This has to be almost poetic in nature, if you think about it.
Donald J. Trump won election to the first public office he ever sought. It’s a big one, for sure: president of the United States of America.
He knows next to zero about governance, so he’ll be learning much of it while working on the job.
Then there’s this: The new president is going to remain attached to the reality TV show that gave him notoriety, “The Apprentice.” He’ll be an executive producer of the show that will be hosted by former body builder/California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who will inherit the role Trump once played, getting the chance to say “You’re fired!” to would-be business executives.
This is just plain weird, man. Strange in the extreme. Goofy to the max.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/maybe-the-answer-is-that-he-can-t-divest
The president of the United States usually has a pretty full plate. He’s got to do things like, oh, protect us against our enemies, rev up the economy, ensure domestic tranquility and be the spokesman for the greatest nation on Earth.
How is this guy going to have time to devote to being executive producer of a TV show?
I guess the poetic element comes in as we realize that the president will be more or less serving as an “apprentice” in his own right while working his day job as head of state and head of government.
Thus, his role as executive producer of “The Apprentice” would appear to be a perfect fit.
Good … grief!
NPR touched on this little bon bon in brief as I layed in bed contemplating going to work in the dark (up here in Anchorage – where we are at 6 hours daylight – to bottom out at 5:29).
They quoted Kelly Anne Conway as saying Pres. Trump deserves to have spare time activities.
(i admit to being lazy and not fetching the NPR transcript – but I don’t think I dreamt this)
More broadly, and critically, I observe that journalists – and to be “fair” many voters/citizens ascribe “oughts” to presidents that I don’t share as a classical liberal. Short version – neglect of affairs that grownups already address to protect their interests is nothing to fear – and often preferable.
To that end your list is suitably short and mostly essential:
protect us against our enemies
This is the most essential function of government – especially if you regard garden-variety criminals/aggressors as “enemies” – and don’t subscribe to ordinary ethical business activity as “aggression”
rev up the economy
In that government already aggresses against ordinary ethical business activity in particular and wealth-creation in general considerable repeal is in order. Good Show (though you and I may disagree on what constitutes “aggression”)
ensure domestic tranquility
Bla Bla – this is the usual vague platitude – oft used to justify govt aggression outside the economic/transactive sphere (the “personal liberty” part of our lives). Do Gooders with legislative and enforcement power should really be Do Lessers.
be the spokesman for the greatest nation on Earth
This is the easiest part – lots of speech makers will help – not all presidents need be as good as president Obama at this – who may be Churchillian in his speech-writing power if not sensibility.
Going back to the trivial:
“Executive Producer” is suitably vague. Sometimes it’s strictly titular – ot means no more than “silent partner” – the dude with the money (except, of course, for the title/credit itself). Other times it means the dude(tte) who actually pulls the levers. No “time” is necessarily needed for the titular version.
The linked article speaks to the extremely sticky conflict of interest issue.
Let tick through recent presidents for similar issues.
BHO: so far as I recall, the only honest job he had was “community organizer” – he never created significant wealth.
(as an aside, candidate Mitt Romney may have had issues – but his wealth was much more narrowly focused than Trumps)
GWB: wealthy but a dillettante – not really any kind of an entrepreneur. One could legitimately argue that GM for the Texas Rangers was a honest job. You might speak to this having worked more closely to him pre-Governor.
(another aside – candidate Kerry – we know he married his wealth – the Ketchup Queen – did he ever have an honest job?)
WJC: much like BHO – except for the honest job part
GHWB: Had a rich public-service resume. Not so sure about his working life. Was he “self-made”? You might speak to this having worked more closely to him pre-CIA-US Rep.
RWR: Announcer, Actor, Union Officer – not really any kind of an entrepreneur.
JSC: (doing pretty good with those middle names/initals)
Supposedly a “peanut farmer” before Gov. in the deep South.
At first blush, it looks like Trump’s problem is “stickier” than all of them. I will be fascinated to see how he addresses it – the public part at least.
I believe he is not legally compelled to do anything – though to hold the noise down from the rabble – especially those with barrels of ink – he should at least pay lip-service.
Well, that about covers it. Thanks so much.
You’re a fast reader (or just shinin’ me on)! No push-back on “rabble with barrels of ink”?
I do look forward to your comments when Trump announces how he will turn over “the reins”.
I read it. I always enjoy your comments, too. Thanks so much for reading the blog.
Oh, and I forgot to compliment you about the “apprentice” remark – as “poetic”.
Thanks again.
Sorry to post this comment here, but I couldn’t figure out how to comment on your “sidebar” titled:
Is Trump really that rich? Really … ?
DJT may not be unique but we may agree that he’s a rare bird. The Forbes 400 came to mind when you (and others) raised the question.
I found a little nugget – a 2005 NYT article which asked the same question:
What’s He Really Worth?
By TIMOTHY L. O’BRIEN
OCT. 23, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/23/business/yourmoney/whats-he-really-worth.html?_r=0
(if you don’t subscribe send me an email and I’ll send you the article)
Among some fun prose it lists Forbes 400 appearances. It quotes the 1996 Forbes article:
“Trump, polite but unhappy, phoning from his plane: ‘You’re putting me on at $450 million? I’ve got that much in stock market assets alone. There’s 100 percent of Trump Tower, 100 percent of the new Nike store — they’re paying $10 million a year in rent!’ Add it all up, said Trump, and his net worth is ‘in the $2 billion range, probably over $2 billion.’ “
and that’s just the start. Good Stuff – Highly Entertaining.
With about the same amount of white hair, but not nearly so worldly as a recently-retired working journalist, I suspect I am not in your league regards financial sophisticiation – after all, you have closely followed so many more of the rich than I.
Yet, I wonder if Trump was not correct when he claimed that the FEC requires far more about his net worth than tax returns would.
(what do you know about FEC requirements?)
Anyway, thanks for arousing a little curiosity in me. That NYT article is a gem (and the man got paid to write – nice work if you can get it).