The End of The Road for The Donald

Today, the tidal wave known as the Trump Phenomenon will crest and roll back, falling short of its objectives; to the betterment of mankind, according to most.

Sixteen months after Donald Trump made that now-famous elevator ride, his third wife in tow, 14 months after I explained for you in two simple words the reason for his rise ("Duck Dynasty"), four months after receiving the nomination of the Republican party for President and one month after the conclusion of a series of debates which proved once and for all that Trump is not only temperamentally unfit for the office, but mentally unprepared, the day has arrived.

Election Day. Hallelujah!

Yes, the "temporarily unfit" part we're well aware of – but he was going to change! When the Republican debates began, he was going to "pivot" and get serious. (He didn't.) Then after he secured the nomination, he was going to pivot and act like a respectful, real candidate. (He didn't.) Then his handlers said, "just wait until Labor Day when the REAL campaign starts …" but again, he refused to pivot. Proof that a leopard can't change his spots.

But in addition to his volatile, child-like temperament, Trump showed in these last two months that he doesn't have the knowledge or the mental capacity to run the big show. Simply put, he's out of his league; a true mental lightweight. And why wouldn't he be? He's had no need, as it were, to be smart.

As youths, most of us are not given $1 million to play with (like Trump), so we pursue knowledge in an area that interests us so that we might make a living. We continue to pursue the knowledge of things around us that may or may not affect us for the purpose of ever growing said knowledge. But in Trump's case, he had no need to learn anything in the first place, even the need for any knowledge about his enterprises. If one of his businesses fail, shut it down and file bankruptcy. If he runs out of money, just don't pay contractors. This has been his life for 40 years and now that he has run for president, we're all familiar with the pattern. He has proven to be a shallow little man with a small brain containing zero real ideas for our nation. During more than one moment in the third and final debate, I was reminded, once again, of Marlow's discovery of Kurtz in the jungle in Conrad's Heart of Darkness: " … he could not have been more irretrievably lost than he was at this very moment …"

However, for me personally, the lack of intelligence is the least of it. Beyond this, even beyond the specific personal jibes, the disparaging of entire cultures and myriad other sectors of society, there's an overriding cloud that hangs over Donald Trump.

He's an asshole.

Not a troublemaker, per se, for the sake of righteousness in the classic political, cultural or even journalistic sense; not a muckraker; not even your basic shit-disturber. He's just a plain asshole. That said, I understand that many in Trumpdom may like these qualities in the guy, or even in their friends or themselves because they think it's time somebody stirred the pot. And when you do so for a good reason, well, that makes you a muckraker. But when you do something with no factual basis or no sincere cause, but merely for the sport of it, that makes you an asshole.

Unfit to be president? Given his professional history of red ink, bankruptcies, legal problems and stiffing contractors, Donald Trump is unfit to run a business.

Given his personal history of playing the victim in virtually every challenging situation he's been in, Donald Trump is unfit to be a human being.

Holt The Dolt

It seemed that last night's debate moderator, Lester Holt, had neither the guts nor the political inclination to put the screws to 'ole Donald Trump when the moment called for it. So, for the purpose of clarification, I'm happy to ask the questions that Holt The Dolt should have asked:

"You, Mr. Trump, say that we shouldn't let jobs leave our shores; do these include the jobs you shipped overseas to manufacturer your extensive line of "Trump-wear?"

"Do you really think, Mr. Trump, that income tax evasion makes you look smart – or just criminal?"

"Maybe you're right, Mr. Trump, that it may be time that this country was run by someone who knows something about money. Considering that you've lost more money than you've made over your lifetime … can you recommend someone?"

"Would it really be possible for you, Mr. Trump – the king of debt – to lead us out of the 'debtor nation' status you say we're in?"

"Mr. Trump, you say you have the right temperament to be president … just for clarification, could you please repeat that statement with a straight face?"

There was no relief in sight this morning amid the talk shows, in particular when Trump's Campaign Manager, Kellyanne Conway, expressed relief that Trump was able to "show restraint" last night. Which was great – first time for everything. But what happens when at some point he DOESN'T show restraint and the provocateur is not Hillary Clinton, but instead one of the nuke-toting, hot-headed dictators from around the globe?

Just wondering.

One Less Nut

An editorial in today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch on anti-feminist gadfly Phyllis Schlafly who died yesterday at 92, said that she was, among other things, a successful businesswoman.

But doesn't a successful businesswoman or businessman actually make money? Ha! Not Phyllis – she went to her grave proud of her oft-stated swank that she never had a paying job after she married – that she didn't need to – that the men in her life were willing to provide for her.

Which is great when you come from a perfect family with plenty of money (or at least as much as is needed to get by without worries) or even marry into such an arrangement. Or, as in Schlafly's case, both.

'Course, the fact is, not every family is perfect like Phyllis'. Some people – some WOMEN – have to WORK for a living. Not every woman is born with a silver spoon in her mouth, enabling her to run off on any crazed, half-cocked endeavor, political or otherwise, no matter how looney such endeavor appears to be. And the case of The Woman Who Said Housewives Should Stay in The House But Didn't Do So Herself was pretty looney. But it was really more than that – it was absolute hypocrisy.

And that was Phyllis Schlafly in a nut- (and I do mean "nut") shell – your classic far right, holier-than-thou hypocrite.

They hate gays until one springs up in the family.

They hate abortion until their 15-year-old daughter is raped.

They hate guns until a loved one is a victim of our too-loose gun laws.

Phyllis Schlafly most likely had plenty of hate in her, with most of it, obviously, reserved for women – that is, women besides herself.

Given that at the height of its potential power in the 1970s when the push for equal pay for both sexes could have taken root, it could be said today that Schlafly – who fought AGAINST this idea at the time – was instrumental in pushing the movement BACK four decades. Appropriate enough for the woman who thought that the best thing to happen to a woman during her lifetime was the invention of the clothes dryer; who once said, "by getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape;" and in a final act of insanity, jumped on the Trump bandwagon. Pretty pathetic. They'll bury her later this week, along with her antiquated ideas about women, work and American culture in general. In Phyllis Schlafly's world, Gretchen Carlson and Megyn Kelly and the rest of ladies at Fox News would just have to take it.

A sad legacy left by a despicable human being.

Hope

Throughout every election year there seems to be a recurring outcry: "Is this the best we can do?" Now that both party conventions have been completed, that plea takes on a more official, albeit more ominous sheen for this election year of 2016. Except that this year, I'm confident in my answer of "NO – it's NOT the best we can do." 

Let me take you back to June 22^nd of this year – just a few weeks ago – to the Democrat party's sit-in/protest over gun control legislation (of the lack thereof) that took place in the U.S. House of Representatives. Agree with the maneuver or not, agree with the politics or not, we saw and heard a series of 5-minute spiels from one seemingly smart, honest, passionate, capable politician after another. And I'd be willing to bet that on the Republican side of the house, there are also plenty of smart, honest, passionate, capable politicians – with no name recognition and no money – certainly not for the kind of high-powered financial run that a presidential bid requires.

Which is why I give Bernie Sanders a lot of credit, despite my general disdain of him. Sanders didn't have the name or the money, but he had the balls. One might instinctively say the same thing about Trump, but the fact is that Trump HAD the money and the name – which makes it pretty easy to have the balls.

Maybe there's a chance we'll wake up from the current nightmare to find Martin O'Malley and Paul Ryan at the top of their respective ballots – a couple of decent guys who, despite their own requisite faults, represent the mainstream interest of their parties with sincerity and passion. But they – or some heretofore unknown – will have to wait until next time. For now, we're stuck – with Hillary and Trump.