The Zeitgeist

       

Cartoon characters Elmer J. Fudd and Cruella de Vil.

Do Americans Really Want Elmer J. Fudd or Cruella de Vil as President?

Are Donald and Hillary the Best 153 Million Registered Voters Can Produce?

In the award winning musical Fiddler on the Roof the main character is “Tevya The Milkman.” In today’s socio-economic terms you’d probably call him a struggling small businessman. One of his biggest wishes is to “be a wealthy man,” so much so that one of the show’s main songs is entitled “If I Were a Rich Man.” (A riff on this song was done in 2004 by Gwen Stefani called “Rich Girl.”)

One of the key aspects of Tevya’s song is that if he were in fact a rich man, he would secure prime seating at his local house of worship and in addition everyone would besiege him with questions and for his advice, “problems that would cross a rabbi’s eyes” because “when you’re rich they think you really know.”

Not much has changed in human nature since the lyrics of that song were written in 1964 because so many people in this country are in thrall in this presidential election cycle to rich people who think they really know.

Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders fulminates against the “billionaires who’ve rigged the system” and how the rich control our economy, the electoral process and the country. He’s calling for a “revolution” on behalf of the Average Joe which can sound pretty radical. Even though I disagree with most of Sanders’ policies and positions, he’s really not far off the mark about the affluent (which can also mean business or special interests) often controlling politics, especially on the national level. Interestingly, most Americans don’t see this as any kind of a problem.

Many of the very top candidates (and some not doing well in the polls) do in fact come from either the Patrician or Oligarch class. A reason for that is when you don’t have to worry about putting bread on the table or sweating out a monthly mortgage you have a lot of free time to pursue politics. Someone punching a clock every day where their presence would be missed at their desk or on the loading dock? Not so possible.

On the Republican side, the man leading all the polls is an actual billionaire who professes no end of braggadocio about it and uses it as his main qualification to lead the county despite not an hour of experience in elective office or the military. Millions of Americans flock to him because he has nothing whatsoever to lose by saying the most outlandish things that can be highly entertaining and is a vicarious release of voters’ powerlessness, anger and frustration. Because he has “F.U. Money” he’s insulated from the ramifications of his words and because even if he loses he’ll still be Donald Trump why not drop malicious gossip bombs hither and yon? What can anyone do to him?

The Wall Street Journal on January 15^th reported on the sale of a penthouse Mr. Trump owns personally in his Trump Park Avenue condo building in Manhattan for $21 million the week prior. He sold another unit recently for $14 million and he’s got another apartment on the market for $35 million. Mr. Trump’s daughter Ivanka in replying to a question whether Mr. Trump’s increased visibility because of the presidential campaign has had any effect on these sales said “the [Trump] brand has never been stronger.” Nothing to lose. Meanwhile, more worthy and more qualified candidates languish at the bottom of the polls while Mr. Trump entertains himself, the media and the country.

On the Democratic side, the woman leading all the polls has earned vast sums of money from accepting huge speaking and consulting fees from giant corporations and from enormous book advances. She and her husband have pulled in nearly $230 million since 2001. Talk about profiting from public service. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2015/10/13/how-the-clintons-made-more-than-230-million-after-leaving-the-white-house/#55ae31f6791e) Having been Secretary of State bolstered the Clinton, Inc. brand and now being a top candidate hasn’t slowed down the flow of cash to her and her husband. If she wins the presidency the money will literally be Mount Gushmore. Mrs. Clinton because of her wealth, fame and privilege also is quite insulated from reality which is why she doesn’t see it as any kind of problem whatsoever that she had her own private hackable email server while working at Foggy Bottom in total violation of the laws for public officials handling sensitive and national security matters.

Like Mr. Trump, Mrs. Clinton hasn’t driven herself to work or to the market in years. They both have retinues of aides and staffers to fill their every need and cater to their every whim. How can either of these two people ever hope to really understand the needs, thoughts and hopes of John and Jane Q. Public? Remember when George Bush the Elder didn’t know what a supermarket checkout scanner was? The American people rightly intuited that he hadn’t a clue about their daily lives. Why then are Americans flocking to these same out of touch flush types now?

Rumored to be mulling an independent entry into the presidential race is former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg – another billionaire – which would give American voters the choice between rich, richer and richest.

The population of the US is approximately 318 million according to the US Census Bureau. Roughly 153 million Americans are registered to vote (although 215 million are eligible). Of that figure 32 percent are registered Democrats, 23 percent as Republicans and 39 percent are Independents. Out of 153 million American voters the best people we can produce from that vast polity to lead this country are Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton? What does this say about the sad state of public life in this country? Why do we want to be led by Elmer J. Fudd or Cruella de Vil?

I may disagree with Bernie Sanders about healthcare, taxation and foreign policy but he’s right that the people need to take back the political process so that candidates of greater quality from both parties will have a serious shot at leadership.

The Zeitgeist

Donald Trump

Donald Trump: RHINO (Republican in Name Only) and Agent Provocateur 

An epithet made popular in the past few years and hurled by ultra-right wing and Tea Party Republicans at establishment GOP types has been that of being a “RHINO,” or a “Republican in Name Only.” The pejorative is meant to discredit the recipient of this accusation as essentially being a Democrat (or worse, an accommodator with Democrats) masquerading as a member of the GOP. In the eyes of the accusers, such a rhinoceros has no real Republican bona fides and should withdraw from the GOP.

Typically, mainstream Republicans have resisted calling folks “Rhinos,” as most centrist Republicans can tolerate a broad spectrum of thought and discourse within the party even if they don’t agree with everyone or everything, which is why GOP presidential candidates run the spectrum from Rand Paul (isolationist Libertarian) to Ted Cruz (inflexible neo-Goldwater type) to Chris Christie (bellicose Northeasterner).

In the wild, the rhinoceros is known for its large size, thick protective skin, small brains and at least one large horn. This is an apt description for the leading GOP presidential candidate, Donald Trump.

Rhino in the wild

Trump has a thick skin, capable of acting like rubber or Teflon, repelling any and all criticism. He is in possession of not a whole lot of book smarts as he mangles and distorts facts, events and history on a daily basis and he has a very large horn which he blows to deafening levels nonstop. Stomping around the jungle that passes for American politics in 2015, he displaces a lot of water and his plodding steps shake the foundations of the GOP.

While Trump presents himself as the GOP’s savior, he’s really the diametric opposite. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, my whole adult life I’ve known a lot of Republicans and they’ve been friends of mine, and Trump is no real Republican. In fact, he’s the consummate “RHINO” even though he presents himself as right-wing. Trump is a clear-cut case where mainstream Republicans can and should call out a far-right fringe candidate as a “RHINO.”

Until very recently, Trump was a registered Democrat. He is very liberal on social issues as are most New Yorkers. He’s donated heavily to Democratic candidates. Paradoxically, he is habitually misogynistic, he’s anti-immigrant, anti-Mexican and anti-Muslim. He’s anti-free trade and in favor of raising taxes on high earners. His talk of pressuring Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians is wholly out of sync with GOP policies as are his views about Syria and Iraq. He’s never held any kind of elective office whatsoever and has zero experience working with legislators, the military or diplomats. His domestic policy proposals and spirit bear no resemblance to that of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan.

That there are as many Republicans out on safari looking to get into harm’s way by riding the wild Trump rhinoceros is utterly astounding to the mainstream GOP. Republicans of nearly every stripe agree that taking back The White House in 2016 is priority one and that defeating Hillary Clinton is priority one-A. Yet despite this, as much as a third of the GOP electorate in some polls have a subconscious death wish. They’ve become so enraptured by Trump and his erratic “go ahead, make my day” rhetoric that they fail to smell the dung he leaves in his wake – because the odious toxins spewing forth from that sharp horn of his make him unelectable in November of 2016 and will ensure Mrs. Clinton’s ascendancy to the Oval Office.

As the GOP nominee, Trump brings nothing positive to the table. As a Manhattanite from the bluest of blue states he will not bring New York’s many electoral votes with him. A bear minimum for a presidential nominee is to contribute a win in his home state, it won’t be the case here because Hillary is also a New Yorker and New York votes reliably Democratic.

Trump will actually drive more female voters into Hillary’s arms. He has such as trail of verbal aggression towards accomplished women that Hillary will trump Donald with the “first female President” card and his hostility towards women.

Hispanics will run towards the Democratic nominee in droves as will Muslim-Americans and even a lot of Asian-Americans who’ve had a bellyful of his talk about the Chinese. African-Americans? Forget about it. The result could be as bad for the Republicans as the Johnson-Goldwater rout of 1964. Such a disaster could also lose the House and Senate for the GOP as well. Hillary will have no problem portraying herself as the sober steward of the nuclear button against Trump’s ill-informed, erratic, xenophobic fulminations.

If Trump doesn’t get the Republican nomination and decides to run as an independent candidate, he will kill the chances for the GOP nominee just as Ross Perot did to George Bush the Elder, thereby ensuring a Hillary victory. In either scenario, Republicans will get another four or more years of Democrats in The White House. Any which way you slice it, Trump is stale bread for Republicans.

That so many erstwhile GOP primary voters fail to envision Trump’s ultimate un-electability in the general election is vexing and astounding. What Republicans need is someone competent to lead the party in 2016 – people like Ohio Governor John Kasich, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie or former Florida Governor Jeb Bush who’ve balanced budgets, created jobs, shown they can work across party lines to pass meaningful legislation in a mature way. Republican voters need to grow up, wake-up and smell the coffee. Running this country and protecting the free world is not a reality television show and should not be put into the hands of amateurs, neophytes or provocateurs. 

The Zeitgeist

Daniel Craig as James Bond, Agent 007

Spectre of Mediocrity: Latest Bond Flick a Tad Too Trite

According to the writers of the latest (and 24^th) James Bond flick, the greatest threat to civilization right now is the centralized control of intelligence, data and undue intrusive digital surveillance by the criminal geniuses at that nefarious criminal cartel that goes by the name of “SPECTRE.”

Back in the good old days, Agent 007 was sent to save the world from nuclear blackmail, errant satellites, cornering the gold market and so on. In 2016 we’re treated to a crusade to rid the world of super computers and spy cameras.

If that comes across as sounding slightly less than scintillating, that’s the point.

Spectre opens in bravura Bond style with an intriguing locale, powerful pyrotechnics, astonishing heroism and awesome effects. Unfortunately, after the first half hour the movie becomes dark and dour and plods on for a total of two and a half hours which must set a running time record for the Bond franchise, which is not a good thing. The climax of the movie, when it finally arrives is really an anti-climax because the very best part of the film was in the beginning.

Daniel Craig is a superb James Bond, probably the best since Sean Connery. Craig gives 110 percent to everything he does in the film. Also very good is Ralph Fiennes as the new “M,” the head of Britain’s MI-6 “Double-O” spy service, replacing Judi Dench in the role. The movie’s shortcomings don’t lie with Craig or Fiennes, it lies with the story, the writing and the directing.

The writers conducted an archeological dig to unearth SPECTRE, first introduced in 1962’s Dr. No. SPECTRE is an acronym for “Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion,” lead by the scar-faced Ernst Stavro Blofeld (played by Christoph Waltz). Viewers are tasked with accepting essentially a reboot or alternate introduction of SPECTRE in 2015 as if no one had ever seen any Bond films from the 60s or 70s, which is a mighty big stretch. The producers may be thinking about young people and future generations with the SPECTRE reboot but for veterans nothing about 2015’s SPECTRE seems as menacing as prior iterations.

I couldn’t shake flashbacks to the Austin Powers films (major Bond parodies) and Mike Meyer’s “Dr. Evil.” One scene in particular comes to the fore – Seth Green playing Dr. Evil’s son Scott confronts his Dad about the idiocy of giving Austin Powers a tour of the facilities, explaining the master plan and keeping him alive. Scott wants to just put a bullet in him. Dr. Evil won’t hear of it.

In Spectre, Blofeld proffers Champagne, shows off his impressive secret lair constructed inside a crater in the Tunisian desert and despite thousands of bad guys at his disposal manages to be defeated in a matter of minutes by a small explosive hidden in Bond’s watch and a few well aimed shots from a machine gun at some kind of a gas line. It’s like the producers just phoned it in. It seems like something right out of Austin Powers. A parody of a parody. It should be noted that this is not the end of the film, it goes on for another 20-plus minutes.

The “Bond Girls” in this film, Monica Bellucci as a not so grieving widow of a top SPECTRE leader (who succumbs to Bond’s charms in nanoseconds and spills everything) and Léa Seydoux as the main female heroine (of course she’s a doctor), while competent brings no frisson to the film. Nothing is shaken or stirred. Neither of these comely ladies possess the jaw-dropping, awe-inspiring looks of many a prior Bond babe. These two seem kind of real, which is not why guys go to Bond movies.

Spectre is worth seeing, but on your home flat screen for no more than $4.95. Die-hard Bond fans will like it but it could have been vastly improved by cutting 30 to 40 minutes. The film gets a “B” rating because of Craig, the cinematography, the sets and the special effects.