Autumn's Upside Down Who'll Be the Next in Line?
Autumn's Upside Down; Who'll Be the Next in Line?
It's difficult to escape my political cocoon these days, with Election Day so close on the horizon. There are reminders everywhere. I'll drop off the kids at school uptown and see my friend Jay Courage; if the increasingly kooky, yet still addictive, overnight polls were bad for George W. Bush we'll scowl at each other. When Gallup posts a positive GOP trend, it's a thumbs-up greeting.
Better in those situations to talk sports. I still haven't shaken off the Red Sox's collapse in the last month of the baseball season, although Junior, who's built a temple to the team in his bedroom, is far more resilient. Last Friday morning, I broke the news to him that the Sox would have to win their final three games and the Yanks would have to be swept by Baltimore, which would force a make-up game between the Bombers and the Devil Rays.
I took a breath and said that if the miserable Florida team then prevails, there will be a one-game playoff for the A.L. East division title. What are the odds, he asked? About 100-1, I replied, and then recounted the weird season of 1978, when the Sox and Yanks met for a similar sudden-death duel at Fenway Park. My son looked up, eyes wide, and asked what happened. Bucky Dent, I whispered, and changed the subject. In any case, even though the Orioles embarrassed the slumping Yankees?man, I hope they're clocked in the preliminaries against the A's?the Red Sox lost. Those 100-1 wagers don't come to fruition very often.
After Sunday's meaningless game, Sox rightfielder Trot Nixon lamented: "It would be so great, to go into Yankee Stadium the next time and not have to hear that '1918' crap anymore." Them's my feelings too.
Much to my surprise, Junior took his team's defeat in stride and told me he still wanted to go to any World Series game, in any city, even if it meant missing a day of school. Sure. Then, after telling me about the new Majora's Mask Nintendo 64 game that's set for release on Oct. 26, he went off on a weird tangent, insisting that his friend George Tabb is really Eminem. I punctured that balloon with pleasure, explaining that George is a decent person compared to the creepy rapper, and a few years older as well. Junior wasn't convinced; and besides, he wanted Eminem's latest CD.
Nothing doing, I told him, feeling a little awkward, remembering how my own parents tried to enforce a Beatles ban when the group broke out in the States. My oldest brother came home one afternoon, not long after the band's first Ed Sullivan appearance, and called out to my three other brothers and me: "Boys' meeting!" We went up to one of the bedrooms and he opened a paper bag containing both Meet the Beatles! and The Beatles' Second Album, which he bought for the going price of $1.99 apiece. Mono, of course.
But Eminem? Nuts to that asshole. Even Junior's 12-year-old cousin Quinn has put the kibosh on such an acquisition, recommending the Chili Peppers instead, telling him that Eminem's language is too harsh for a kid. Quinn's e-mail message only amped up Junior's stubborn streak, but I think I've defused his interest for the time being.
I don't think a more nails-on-the-chalkboard news clipping has passed my desk in the past month than the Sept. 20 Associated Press report that alerted readers across the nation that Elton John, that forgotten English lump, has endorsed Al Gore for president. The decaying singer, who displayed a flicker of talent back in the mid-70s, told a Silicon Valley crowd that "The vice president wants this country to go forward, and if you vote for him, it will go forward. But it's back to the Dark Ages, I'm afraid, if you vote for the other guy."
Well, not to be uncharitable, but I find it difficult to trust a man who wears a rug. Besides, at the $10,000 per that the Silicon Valley attendees were required to pay in order to fill the veep's coffers, there probably wasn't much of a chance that many Bush backers were present. Excepting, of course, the inevitable double-dippers, like Rupert Murdoch, who donate to both the Democrats and Republicans.
Leave it to a moron like Elton John to invoke something as absurd as the Dark Ages. I don't begrudge the singer his celebrity one bit: He was a talented musician who chanced upon stardom. Then came drug addiction, a fake marriage, obesity and assorted tawdry shenanigans that can't be detailed in a family newspaper, so it makes sense he's rooting for the Gore-Lieberman ticket. After all, that pair is just going to "noodge" entertainers such as John, who are such wholesome examples for America's youth. Mind you, I'm just speakin' hypocritical Al and Joe's lingo here; I don't give a hoot about the lifestyles of rock stars.
Now, if as many artsy types had actually made good on their threats to leave the United States if Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, both Hollywood and the Upper West Side of Manhattan would've been significantly less populated during the 80s.
Maybe some of the deadwood at CNN will be shoving off to Europe with Alec Baldwin and Robert Altman if Bush is elected next month. Still, even with their blatant bias against the GOP, you'd think that CNN's new management would've disciplined foreign reporter Christiane Amanpour for the remarks she made at the RTNDA 2000 convention on Sept. 18. Amanpour, who's married to Jamie Rubin, Madeleine Albright's former mouthpiece?a dodgy enough alliance?was on sure enough footing when she denounced the focus groups that politicians and entertainment executives use. And she made the following point that CNN might, but won't, heed: "[W]hy are we terrorizing the country at large, leading with murder and mayhem, when crime is actually on the decline?" Uh, it's called ratings, C.A.
But then: "Why have we given George W. Bush such an easy ride, until now, when actually his qualifications are questionable?" Amanpour later backtracked by saying that since she covered international news, there was no conflict of interest. But what if Bush is elected and she does have to report on a conflict abroad? Will she lead the segment with: "President Bush, once again displaying his naivete about the Mideast, made the following stupid analogy today while meeting with Yasir Arafat."
Give her the sack.
The Chicago Tribune's Steve Chapman took advantage of the furor that Bush's candidacy generates among left-wingers with a splendid column on Sept. 28. He mentioned Elton John, of course, but also noted that Minnesota's Sen. Paul Wellstone has said that if the Texan is elected he'd "repeal the 20th Century" and that pro-choice activist Kate Michelman claims Bush will "de facto end legal abortion." Chapman continues: "From all this, you would think the Republican presidential nominee is the eldest son of Jesse Helms, not George Bush... At least since Barry Goldwater ran, Democrats have delighted in portraying their opponents as dangerous extremists. But Bush has about as much in common with Barry Goldwater as he does with Barry White."
As for abortion, will that single issue ultimately decide this presidential campaign? Democrats, including Al Gore, predict that Bush will concentrate all his efforts on overturning Roe v. Wade. That's ludicrous: Bush is pro-life, but until last week's approval of the abortion pill RU-486, he's stayed far away from the topic. When pressed, he's said that the ruling will stand until a majority of the American people are in favor of reversing it, adding that the debate is complicated. Translated: Like my dad, I'm taking a pass on this one. Priority number 83.
Although Gore maintained on a Larry King Live appearance last week that "[Bush] said he will do everything he can to overturn Roe v. Wade," that's not true. Bush, like many Democrats, is for a partial-birth abortion ban, but he simply doesn't have the passion, for better or worse, on the abortion issue that his vanquished GOP primary opponents Gary Bauer and Alan Keyes do. Don't you think that if Bush was a demagogue on this one position?like Gore is on everything from Medicare to campaign finance reform?Bauer, Keyes, Pat Robertson and James Dobson would be a lot more visible in his campaign?
Bush didn't even attend the annual Christian Coalition conference this past weekend, sending along videotaped remarks instead. And on the abortion issue, he said: "Should I be elected, I will lead our nation toward a culture that values life?the life of the elderly and the sick, the life of the young and the life of the unborn." Not exactly the fiery oratory that one would expect in front of such a group.
Of course, every nuance in this race is put through the Midwest "battleground" filter. A lot of Catholics, even those who are essentially pro-choice, are going to feel squeamish about RU-486, fearing that it will lead to more abortions. Others in those states, who've put the issue on the back burner, will be newly energized for Gore.
Since the topic will certainly come up in the Oct. 3 debate (I'm writing a day before), Bush should hammer the politically motivated and cynical timing of the FDA's announcement. I suspect that he'll repeat that while abortion will remain legal because a change of that magnitude requires a consensus of American opinion, he himself is opposed to it and disdains politicians who promote the issue for electoral gain.
I love how Gore, according to an Oct. 2 Washington Post report, prepared for the debate in Florida over the weekend with a number of "ordinary citizens" he's met along the campaign trail. Still, while Gore was accepting pointers from people who haven't been groomed for the presidency since the cradle, even sympathetic journalists knew the ringers were mere props. The Post's Ceci Connolly noted: "Even with all the attention his new group of advisers received, Gore was relying heavily this weekend on a high-paid, high-octane group of political consultants. No less than 20 professional advisers joined Gore in seclusion at the Mote Marine Laboratory for briefings and mock debates."
It was expected that Winifred Skinner, the 79-year-old Des Moines woman who collects cans to earn money, would be in Boston, at Gore's invitation, to offer the candidate support during the debate. Skinner, dubbed the "Aluminum Can Lady" by the media, has emerged as this year's Clara Peller, the woman famous in the 80s for those terrific "Where's the Beef?" tv commercials.
Skinner was a Gore plant at a town meeting in Iowa last week, to illustrate (what else?) his prescription drug proposal, and has become a sudden media darling. Although not to Rush Limbaugh, who called her a "hobo." According to the Sept. 30 Des Moines Register, Skinner has refused financial assistance from her own son, who lives "comfortably" on a ranch west of Des Moines with his wife. Also, since her hug with Gore last week, strangers have offered Skinner donations totaling over $100,000, but she's turned it all down.
The Vice President really is shameless in his trolling for the votes of Americans over 65. But as Andrew Sullivan writes in the Oct. 9 New Republic, this country's retirees are among its wealthiest citizens, and only 10 percent pay more than $1000 a year on prescription drugs. But they vote at?for the United States, at least?a reliable rate. After describing the relative affluence of the elderly, Sullivan suggests raising the retirement age to 68 and "devolv[ing] Medicare, Bush-style, to the private sector." He also says that if money is needed to expand healthcare entitlements for the poor, then some retirees ought to buck up and get a job to help pay the freight.
Sullivan concludes: "Gore is right about one thing in this election. This is a battle between the people and the powerful. It's just that on this issue, at least, he's for the wrong side."
On the subject of The New Republic (and unlike Mickey Kaus, who says the magazine has lurched to the left, I've been surprised at owner/Gore guru Martin Peretz's relative restraint), Jacob Weisberg, who once worked at the magazine, wrote a zinger last week for Slate. Reporting on Sept. 26 about Gore's MTV appearance?I saw clips and it was gag-inducing?Weisberg was critical of the candidate's programmed responses to youth-oriented questions. He writes: "Asked what entertainers he would ask to perform at his inauguration, he took a long time to come up with the name of Lenny Kravitz, announcing it in the manner of 'Eureka!' A better and more honest approach to this territory might be, 'I'm a very busy 52-year-old government official, and I don't keep up with pop music that much.'"
It's true that the campaign is frozen as I write, as curious citizens wait to see if Bush can string two sentences together against Gore in the first debate. If he does a Gerry Ford and says something about the dictator "Salami Hussad of Iraq," well, the election is over. On the other hand, if he's charming and forceful in presenting his agenda, this will remain the closest race since 1960.
So while I'm at it, it's pleasing to see that Joe Lieberman is receiving his overdue backlash. There was Sullivan, again in The New Republic, calling Joey "the ideological Gumby of American politics." William Bennett, in the Sept. 22 Wall Street Journal, was far more harsh in criticizing the man who was once his partner in demonizing?stupidly, I think?the entertainment czars for debasing society with the films, music and advertisements they produce. Bennett wrote: "When the campaign began, I hoped that a kind of tropism would occur. In terms of political integrity and character, I had hoped that Al Gore would become more like my friend Joe Lieberman. Instead, it appears Joe Lieberman has become more, much more, like Al Gore. And for those of us who know and have admired Joe Lieberman, that is a sad thing to behold."
And from the opposite side of the spectrum, filmmaker Spike Lee made a comment about Gore's runningmate in the October issue of George?which few people saw, but that was reprinted in Sunday's "Page Six" in the New York Post?that speaks to a serious concern of Gore's: low turnout. The fabulously articulate Lee said: "Why should blacks be excited? Just because this guy's an Orthodox Jew doesn't mean nothing. Black people see Jewish people as white people anyway. This whole Jewish thing is not the point. The guy's a conservative."
Further piling on, both The New York Times and Boston Globe have editorialized that Lieberman should abandon his twin-run for senator and vice-president. The papers cite a lot of mumbo jumbo about democracy not being served, but their agenda is clear: if, God forbid, Gore wins, the Republican governor of Connecticut, John Rowland, will choose Lieberman's successor. And if the Senate makeup is close, that certain GOP successor from Lieberman's state might tip the balance in the Republicans' favor. Lieberman then will start his term as Gore's understudy as a pariah in the Senate.
And, if anyone doubts that the 2000 presidential election is one that will be studied for years to come?as significant as the JFK-Nixon battle that essentially introduced tv into politics?just take a look at the "mole" story that has journalists scratching their chins. Bush's media adviser, Mark McKinnon, the former Democrat who once worked with James Carville and against his current boss, Karl Rove, in an '86 gubernatorial election in Texas, was quoted in the Times on Sunday saying he feels like he's "in the middle of a Kafka novel." More like a Paul Begala novel is my guess, but in any case his story about the debate prep tape sent to Tom Downey is pretty fishy.
It's hard to tell what the fallout will be for Bush if McKinnon is fingered by the FBI before the election. Voters might be uncomfortable, thinking that if the Governor couldn't detect a traitor in his campaign, what does that say about his potential administration? On the other hand, if Democrats are implicated, after eight years of Clinton-Gore the desire to clean house would probably trump all.
That's why I say: All Roads Lead to Tony Coelho.
october 2
Send comments to [MUG1988@aol.com](mailto:mug1988@aol.com) or fax to 244-9864. Please include your full name, town and state for publication.