Donald Trump was elected to shake things up, to undo the damage that the left has been doing to our society, our culture, and our government. But when you staff a government with entertaining names, how does that affect the cause of effectively changing policy in a more positive, liberty-oriented direction?
Pete Hegseth
Cabinet members tend to be obscure. Quick—who is the Secretary of Health and Human Services? Who is the Secretary of Defense? People may know the Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, from the Republicans’ attempts to impeach him, or the Attorney General, Merrick Garland, from his use of the legal system against President-elect Trump and others in the Biden regime’s crosshairs. But most Cabinet members are pretty anonymous.
Not the Trump Cabinet. It features a number of prominent and semi-prominent political names, from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard to Marco Rubio and Kristi Noem. The nominee for Defense Secretary, holder of two Bronze Stars and an author, is known from his gig on Fox and Friends. The nominee for Attorney General is known for his televised (and ultimately successful) effort to depose former Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy. (Ironically, McCarthy is also rumored to be up for a Cabinet position.)
Donald Trump seems to have created a new kind of reality show. This looks like a cross between Cabinet Apprentice and Survivor: Cabinet Edition. Observers are left wondering which person will be the first to have President Trump say ‘You’re fired.”
Americans love to be entertained, and nobody in politics right now does it better than The Once and Future President. By surrounding himself with personalities such as Kennedy, Pete Hegseth, Matt Gaetz (if he gets confirmed, which is no sure thing), Gabbard, Noem, and others, Trump has made Cabinet members recognizable and kept people who follow politics fascinated. However, many of his picks, such as Kennedy and Gabbard, are not conservatives. Do they share the intention of limiting and reducing an overweaning Federal Leviathan?
Some have suggested that Gaetz may be a decoy, getting him out of Congress to “get Borked” and lose confirmation, then bring in the real nominee when the Senate has confirmation fatigue. If so, I hope that nominee is a strong, solid person and not just a “name.”
The fireworks if and when Gaetz and McCarthy are in the same Cabinet meeting should be more entertaining than many movies, television programs, or sports. If you like politics as entertainment, you should enjoy it when those two meet again.
These are not the usual selections, but Trump is not the usual president. The left wing and right wing have been part of the same bird. The Trump administration seems to be a whole different bird.
Trump was elected to shake things up, to undo the damage that the left has been doing to our society, our culture, and our government, to restore a more traditional sense of federalism, subsidiarity, and cultural values that have been under attack by the left since Woodrow Wilson’s presidency.
The appointment of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) shows that this is not the same old Republican presidency, aiming to trim the Democrats’ sails a little bit. Never mind trying to make the government more efficient by creating a new department to do it, then appointing two people to head it. (And wouldn’t Vivek have been more useful replacing Vance in the Senate?)
The new entity is tasked with taking a sledgehammer to the Leviathan state and trying to bring it down to size—something conservatives (and libertarians) should greet with approval. As Dennis Prager has said, “The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.”
Will the marquee names be able to focus on this task, or will style overwhelm substance? We shall see.
President Trump’s pledge to eliminate the Department of Education should, of course, be welcomed. But do Donald, Elon, and Vivek really know what needs to be cut, and can they actually eliminate departments?
As M. Stanton Evans observed, when our people get in positions of power, they cease to be our people. I suspect that there will be much resistance on Capitol Hill from both Democrats and Republicans, not to mention in the bureaucracy. Leviathan does not die easily.
As the late Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus used to point out, when the Democrats are in charge, it’s as if the country is a car going off a cliff at a hundred miles per hour. At least the Republicans drive the speed limit, but you’re still going off the cliff. We need to turn the car around. This is what the Trump administration was elected to do. Can they do it?
It is one of the iron laws of politics that personnel is policy. It will be a happy four years if the new Trump Administration can actually make the state less intrusive, less expensive, and more efficient at doing the things it is supposed to do. But can they? Again, there will be significant resistance on Capitol Hill and in blue states, and I do not find Senator John Thune or Speaker Mike Johnson especially eager or effective leaders for this task.
When you staff a government with entertaining names, how does that affect the cause of effectively changing policy in a more positive, liberty-oriented direction? Restoring our culture of ordered liberty and traditional values will benefit all, but will the entertainment and the jockeying for television time and position drown out the necessary effort to promote freedom and order?
It should be an interesting four years. One hopes it will also be productive.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image, uploaded by Gage Skidmore, is a photograph of Pete Hegseth speaking with attendees at the 2022 Student Action Summit at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Mr. Phares, I like your article. It seems to me that very few understand what Trump knows innately……personality is policy. I agree with you that this will be an interesting four years but also think his choices have changed the face of Washington forever.
Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Swift, Barbra Streisand Beyoncee, George Clooney——entertainment and politics? These “stars” pontificate and lecture constantly about what government should be and do. The media covers them as if Clooney and Streisand wrote the Federalist Papers and Beyoncee herself wrote the Declaration of Independence.
And the author of this article is ragging on Trump for his appointments?
Trump is making great appointments, targeting the 35-50 age group who need to be our future leaders, plus he’s calling on people who have actually done something with their lives—other than being big stars in Hollywood.
Seems odd to comment upon the personality and conservatism of these nominees, with no observations regarding their character, experience and competence. No less odd,I suppose, than offering no observations regarding the character, experience and competence of the President-Elect. Both leave the distinct impression that such considerations are of no moment.
Odd and different times indeed for conservatism.
What are you getting at? What do you think about the character, experience and competence of the Trump? Why the innuendo and obliqueness?
I think Trump’s character is about average though he’s an incredibly honest man about his own mistakes. He’s had the same number of marriages as most men I know. His former wives spoke and speak well of him. He seems to be a pretty caring father and grandfather. He’s not alienated from any of his kids. His experience as a builder is vast. He’s also a highly competent businessman who has, over his years as a builder and public figure, interacted with politicians, union bosses, average Joes and Janes, international leaders and personalities and workers at the fry-o-later at McDonald’s.
Amy, if most men you know have had three wives, that seems remarkable.
Yes, yes, Albert , so literal you are! My point was obvious but as we enter into the next four years, it needs articulating—Trump’s character and lifestyle are reflective of the times. Trump is not some freak nature.
Think about it, sir, and reflect upon whether or not among your acquaintances there are not those who are no strangers to divorce, second marriages, “blended” families, unmarried or cohabiting couples , single-parent homes and kids who shuttle between households.
Trump is who he is and he’s hopefully going to be the catalyst who ushers in a new era in government so that we can eventually return to at least some of our founding principles.
I’ll accept that I took a bit too literally on the three marriages matter.
Of course, I know people involved in all the things on your list. But the issues I have with Trump’s character have nothing to do with his having been married three times. I would grant you that Trump’s character, as revealed in his public life, is a substantial reflection of our times. But I would call him an extreme case. At least, considerably beyond the norm.
That should be Frialator, of course!
Well written essay thank you
“Personality” is key in every aspect of life! Praying we don’t go off the cliff! Thoughtful essay sparking insightful comments ~ Thank you!