Win or lose, Trump’s impact has been ‘y-u-u-u-u-ge!’

donald-trump-speech-promo-getty-491877616

Americans ought to perhaps prepare themselves for a major shock at the end of this year.

I’m talking about Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign.

No, I do not mean to suggest that Trump is going to win the election and start preparing himself to settle into the chair behind that big ol’ desk in the Oval Office. He won’t ever get to do that — in my humble view.

What I mean is that Trump’s presence on the campaign scene has had an impact far, far beyond anyone’s expectations when he entered it this past summer.

Yes, America, this man well could become Time magazine’s Person of the Year for 2016.

I don’t know how the Time editors are going to process this election. The winner of the campaign assuredly should be the logical choice for the esteemed honor. If it turns out to be Hillary Rodham Clinton, well, she will have made history as the first woman ever elected, just as Barack Hussein Obama made history by becoming the first African-American ever elected president.

Trump’s influence on this election, though, has been overarching.

He has redefined how the media cover these events.

Think of it: The guy has no government experience of any kind whatsoever. He is known as a reality TV celebrity and real estate mogul. He has lived a life of excess — and boasts about his extramarital sexual conquests. He begins his campaign by insulting Mexican immigrants who come here illegally by lumping all of them together as rapists, murderers and drug dealers.

Then it got worse.

Still, the man remains the frontrunner for the Republican Party presidential nomination. The media cannot stop reporting on his utterances. Why is that? Because the public is infatuated with them. Even those of us who cannot stomach the sight of him or the sound of his voice can’t stop writing about him.

Trust me on this: If there wasn’t a public appetite for this guy, the media wouldn’t report on him. The media respond to what the public demands.

The Time editors have made much of the criteria they use for these selections. The person they put on the magazine’s cover are there because of what they contributed for “good or ill.” The publication has put some pretty hideous characters on its cover: Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and the Ayatollah Khomeini come to mind immediately.

Donald J. Trump ain’t in their league.

However, he’s had a gigantic impact on the political process that selects the person who becomes president of the United States.

‘Bama pol seeks governor’s impeachment

bentleyrobert_042811getty

You’ve got to hand it to at least one Alabama Republican politician.

He wants to impeach the state’s governor, who’s also a Republican. He wants to invoke the state’s loosey-goosey impeachment criteria to remove Gov. Robert Bentley from office.

Bentley is accused of making “inappropriate remarks” to an aide. He’s been accused also of having an affair with her.

Bentley has denied the affair and acknowledged saying something untoward to the staffer.

The state’s impeachment criteria involve moral turpitude in addition to the usual things, such as malfeasance or outright corruption.

The lawmaker is on shaky ground, or so it might appear.

Republican state Rep. Ed Henry is going to present evidence to the House Rules Committee to see if he has grounds to impeach Gov. Bentley, who he has accused of betraying the trust of the people.

To be honest, this kind of conduct doesn’t strike me as an impeachable offense, no matter what the state’s rules allow.

Has the governor cost the state money? Has he done a poor job in running Alabama’s executive branch of government? Can anyone prove actual corruption?

The rest of the state’s legislature needs to take a sober look at what Rep. Henry is proposing and the grounds on which he is proposing to remove a statewide elected official.

Perhaps the state also ought to rethink the rules that “justify” an impeachment in the first place.

 

Game changer in Wisconsin?

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt,  and his wave Jane acknowledge the crowd as he arrives for his caucus night rally in Des Moines, Iowa, Monday, Feb. 2, 2016.  (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Bernie Sanders has scored the victory he was expected to get in Wisconsin.

Does that change the Democratic Party presidential primary game? Not just yet. The U.S. senator from Vermont has another big test ahead of him: New York. More on that in a bit.

The game now does appear to have changed in the other primary, the Republican one, where U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz drubbed Donald J. Trump in the GOP primary.

Cruz has cruised — pun intended — to a 20-point-plus victory in Wisconsin.

This sets up a longer-range battle as the GOP field slogs its way to the national convention in Cleveland, Ohio.

Trump’s insults, his inattention to detail, his innuendo and his inability to articulate a detailed policy platform on any issue under the sun finally — finally! — seems to have caught up with him.

Is the Texan, Cruz, any better? To my way of thinking, well, no. He’s not.

There well might be a situation setting up whereby Trump arrives in Cleveland a good bit short of the delegates he’ll need to win the nomination on the first ballot. After that? All bets are off. Let the chaos reign!

As for Sanders’ victory in Wisconsin, he’s now heading into the belly of the beast. New York ain’t Wisconsin.

My concern about Sanders is that he is singing a one-note aria. Income inequality? The shrinking middle-class? Big banks? Wall Street hedge fund manager? What in the heck does Sanders intend to do about any of it?

The more I think about it, Sanders is sounding almost as demagogic on his pet issues as Trump is sounding on his.

Is Hillary Rodham Clinton the perfect candidate? Far from it. She’s flawed, too. But she’s been pounded and pilloried by her enemies for more than two decades. She’s still standing, still fighting back.

The way I see it, that speaks to this woman’s political courage.

Moreover, she did represent New York in the Senate for eight years and by all accounts — even from her Republican colleagues — became an effective senator for the Empire State.

I will await the next primary round to commence in New York. We’ll see if the game has changed for the Democrats as much as it appears to have changed for the Republicans.

 

Passage of time brings more loss

How-time-flies-Time-management-tips

When I was a good bit younger I used to chuckle at old folks who would look at newspaper obituary pages in search of their friends’ names.

Many of those old folks would joke about whether their own names were in there. “Good, not there yet,” they might say.

It’s a rite of passage. It becomes something that everyone goes through, I guess.

I’m now getting up in age myself. I don’t see the newspaper regularly, but when I do I find myself gravitating to the obit page to find names and faces I know. Sadly, those names and faces show up with increasing regularity.

Yes, time does bring about the loss of friends. And family.

—-

I received a call this morning from my sister informing me that my wonderful Aunt Libby had died.

Elizabeth Kanelis is the fourth of my father’s generation to pass. Dad was the first, followed by his brother Tom and his sister Eileen. Libby has joined them, leaving only three of the seven siblings still with us.

Libby was one of a kind. She worked for many years for Ma Bell, aka the “Phone Company.” She left there and went back to college in her late 30s. She earned her degree — which gave her and all of us a great deal of pride — and then taught English to high school students in Portland, Ore., before retiring from that job.

She was married once — briefly — to a guy named Chuck.

I have a lot of memories of Libby while growing up. I feel compelled to share a couple of them here.

Libby was a great athlete. She played in a women’s semi-pro softball league; I’m guessing it was when she was in her 20s.

I used to play catch with her. If she came to our house, of if we gathered at my grandparents’ house, we usually found time to toss a ball around.

Whether throwing a baseball or football, Libby did not throw it “like a girl.” I’m telling you, she had an arm. She could throw a baseball as hard as any guy I ever saw and the spiral on a football she threw was tight enough to make any college or pro football player proud. She maintained her athletic prowess even as I became a teenager.

We played golf on occasion. And, oh by the way, she was no duffer.

Libby could be outspoken and blunt. That was part of her charm. She also was self-deprecating and had no trouble making fun of herself.

I didn’t hear this directly, but I got it from my other sister, who related a story Libby told about herself to my sis and her then-quite young daughter. She was talking about a cruise she had taken with one of her sisters, who — Libby said — had met this “special friend” aboard ship. My other aunt and this gentleman spent time on the ship enjoying the sights and, oh, you know …

As my sister told me the story, she remembered her daughter asking Libby, “Aunt Libby, did you meet anyone special on the ship, too?” Oh sure, Libby said. “I managed to bag a bellhop in the boiler room.”

My sister and I cannot tell that story to this day without busting out in hysterical laughter.

I took some time a few weeks ago to see Libby. I flew to Portland for the purpose of seeing her. She had suffered a stroke not long ago. Her memory wasn’t good. She had trouble constructing sentences and then uttering them. But when I walked into her room, I was heartened that she recognized me right away.

We had a wonderful visit. I just sat there and looked at her, recalling a long-ago time.

Yes, it happens to everyone. Our time on Earth comes to an end eventually.

I just wanted to introduce you to a member of my family who I loved very much and who has left me with many cherished memories.

The passage of time has this way of triggering those thoughts, too.

 

Life-changing project has begun

emma

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on upcoming retirement.

It has begun.

The “it” is the beginning of a project that will result in a significant change in the lives of my wife and me.

It’s not an event that will occur in the immediate term. Or even the medium-length term. It’s more of a longer-term project. I hesitate to tell you today how long it will take, because I don’t want to get pinned down by watchdogs out there who read these musings with regularity.

I’ve made no secret to family and friends of our desire to make a big move to be near our now 3-year-old granddaughter, Emma, her parents and her brothers. Yes, that’s our little pumpkin in the picture that accompanies this blog post.

One huge project that stands between us today and that event is the condition of the home we had built in Amarillo in late 1996. The yard — particularly the back yard — needs attention. It’s not officially in what I would describe as “grotesque” condition. It just needs work.

Well, today, that project began. It’s going to take some time to complete. We’ll take care of some inside needs, too.

I’ve decided to start working on the outside. I’m digging up turf and will re-sod portions of the back yard — eventually.

It’s not that we have a lot of turf to dig up. It’s just that the grass has been in the ground for some time. The ground is pretty dry these days. I’ll water it some to soften it up for my shovel. But the wind dries everything out around here in a big-league hurry.

My wife reminds me that I’m not “as young as I used to be.” Funny, eh? No one is as young as they used to be. I get her point. I intend to be systematic and patient with this re-sodding project.

As I noted, we aren’t planning anything any time soon.

But we’ll get there soon enough …

Grandparents who read this blog surely will empathize with what’s in our hearts.

Polls, polls … and more polls

sandersclinton_040116getty

Is it me or have the media become more obsessed with poll coverage in this presidential election cycle than ever before in the history of mass media in this country?

Of particular interest to me are a certain type of intraparty poll that measures candidates’ relative strength against each other.

These surveys drive me nuts. Bonkers, man!

Why? They’re meaningless.

Here’s the latest: NBC says Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a nine-point lead over Democratic Party primary rival U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders. That’s nationally.

What, I ask, does that mean? Does that mean if we had a national political primary that Clinton would beat Sanders by nine percentage points?

Maybe. Except that we aren’t going through a national primary election cycle. Candidates are trudging through these primaries state by bloody state, where the voters in each state have different perspectives, different worries and concerns, different philosophies.

Wisconsin is going to have its Democratic and Republican primaries today. Sanders is favored at this moment to win the Democratic primary; U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is favored to win the GOP primary.

Still, the media keep reporting that Donald J. Trump holds a diminishing national lead over Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich in a national poll of Republican voters.

I’m running out of ways to say this: I do not care about national intraparty polls. They are not relevant to anything.

Some TV pundits the other evening were saying that they perceive fewer “horse-race” questions coming from the media as the primary campaigns head toward the home stretch. They say they’re hearing more “policy-driven” questions … allegedly.

More policy and fewer polls, please.

 

Intrigue builds around Speaker Ryan

ryan

Oh, how I love the intrigue that’s building around House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Will he “save” the Republican Party by emerging in Cleveland as the party’s compromise candidate for president of the United States?

Is the speaker going to toss aside every one of his (half-hearted) statements of non-interest in seeking the presidency?

This is fabulous! I am not going to predict what Ryan will do, but it certainly has me licking my chops at the chaos that would develop if the speaker actually jumps in.

Ryan keeps saying most of the things that would suggest he’s not going to run. But there remains wiggle room in every one of his so-called statements. The room ain’t huge. He’s not going to shake his booty while saying these things.

Every pundit since shortly after the Civil War keeps waiting for the so-called Shermanesque statement. You know what I mean. Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman said, “If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve.”

Everything the speaker has said so far falls so far short of that categorical disavowal of any interest in running for the presidency.

He told radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt today that “you have to run for president to be president. I am not running for president. Period. End of story.”

He is “not running for president.” Isn’t that what he said? It’s tantamount to the standard dodge that pols use when they don’t “intend to run.”

Let’s parse that for a second. I take that to mean that Ryan “is not running” today, in the present tense. He says not a single thing about what he might do this summer.

The only possible circumstance that is going to quell this “draft Ryan” talk is if Donald J. Trump wins enough delegates to sew up on the nomination on the first ballot.

Let’s remember that the speaker said he didn’t want to be speaker, either. Then the Republican House caucus drafted him to take the job as the nation’s top GOP elected official.

And the intrigue will continue.

RNC chairman warns Trump of ‘consequences’

RNC chair

Reince Priebus has given Donald J. Trump fair warning.

He might face “consequences” if the fails to fall in line and support the Republican Party’s presidential nominee if it happens to be someone other than Trump his own self.

The RNC chairman might have little actual power to inflict damage on the still-presumed frontrunner for the GOP nomination.

Those consequences, though, could take on lives of their own if the convention in Cleveland gets out of hand.

Listen up, Donald.

Let’s flash back — shall we? — to 1972. The other major political party, the Democrats, had a raucous gathering in Miami, Fla. They had gone through a rough-and-tumble primary season and from the rubble of that protracted battle there emerged a candidate to seal the nomination.

U.S. Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota became the Democratic nominee. His campaign theme was as simple as Bernie Sanders’s theme is today: Bring the troops home from the Vietnam War, which Sen. McGovern opposed with every fiber of his being.

Well, he didn’t win the presidency that year. He lost it huge to President Nixon in that 49-state wipeout.

It might be that a partial reason for the huge loss was the timing of his acceptance speech.

The convention delegates had battled day and night over rules changes. McGovern’s forces had sought wholesale change in the rules, which usually are a sort of work in progress as the convention unfolds.

They fought, squabbled and bickered on the convention floor.

Finally, after all that fighting, Sen. McGovern strode to the podium and urged the nation to “come home, America.” It was quite a stirring speech. I watched him deliver it from my apartment in Portland, Ore., where I lived with the girl I had married less than a year earlier.

He gave the speech at 2 a.m. That’s 2 in the morning, man. It was 11 p.m. on the Left Coast. But he wasn’t really talking to us. His remarks were meant to  be heard by that big voter base back east.

A lot of those voters had hit the sack by the Sen. McGovern accepted his party’s nomination.

As I look back on it now, I figured that was a “consequence” of Democrats failing to have their ducks lined up.

There well might be a similar consequence this summer in Cleveland as Republicans gather to send their nominee into battle against the Democrats.

Will it be the work of Chairman Priebus? Maybe.

Then again, he might not have to do anything to make Trump pay for his rebellion.

 

 

 

C’mon, Bernie; show us your tax returns

berniesanders-61515-1434466786

Sen. Bernie Sanders tries to make a lot of hay about his authenticity, that he’s just one of us, that he’s campaigning for the little guy.

I get his message as he battles Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

But this morning on CNN, the distinguished gentleman from Vermont fluffed a direct question from “State of the Union” host Jake Tapper: Why won’t you release your tax returns, as Secretary Clinton has done for the past eight years?

His answer? “My wife does our tax returns and I’ve been a little busy.”

OK, senator. Enough already.

Americans heard some kind of song-and-dance from Republican frontrunner Donald J. Trump, who said he couldn’t release his returns because he was being audited for the past 12 consecutive years. That, too, is a stretch.

However, these returns have become part of the effort to improve transparency among all the candidates running for president.

It seems to many of us that it’s especially critical to see the tax returns from candidates who keep purporting to be champions for “wage equality” and who keep blasting the “top 1 percent” of income-earners for getting rich while the rest of us are struggling to make ends meet.

Mrs. Sanders does his tax returns? They’ve been “busy”?

Get real, senator. If your returns are straightforward and uncomplicated as your campaign message would seem to imply, then releasing the records wouldn’t be that big a deal.

This, sir, simply goes with the territory. Candidates who ask voters to entrust them with governing the world’s richest and most powerful nation should expect demands to see if they, too, are living up to the high-minded rhetoric they espouse on the campaign trail.

 

Now … about the Democratic wackiness

rs_1024x759-150709052426-1024.Donald-Trump-Hillary-Clinton-JR-70915_copy

Almost all the political chatter of the past, oh, six months has been about how Donald J. Trump turned his Republican Party primary presidential candidacy from a joke to a matter of serious discussion.

Who among you really thought this guy ever — in a zillion years — would achieve GOP frontrunner status when he declared his candidacy this past summer? I didn’t either.

He has. Trump is beginning to wobble, though, because his glaring lack of study of the issues is finally catching up to him. He’s likely to get hammered in Wisconsin on Tuesday. Then it’s on to New York, where he figures to do better, if not real well.

OK, enough of that.

Those Democrats have produced their share of campaign wackiness, too.

Let me ask you this one: Who out there really and truly thought at the beginning of her campaign that Hillary Rodham Clinton would be challenged as strongly as she’s been challenged by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont, the “democratic socialist”? I’m with you. I thought she was a shoo-in.

She’s been hammered by the right — as expected — over Benghazi, those “damn emails,” as Sanders has described them, and over an alleged lack of “authenticity.

But she’s also been pounded by the lefties. Those kids who’ve climbed aboard Bernie’s bandwagon because of his pledge to provide college education for everyone has helped lift this guy’s candidacy to heights never imagined when he started out.

Bernie well might win in Wisconsin this week. Then he goes to New York, which Clinton represented in the U.S. Senate after she served two terms as first lady.

Clinton’s task in Wisconsin is to keep the result fairly close; a blowout win by Sanders might light a serious wildfire in his campaign that could cause some serious trouble for Clinton in New York.

Clinton now has to win big in her “home state.” I put that in quotes because, as you know, she really didn’t spend much time there before being elected to the Senate in 2000. It’s that authenticity thing, aka “carpetbagging,” that keeps nipping at her.

Clinton remains miles ahead of Sanders in the delegate count. If she wins yu-u-u-u-u-ge in New York, then she is on track to sew the primary campaign up by the time it rolls around to California.

If she stumbles there after getting beat in Wisconsin, well, then we’ve got a different game.

Yesterday’s sure thing, thus, becomes a candidate in for the fight of her life.

Go figure.

I’m telling you that when historians over the next generation or two try to examine the impact of strange and weird presidential campaigns in this great country, they’re going to hold Campaign 2016 up as their starting point.

I’m not sure how it can get any stranger than what we’ve witnessed on both sides of the divide.

It probably will.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience