.
    To the media be careful what you wish for!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      Indeed, that is the problem I see, they will tear everything down, just to get rid of Trump. I have seen mor made up BS, in fact the whole Republicrat response to his Monday speech, his battle with moronic journalists, and even the BS from the 3 CEOs, is so, so sad, but seems to reflect the grim determination of the Caine wardroom.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mudirikwa 3 months ago
    No US President has ever been successfully impeached. In 1974 Richard Nixon resigned before he could be formally removed. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but neither was convicted of the charges filed against them.

    Although some have suggested Mr Trump will not serve his full four year term he is still unlikely to be impeached as both Houses of Congress, which have to vote to remove him, are controlled by Republicans.

    The 25th Amendment was originally adopted in 1967 and establishes the procedure where by the Vice-President succeeds the President if he or she is incapacitated, dies in office or is impeached.

    My advice is 'do not hold your breath on this snowflake fallacy' ;)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months ago
      It was often said that VP Joe Biden was Obama's impeachment insurance, and VP Mike Pence , I believe, is Trump's impeachment insurance. Trump may be unpredictable, but the ultraconservative Pence would be every Democrat's nightmare as President.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      As you wish, but I believe you are discounting the extreme angst on the left, and in the media, and the wimp factor of those who control the house. If they supported him, they would not be throwing him under the bus every other day, either to the media or with votes like McCain s.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 3 months ago
    Is Trump Queeg? No.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      OK, I was not trying to propose he WAS Queeg, but that this situation fits that scenario and he fills the role of Queeg, remember Queeg had been serving in the Atlantic for 2 years before hand, Trump is coming from a position of absolute authority answering only to a board and shareholders if he fails, and he didin't. I don't even know how much stock he is responsible too.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    As I recall from the book, Queeg came in, said "When perfection is the standard...", bd and bd, got snotty about shirttails, and finally tore the ship upside down over an issue of missing strawberries. His second-in-command, (under Keefer's influence), during a typhoon, declared him mentally incompetent, and took over the ship, after which he (Maryk) was court-martialed,
    and found not guilty.

    Will such a thing occur with Trump? I doubt
    it. I don't think he is picky about non-essentials.
    I do think he has a big mouth, into which he
    often unnecessarily puts his foot.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
      Liberty, not to argue the point, as everyone interprets art their own way, but here is the conversation with Barney, and it was after the YellowStain incident, Queeg comes to them for help, but he does not know how to ask for it outright, that was Barneys point. They knew what was up, and still left him to hang out to dry, which is what I see the Republicans doing to Trump. It is a point we can discuss and debate, as I am sure there is no right or wrong answer or interpretation, I am surprised there were people who remembered the book or the movie:

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: Well, well, well! The officers of the Caine in happy celebration!

      Lt. Steve Maryk: What are you, Barney, kind of tight?

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: Sure. I got a guilty conscience. I defended you, Steve, because I found the wrong man was on trial.

      [pours himself a glass of wine]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: So, I torpedoed Queeg for you. I had to torpedo him. And I feel sick about it.

      [drinks wine]

      Lt. Steve Maryk: Okay, Barney, take it easy.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: You know something... When I was studying law, and Mr. Keefer here was writing his stories, and you, Willie, were tearing up the playing fields of dear old Princeton, who was standing guard over this fat, dumb, happy country of ours, eh? Not us. Oh, no, we knew you couldn't make any money in the service. So who did the dirty work for us? Queeg did! And a lot of other guys. Tough, sharp guys who didn't crack up like Queeg.

      Ensign Willie Keith: But no matter what, Captain Queeg endangered the ship and the lives of the men.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: He didn't endanger anybody's life, you did, all of you! You're a fine bunch of officers.

      Lt. JG H. Paynter Jr.: You said yourself he cracked.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: I'm glad you brought that up, Mr. Paynter, because that's a very pretty point. You know, I left out one detail in the court martial. It wouldn't have helped our case any.

      [to Maryk]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: Tell me, Steve, after the Yellowstain business, Queeg came to you guys for help and you turned him down, didn't you?

      Lt. Steve Maryk: [hesitant] Yes, we did.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: [to Paynter] You didn't approve of his conduct as an officer. He wasn't worthy of your loyalty. So you turned on him. You ragged him. You made up songs about him. If you'd given Queeg the loyalty he needed, do you suppose the whole issue would have come up in the typhoon?

      [to Maryk]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: You're an honest man, Steve, I'm asking you. You think it would've been necessary for you to take over?

      Lt. Steve Maryk: [hesitant] It probably wouldn't have been necessary.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: [muttering slightly] Yeah.

      Ensign Willie Keith: If that's true, then we were guilty.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: Ah, you're learning, Willie! You're learning that you don't work with a captain because you like the way he parts his hair. You work with him because he's got the job or you're no good! Well, the case is over. You're all safe. It was like shooting fish in a barrel.

      [long pause; strides toward Keefer]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: And now we come to the man who should've stood trial. The Caine's favorite author. The Shakespeare whose testimony nearly sunk us all. Tell 'em, Keefer!

      Lieutenant Tom Keefer: [stiff and overcome with guilt] No, you go ahead. You're telling it better.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: You ought to read his testimony. He never even heard of Captain Queeg!

      Lt. Steve Maryk: Let's forget it, Barney!

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: Queeg was sick, he couldn't help himself. But you, you're real healthy. Only you didn't have one tenth the guts that he had.

      Lieutenant Tom Keefer: Except I never fooled myself, Mr. Greenwald.

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: I'm gonna drink a toast to you, Mr. Keefer.

      [pours wine in a glass]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: From the beginning you hated the Navy. And then you thought up this whole idea. And you managed to keep your skirts nice, and starched, and clean, even in the court martial. Steve Maryk will always be remembered as a mutineer. But you, you'll publish your novel, you'll make a million bucks, you'll marry a big movie star, and for the rest of your life you'll live with your conscience, if you have any. Now here's to the real author of "The Caine Mutiny." Here's to you, Mr. Keefer.

      [splashes wine in Keefer's face]

      Lt. Barney Greenwald: If you wanna do anything about it, I'll be outside. I'm a lot drunker than you are, so it'll be a fair fight.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  2 months, 4 weeks ago
        Important point, is Trump sick? I don't know, he does do some off the wall things, but I am not sure if it is because it is what he is used to, or just doesn't know how bad it can come off, or what. Barney did not argue the point Queeg had cracked, I would hope Trumpp doesn't.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 3 months ago
    The only way I see this happening is if he openly declares war on the RINOs in Congress. They do need to go, and I'm hoping they will, but Trump can work against them without it being out in the open. He's not that unsubtle.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 3 months ago
    Why do you think Queeg was railroaded? I do not happen to agree with that lawyerly speech at the end proclaiming that one's leadership must be supported regardless of how rotten it is.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      Ah, you miss the part of the movie where Queeg showed up, and had he had some careful guidance from his wardroom, as well as support during the infamous wardroom meeting, it may have been different. That was Barney's point. If you assume your leader is hopelessly dysfunctional, you WILL make it so. Herman Wouk made it an excellent lesson for leadership on both sides, the Leader and the Lead.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by strugatsky 3 months ago
        I did not miss it. I happen to disagree with it. Although I admit not reading the book and judging only by the movie (I should read it; Wouk is excellent!), Queeg in that meeting appeared to me as a manipulating liar. If he really wanted to come clean, HE had an opportunity to do that, not ask others to fall for the lies again. People like Queeg should never be in any management or leadership positions; that a failure of the higher management. I suspect that in some part Wouk's fictional account is based on Smith vs Smith controversy in the same time frame and location - the Marine Smith vs Army Smith, a story well known at the time. Maybe its just my projection? In any case, I never agreed with Barney's position that we must respect and support our leaders - the respect and support must be earned, not assigned due to rank. I worked for the DoD until a year ago and I did not hide the fact that I did not support Obama or his cronies. I could not respect or support what I considered to be moral feces. Eventually, I quit. During the war, Queeg's subordinates could not. Similar "leaders" in Vietnam (and I'm sure in other wars) received a bullet in the back. I don't know why Wouk took that position through Barney.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months ago
          Ok, I am not saying you are wrong, I was just clarifying. I do see your argument, although I would say I have met many Queeg types in my time in the navy and out, and yes, they generally are allowed to go on,as long as they do not make the org look bad. I don't know if Wouk was trying to make a point that leaders are not always screwed up from the start but can become so by how they are supported in specific cases. Your point of earning respect is also very true, had Queeg not come from the pre-war Navy, where you bred commanders who were tyrants, because there not a lot of people wanting to be in the Navy in the late 30's, due to the low pay, heavy politics and bureaucracy, maybe it might have a different outcome.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  3 months ago
            The Submarine service also had an issue in the first 2 years of the war, with commanders operating as they had been trained and told to, getting poor results and relieved after 2 patrols. It was the junior officers who rose to fill the command billets in 43, 44 that were successful, along with giving them warheads that worked in 43.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by strugatsky 3 months ago
              It is typical that in a real war, some time must pass before the paper pusher and ass kissing generals are moved out of the way and real men take over. I've spent 25 years in the DoD, much of the time with O-5, 6 and above. Perhaps a generalization, but my respect would be inversely proportional to the officer's rank. A colonel or Navy captain (o-6) was about the limit for respect. After that, promotion was dependent more on the length of one's tongue than on merit. I've only known one Admiral that deserved respect, and he was retired with only one star. And I've worked with two stars that got promoted with no merit at all, but what smooth talkers they were... One became Vice Admiral; he was the Aegis officer on USS Vincennes when she shot down the Iranian airliner. The report said that he used the Aegis screen for Post-It notes!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  3 months ago
                Yes, I cannot argue the point as it reflected my experience in the enlisted world, most E8/9 were not worth spit, as they only got promoted because of KA. I did see a 2 star I had great respect for, and by accident, on a video on You Tube about the Virginia class submarines, he drove the program to be cost efficient, and made building them efficient. He also was a super guy, and was weapons officer on the USS Will Rogers with me in the late 70's. He used to wear cowboy boots, and refused to change them, despite the XO ranting about it. he was a Texan and stayed that way, he still had the damn boots on as an admiral, and they were black and polished as any corofram ever was.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months ago
    I have not read the Caine Mutiny, so I don't get the reference.

    If they're going to railroad President Trump, though, I wish it were for his radical stances. I wish it were because he didn't submit a budget with INCREASED gov't spending. I wish it were because he DIDN'T chose an AG who supports the drug war. I wish it were because because he OPPOSED asset forfeiture and were FOR strict rule of law. How lame that it should be for APPEARING to defend racists and ACTING guilty when accused of wrongdoing! If I'm going to be persecuted, I'd rather it be for a real cause.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months ago
      I am sure he would too. You should read or rent the Caine Mutiny, by Herman Wouk, I believe. Watch it closely and at the end you find out that maybe they weren't all right, which is what you believe all through the story. Trump is weird, but no weirder than any of the others, and certainly no weirder than "Get rid of Jefferson" Al Sharpton who owes 10.5 million to the IRS, but believes black men don't need to pay taxes, let alone all his other corrupt history. I belive Trump has not done anything he wanted or promised he would because he has been stonewaleed by the 2 parties, who have yet to support ONE of his proposals.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo