Who Needs a Moderator?, Trump Asks

Amid all the hullabaloo over Hillary Clinton’s health, perhaps you missed this latest ploy from Donald Trump:

He wants to change the debate ground rules. He wants to do away with moderators at the three presidential debates. He is trying to game the agreed upon system just like he shortchanged contractors out of their agreed upon compensation for work on his construction projects.

Trump is obviously afraid that moderators with more savvy, sense, intelligence and courage than Matt Lauer will point out his fabrications, inconsistencies and overt lies.

Let’s be clear. Both candidates fudge the truth, but Trump’s lollapaloozas are extreme. It does no one a service, other than Trump, to have him spout inaccuracies. Clinton’s misstatements, as well, need to be clarified and cleansed. An objective, informed, intelligent and courageous moderator should take up the challenge. 

Here’s another thing that needs to be clear: The Trump-Clinton debates will not rival the dignity of the hallowed Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858. Though they will pit a Republican against a Democrat, that’s where the similarities end. The format of those seven classic meetings was not a give and take of candidates answering questions posed by a moderator, each other or member of the public. Rather as explained by Wikipedia, “The format for each debate was: one candidate spoke for 60 minutes, then the other candidate spoke for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate was allowed a 30-minute ‘rejoinder.’ The candidates alternated speaking first.”

In seeking to remove the moderators Trump is suggesting they would be biased against him. He claims the format is rigged against him (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-no-debate-moderator-228016). 

A rigged election is a theme Trump has espoused for several weeks as a counterfoil to a potential loss on November 8. “I’m afraid the election’s gonna be rigged, I have to be honest,” Trump said last month in Columbus, Ohio. 

Perhaps no other comment—from his attacks on Mexicans, Muslims, prisoners of war, a Gold Star family, the military leadership—has been more troublesome as it undermines the credibility of our electoral system and the peaceful transition of power. 

Hardly an election goes by that does not engender cries of “foul.” But from Richard Nixon in 1960 through Al Gore in 2000, candidates who felt cheated out of the presidency have considered the consequences a legal challenge to the outcome would have on our democracy. 

Trump, on the other hand, is feeding a frenzied following fodder for physical dissent should he lose. From the outset of his primary run to now, his campaign has not been a combat of ideas and platform planks but rather one of invective and disdain for the truth. 

In case of defeat, Clinton supports half-jokingly talk about moving to Canada. Trumpsters talk about taking back their government, by force if necessary. Paranoia abounds (http://nyti.ms/2bVLlVg).

Democratic paranoia stems from the possibility that Russia might hack the results in key states to tip the election. Already Russia is suspected of hacking election files in Arizona and Illinois. Computer voting with no paper backup is an invitation to confusion, if not disaster.

For a diverting take on how a computer glitch could determine an election, view the 2006 Robin Williams film, Man of the Year. Williams played Tom Dobbs, a TV host-comedian whose acerbic jabs at politics and politicians not only provoked laughter but also propelled him toward a spontaneous populist third party candidacy for the presidency.

Asked during a debate why he was running, Dobbs sounded Trump-like prescient: “I’ve decided to run because I’m fed up with party politics. I’m tired of the Republican Party,  I’m tired of the Democratic Party. There’s no real difference. They’re all Mr. Potato Head candidates. Basically, you’ve got a figure where here’s the operative word, “party,” because behind closed doors, phew,  I think they’re just having a real good time…the bottom line is they’ve lost track of what they are responsible for. They’re responsible to the people and not party loyalties and definitely not lobbyists. That’s why I’m running for president.”

To no one’s surprise who views the movie, spoiler alert, he wins because of a computer screw-up. Watch the movie to find out what happens next.

By the way, did anyone else see the irony of Hillary Clinton’s failed attempt Sunday morning to keep her pneumonia secret coinciding with the Sunday night airing of Churchill’s Secret, a movie on PBS about the British prime minister’s attempt to keep the world in the dark about a life-threatening stroke he suffered in 1953? 

The movie is based on the book by Jonathan Smith, The Churchill Secret KBO. KBO stands for Churchill’s motto, “Keep Buggering On.” Is that not like what Clinton told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “I thought that I could just keep going forward and power through it. And obviously that didn’t work out so well,” she said.

Trump: A Real Life Man of the Year?

As I do many days while eating a late breakfast after driving Gilda to work, I turn on the television. It’s a good time to catch up on the prior night’s Daily Show with Jon Stewart. But this being a Monday, there was no Daily Show recording to view, so I channel surfed, stopping when I came across a 2006 Robin Williams film, Man of the Year. It is not a great film. Passably a good film. In the pantheon of political-based films it doesn’t rank up there with movies like The Candidate, or Wag the Dog, Bulworth, The Last Hurrah, All the King’s Men, or Gabriel over the White House.

But it’s a timely film, particularly since Donald Trump will be on the stage as one of 10 Republican hopefuls at the GOP’s first presidential debate August 6 in Cleveland, to be aired by Fox News. The movie’s debate scene alone is worth sitting through the near two-hour flick, which will be rebroadcast on HBOC at 2:35 pm Thursday, July 30.

Willams played Tom Dobbs, a TV host-comedian whose acerbic jabs at politics and politicians not only provoked laughter but also propelled him toward a spontaneous populist third party candidacy for the presidency. He generated sufficient support to garner an invitation to appear beside the Democratic and Republican nominees during the last televised debate weeks before the election.

Asked by the moderator why he chose to seek the Oval Office, Dobbs responded seriously enough: “I’ve decided to run because I’m fed up with party politics. I’m tired of the Republican Party,  I’m tired of the Democratic Party. There’s no real difference. They’re all Mr. Potato Head candidates. Basically, you’ve got a figure where here’s the operative word, “party,” because behind closed doors, phew,  I think they’re just having a real good time…the bottom line is they’ve lost track of what they are responsible for. They’re responsible to the people and not party loyalties and definitely not lobbyists. That’s why I’m running for president.”

Off stage, his staff yearned for him to be bombastic, like the comedian he is. But Dobbs remained serious until, until he couldn’t take the posturing of his opponents any longer. He reverted to form.

After riffing on security checks at airports, including body searches of old ladies, he said, “Meanwhile, at the southern borders of our country, four million illegal aliens are crossing the border with bedroom sets and night tables. 

“Let’s have real security and not the illusion of security.” 

Sound familiar?

He interrupted the other candidates with a free form rant. He vacated the sanctity of his podium and strode across the stage. Frantically, the moderator sought to restore order, admonishing, “Mr. Dobbs, please do not make a mockery of this process,” to which he replied, “Ma’am, this was a mockery a long time before I came here.”

The live audience loved it. So did much of the viewing public. In short, his performance was exactly what Republicans fear Trump’s will be next week. 

To see a clip of Dobbs at the debate click on this link: 

https://youtu.be/ihlVhZwj0fY

For a more reasoned analysis of what begat Trump and his impact on the GOP, read Timothy Egan’s commentary from The New York Times: http://nyti.ms/1LAbF2j

Buckle Up! Peter Pan Is Taking Off, Again

Will you be watching Peter Pan tonight? I probably won’t, though Gilda has influenced me into taping the three hour live production (taping allows me to zoom through the plethora of commercials that would make this new version of the classic show almost intolerable to view live). Which raises the question, which moron at NBC thought it brilliant to air a children’s show that would end at 11 pm on a school night?

I’m not inclined to see this version of Peter Pan because I adored the mid-1950s production starring Mary Martin and Cyril Ritchard. Each year I eagerly absorbed the black and white telecast, excitedly clapping to keep Tinker Bell alive, crowing along with Peter, singing “I’m an Indian, too” with Tiger Lily, and crossing swords with Captain Hook and Smee. I had a green felt hat with feather, just like Peter wore, at least in the Walt Disney cartoons of Peter’s adventures that aired in the same decade, and plastic swords to duel pirates. I had a Peter Pan board game. 

In short, if I wasn’t imagining myself as Davy Crockett in my coonskin hat, I was visualizing myself flying through the air as Peter Pan. Perhaps that’s why I liked the Robin Williams film Hook and the Johnny Depp flick Finding Neverland that extended my youthful fascination with the J.M. Barrie boy who never wanted to grow up. I never wanted to, either (Gilda would say there are many a day when I display child-like behavior, but that’s a subject of another blog that probably will never see the light of a computer screen). And for the record, I also really enjoyed watching the Disneyfication of Davy Crockett starring Fess Parker and Buddy Ebsen.

Gilda does not share my enthusiasm for Peter Pan. I don’t believe Ellie does, either, but her musical theater career includes two portrayals of Wendy, once in the traditional role as part of a Play Group Theatre production while in high school and then at Skidmore College in a dark, avant-garde reorientation of the classic story. All I recall from that play is Ellie singing, a major coup for a freshman to be chosen ahead of theater majors.

Remembering Robin Williams

Robin Williams was so achingly funny, so capable of mining the essential human spirit out of a moment, that you would have to be reminded he was not Jewish.

Quick. Make a list of memorable comics/comedians during your lifetime. Here’s my top of the mind list: 

Milton Berle, Red Skelton, Jack Benny, George Burns, Mel Brooks, Steve Martin, Phil Silvers, Alan King, Jackie Mason, Louis CK, Sarah Silverman, Richard Pryor, Bill Cosby, Martin Short, Jerry Seinfeld, Larry David, Flip Wilson, Godfrey Cambridge, Totie Fields, Joan Rivers, Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, Joey Bishop, Mort Sahl, Lenny Bruce, Dick Gregory, Jonathan Winters, Steve Allen, George Carlin, Ernie Kovacs, Sid Caesar, Henny Youngman, Jack Carter, Buddy Hackett, Jimmy Kimmel, Tina Fey, Carl Reiner, Myron Cohen, Shelly Berman, Jim Carrey, Freddie Prinze, Andy Kaufman, Red Foxx, Bob Newhart, Don Rickles, Bill Maher, Robert Klein Woody Allen, David Steinberg, Jerry Lewis, Billy Crystal, David Brenner, Ellen deGeneres, Pat Cooper.

Fifty-four names. With rare exception, if they weren’t/aren’t Jewish (32) they were/are black (6), similarly from heritages of suffering and exclusion. Doesn’t it reveal something that of those who are not Jewish some of the more prominent and successful, including Martin Short, Steve Martin and Bill Maher, are often thought to be tribe members.

Among the many tributes his fellow comedians extended Monday was this one from Steve Martin, himself a brilliant observer and commentator of the human condition.  “I could not be more stunned by the loss of Robin Williams, mensch, great talent, acting partner, genuine soul.”

How revealing, how nuanced, that Martin would include mensch in his recollection of Williams.

I wrote this blog (until this paragraph) the night Robin Williams’ death was announced but have been reluctant to post it, thinking I might be a little too jingoistic in my Jewishness (would you have known what I meant if I had just written “Jewgoistic?). 

I’m not the only one to have noted the crossover ties between Williams and his Jewish audiences (here’s a columnist for The Jewish Week: http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/national/robin-williams-honorary-jew). 

Perhaps it stemmed from the dramatic roles he undertook in film. Though not necessarily Jewish characters, several represented professions that embodied nurturing and healing—doctors in Good Will Hunting, Patch Adams, What Dreams May Come and Awakening; teachers in Dead Poets Society and Flubber. He portrayed outcasts of society in Jack, The Fisher King, Bicentennial Man, Good Morning, Vietnam and The Birdcage. He exemplified the Russian Refusnik who emigrated to America (and Israel) in Moscow on the Hudson. In Jakob the Liar Williams made the Holocaust bearable, for a time. He played everyone’s favorite nanny in Mrs. Doubtfire.

Like most people I marveled at his comic genius, his creativity, his ability to spout on-the-spot humor. But, from what I’ve read, before Williams hit pay dirt with comedy, he wanted to be a dramatic actor. Few would deny he became one of the best of his generation.