From the Inauguration through yesterday has seen a whirlwind of appraisal of, and consternation over, what Our Lord of the Tantrum Text views as what is going on around him, and how he acts on it. On one end of the spectrum, at least for me, is a cold, self centered opportunist who manipulates things to whatever degree he can; often brashly in contradiction to himself on a ongoing basis. On the other end of the spectrum is, as expressed by Keith Olbermann, the idea that he really is clinically out of touch with reality.

Neither of these possibilities is very encouraging for our country, but naturally Mr. Olbermann's viewpoint would be the most chilling of all. And whether you agree with it or not you have to admit the argument for it presents an all too plausible possibility. As scary as it is, however, you would also think it would be the easiest scenario in which to make a determination, and then to take action. I mean, if he's clearly unhinged then it really does become a no brainer to put him out to pasture; preferably of the padded cell type.

If it is of the former type, however, it could still be very dangerous for us, and a great deal harder to formulate a consensus in removing him from office.

Trump is certainly way too full of himself, and it also might be close to pathological, but I have to wonder if it is (more or less?) complex than that. That is to say that he started out with a sense of privilege, New York inspired it would seen (not so much with a silver spoon in his mouth, but with gold plated brass knuckles in both hands). His old man set him up with several hundred million to start out with. And perhaps, just as important, if not more so, he got the entry to the same doors of power in New York City his old man had accumulated after decades of grinding the access out the hard way.

The one other thing that's important here, however, is that it was only little after he skated comparatively easily through most of his N.Y. real estate business, that the debt he quickly plowed himself into with the casino's, taught him (or at least proved to him) a very important fact: get into the system big enough, where it's not only yours, but a lot of their skin, that you've talked them all into putting on the line, where you then just look them in the eye and say: "I'll just let it all fail..." (he's probably got enough hidden to not make this a totally catastrophic bet -- J.V.). "...I don't care. Go ahead and sue me if you want. You won't get a dime. Take whatever pennies on the dollar I'm offering and be thankful for that."

And they took that deal; whether he was bluffing or not because he does a really good job of seeming like he's crazy. But then off course... where's the line drawn between crazy willing to take risks, mostly because you've gotten away with it before (as a spoiled kd kinda thing), and being simply pathologically unable to determine crazy in any action you might take because you just flat out don't perceive reality correctly in the first place?

For me, though it's not been easily one way or the other, I still tend to lean towards the "I get away with shit, I love to think I'm a big risk taker, and I've got the money to surround myself in a buffer so thick not caring what people think is easier than than breathing. I love being a bully, and I especially love pushing folks around who never took me seriously in the first place. My business acumen may actually suck but I am good at snowing people and not giving two shits about how it might make me look. If you win despite the obvious contradictions then what difference does it make how ugly the grinding out process was. What do I stand for? Other than getting more famous? Or richer? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's simply about playing the bullying game and laughing behind the backs of those who thought they were better than me. And the opposers, who are now sycophants, and who have let me get this far, will shit their pants before taking on the risk of chaos I can create if they want to take me down now."