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.

The Zeitgeist

A Nazi Crematorium

Baking Jews with Mike Huckabee:

When is an Oven an Oven?

Last weekend former Arkansas Governor and GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee opened the oven door on President Obama’s Iran Nuclear deal and let out a big blast of heat and blowback.

On Sunday, July 26^th in an interview with Breitbart News, Huckabee said “this president's foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven." The metaphor used by Huckabee is that of the Nazi crematoria of World War II which were employed in the extermination of six million Jews.

The next day Huckabee was all over broadcast and cable TV defending his criticism of the Iran deal in those terms and saw his poll numbers rise appreciably against the 17-candidate GOP pack.

No end of vituperative criticism and righteous indignant invective was inveighed against Huckabee by President Obama, others within his administration, prominent Democrats, prominent American Jewish Liberals and the gaggle of cable talking heads. “How could you and how dare you compare the Iran nuclear deal to the Holocaust” was the general refrain. Somehow Huckabee had sacrilegiously besmirched the hallowed memory of the Nazis’ victims. But did he really?

It begs the question, what is an oven exactly? We’re all familiar with coal and wood fired ovens, which often make the best pizza. There are electric ovens and convection ovens, toaster ovens, gas-fired ovens and microwave ovens all employing differing levels of technology to achieve the desired result of cooking whatever dish might be placed within and sometimes you can burn a roast or casserole if the oven is too hot. The Nazis burned people in really big ovens. The main target of Nazi burning were Europe’s Jews who they killed with industrial efficiency with an eye towards genocide, at which they were nearly completely successful.

Hitler and his minions were unabashed and unapologetic about their stated goal of eradicating Europe’s (and even the world’s) Jews. At great cost to their war effort they pursued this goal practically until the bitter end. It was really kind of a rabid hate.

The Ayatollahs along with the political and military leaders of Iran have made no bones about their admiration for the Nazis’ effort (which paradoxically they deny ever happened) and their oft publicly stated desire to complete Hitler’s work by eradicating the State of Israel and all of the six million Jews in it. This is no secret, it’s shouted in the streets of Iran, in their press, tweets and broadcasts. They provide extensive monetary and strategic backing to various heavily armed proxy terrorist groups encircling Israel with the aim of enabling them to murder as many Israelis as possible and as an advance guard for the big, final push somewhere down the road.

This is why there is a wall to wall consensus in Israel from the far left to the far right against President Obama’s Iran nuke deal. After the experience of World War II and decades of ethno-religious hatred against them in the Middle East, Israelis take threats of genocide seriously and don’t pooh-pooh them as fantastical.

By allowing Iran to keep their nuclear program and permitting any pretense of inspections to expire in a decade along with the repeal of economic sanctions, the return of $150 billion in frozen assets, the lifting of prohibitions against selling Iran arms and intercontinental missiles, isn’t the deal in fact enabling Iran to burn more Jews in the short term and possibly realize their stated goal of genocide against the Jewish people perhaps 10 years on?

In the only two instances where atomic weapons were used against civilian populations (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) we saw the power of the atom to burn and incinerate. While the Nazis had to turn one body at a time into powder and ash, atomic weapons can do that to tens and hundreds of thousands in an instant and cause delayed death from radiation shortly after for the survivors of such a blast. If you incinerate thousands of bodies a day manually or perhaps a million instantaneously is not the end result the same?

The real desecration of the Holocaust victims’ memory is allowing such a thing to happen again, enabling would-be genocide by caving into the demands of dictatorial bullies who are fueled by religious and racial hatred. Holocaust survivors and most Jews generally ascribe to the philosophy of “Never Again” to a Holocaust against them.

Mike Huckabee used some very blunt language to disparage a deal that puts millions of Jews in harm’s way and Israel between a rock and a very hard place defensively.  When it comes to saving millions of lives perhaps diplomatic politesse is precisely the wrong tack to take and some plain speaking will both clear the air and shed more light.

For the diplomats in the White House and at Foggy Bottom this is all one big process and they’ll move on to the next treaty. For Israel and the Jewish people this is about life and death. Jews are very familiar with ovens of every caliber and would prefer not to be exposed to the heat in the Iranians’ kitchen.