*Everyone, especially the liberal media/intelligentsia/political punditry, seem/s to be scrambling all over themselves to make - wholly unsubstantiated and moreover unsubstantiable - comparisons between the late, great Mr Perot and their own pet hate, President Donald J Trump...
...but all such attempted comparisons fall apart - and miserably - at the veritable drop of a hat...
Sorry, folks, the two are not even in the same ballpark or upon the same (political) page: the calibre of their respective character is so diametrically dissonant that it's highly problematic as to whether one can even use the word 'character' in any proper discussion of 'the Donald'...
Reminding me of the rejoinder of/by the granddaughter (or grandson) of another one-time President: after an injudicious and self-important self-observation, if I remember rightly, by a former President (perhaps Bill Clinton) about himself/his presidency. S/he responded, in tones of the utmost irony (concerning this upstart's comparison of himself with the likes of (the character-laden - despite Hiroshima and Nagasaki, admittedly - and ever straight-shooting, true son of Missouri - like my beloved Granny) Harry Truman), with words very much like these:
"Sorry, sonny, my granddaddy had more integrity in his little finger than you [WJC] have in your entire body!"
Sure, to a superficial mind or from a mere surface perspective - looking only upon the obvious external similarities: wealthy self-made businessmen of national/global empires...complete political outsiders and mavericks...presidential wannabes/'actualities'...there's a whole lot in common, indeed - but no, they are not, they are far from - in every other respect - 'birds of a feather' or any such thing.
Yet having stated all the foregoing, it's perhaps best to focus upon those few similarities at the outset.
In eschewing conventional politics and the traditional (**big party) route to political power, it's true that both Trump and Perot - much like their independent-minded, century-separated predecessor, the two-term (Republican Party) President and later significant third-party candidate Theodore Roosevelt, himself unquestionably was - are the very epitome of direct, straight-shooting, tell-it-as-it-is political speech and action... models of political populism, even honing this arguably to a political artform (and then some)...
Ross Perot's presidential candidacy was a memorable one, even had I not at that precise moment in time - during Perot's on-again, off-again presidential candidacy, that is - been on my way to America, and indeed well underway with what turned out to be an almost three-year sojourn in the land of my parents and other forebears...
Among other things no doubt, all and what I can specifically remember was his position on drug-pushers, the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, and the dire financial plight of American workers.
Refreshingly eschewing the traditional, "Isn't America the bee's knees, there's none other like us?" type of patriotic, gung-ho call to arms and downplaying of the very real issues within the body politic of "the world's greatest nation", Perot proposed (itemizing these three proposals from last to first):
#Equalizing American workers' wages with those of their European counterparts, or suchlike, at very least 'upping' 'em onto some sort of a realistic par... Can anyone (in the US of A, anyhow) ever forget the spectacle of the *****'diminutive' Perot holding up carefully-produced 'pie-charts' or the like showing the relatively abject position of Americans vis-a-vis said European compatriots?!?!?
#Exiting NAFTA, or, more precisely, if I recall rightly, not even entering it in the first place...
#Rounding up the 'drugees' (i.e. drug-pushers) sauntering back and forth across the U S's southern border... - yes, something about that does sound familiar; mind you, only to throw 'em in the slammer, not to leave them to die, much less to summarily execute them (in the modus operandi of Filipino President Deterte(sp?))...
Perot's drug-pusher stance earned him the undying enmity of urban and ever so urbane sophisticates, whilst his other two proposals - opposing that major free trade agreement in the interests of America Inc, whilst decrying the plight of American workers - certainly wouldn't have earned him any brownie points among the (relatively sizable) business class and right-of-centre voting 'bloc'.
Unfortunately - for the United States (and all of us worldwide, I suspect) - Perot's dropping out of the race a good way on, and then, relatively last-minute, coming back in, deflated his otherwise gradually gathering momentum and thus cost him in the election; perhaps indeed being one he could well have won...such was the quite understandable disaffection with the two establishment candidates (incoming President Clinton and the then President Bush Senior)...
Though a dual (kiwi-U S) citizen - evidently since President Ronald Reagan's Administration, or that of his immediate successor, George Herbert Walker Bush, relaxed the rules thereabouts - I somehow didn't realize I could vote (even offshore) at the time...
...but if I had, it most certainly wouldn't have been for either Bush nor for that matter his replacement, William Jefferson Clinton. No sirree, no way Jose. It'd have been, notwithstanding the longtime, outstanding U S consumer advocate and sometime presidential candidate Ralph Nader himself possibly standing (as far back as 1992; though I don't believe he did), for one particular candidate, and only that particular individual: yep, the great American Ross Perot.
Yes, at least vis-a-vis Perot and Trump, anyhow - though the comparison could doubtless be transferred on to Roosevelt as well - the two men have championed a non-business-as-usual, vigilante-style populism, aided and abetted by liberal doses of both charismatic manner and fluent/colourful speech/rhetorical flourish, whilst eschewing modern era, neo-liberal, 'supply side' Reaganomics and late 20th Century orthodox economics...
But there all comparisons fade into insignificance, I'd respectfully submit...
For Ross Perot - innovator extraordinaire, intellectual maverick, decent citizen and true patriot, and above all else true blue benefactor/philanthropist - stands in a league of his own, far above the inclement malaise inhabited by those other, pragmatism- and/or self-worshiping political figures...
A man - unlike ****all those aforementioned (Trump, Bush Senior, Bill Clinton) - who not only wouldn't have left Americans by and large embarrassed and shamefaced (Clinton and Trump for obvious reasons, need I detail that any further?) -
...while I also include Bush Senior, in terms of, if not his seemingly glowing legacy (read: the breakup of the entire Eastern Bloc/Soviet Union on/under his watch), but rather his much less than impressive track record (when examined carefully that is) - see a 'piece' (blogpost) I wrote upon him following his death awhile ago, entitled something along the lines of 'Speaking Badly of the Dead'...
...but would have indeed, verily made America great again...in reality not just in sloganeering...
*That is, to the extent they've even bothered to report upon it. Thus far, said pickings have been fairly few and far between (that is, upon New Zealand's broadcast (TV and radio) media), the only reference thereto thus far being a two minute at most commentary by some woman in the know this morning on BBC World Radio...(which of course isn't even kiwi-run much less -based).
**Yes, I well realize my comparisons quickly break down with Mr Trump, since everyone knows he became a Republican Party nominee and therefore 'Republican' President...yet as so many well know, ***in everything but name Donald Trump is anything but an orthodox/traditional Republican.
***End of story, except to add (as I am wont, and frankly can't help myself, being almost the author of the endlessly progressing 'postscript'), that this very thing - though already implicitly understood by any political junkie worth his or her salt - was stated way back when (prior to the 2016 American Presidential Election, I'm pretty sure) by RNZ National's Kathryn Ryan upon her weekday 'Nine to Noon' radio programme...
And, more importantly - from my perspective, anyhow - is incorporated within the text of an extensive, 42-page backgrounder to U S Election 2016 by Yours Truly...next to my 21/22-pager upon the election of the first (openly) Jesuit Pope in Vatican history, 'Pope Francis the First: Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, or, 'Surprise, Surprise', Sheep in Wolf's Clothing?' (available only by post, incidentally, if you're really interested), probably my most thorough and carefully-researched, historically-situated, even, dare I say so or suggest it, inspired (but not in the biblical sense) 'opinion piece'...
The foregoing being the blogpost (approximately my 24th or 25th on that particular blogsite) dated August 22nd, 2016 - as I say, upon my now (in all but name and cybersphere 'situation') effectively defunct original blogsite
Http://Nuff Said: consideryourself-frombothsidesnow. blogspot.co.nz/ (or .com/).
****Yes, excluding (the first) President Roosevelt, who far as I can ascertain served America well, breaking up monopoly capitalism with a sledgehammer and leaving it with its unparallelled network of world-famous national parks, an environmental record leaving modern 'greenies' in the dust...
*****As described this morning (New Zealand time) by the aforementioned BBC correspondent. Evidently the precise same height as Yours Truly, '5 foot 6 (inches)' (in ye ole 'imperial measure'), though occasionally, when comparing and contrasting relative heights - but rarely weights! - with my older bro - either he or myself comes in at the marginally lesser '5 feet, 5-and-a-half inches'...
...but who's counting...?
...but all such attempted comparisons fall apart - and miserably - at the veritable drop of a hat...
Sorry, folks, the two are not even in the same ballpark or upon the same (political) page: the calibre of their respective character is so diametrically dissonant that it's highly problematic as to whether one can even use the word 'character' in any proper discussion of 'the Donald'...
Reminding me of the rejoinder of/by the granddaughter (or grandson) of another one-time President: after an injudicious and self-important self-observation, if I remember rightly, by a former President (perhaps Bill Clinton) about himself/his presidency. S/he responded, in tones of the utmost irony (concerning this upstart's comparison of himself with the likes of (the character-laden - despite Hiroshima and Nagasaki, admittedly - and ever straight-shooting, true son of Missouri - like my beloved Granny) Harry Truman), with words very much like these:
"Sorry, sonny, my granddaddy had more integrity in his little finger than you [WJC] have in your entire body!"
Sure, to a superficial mind or from a mere surface perspective - looking only upon the obvious external similarities: wealthy self-made businessmen of national/global empires...complete political outsiders and mavericks...presidential wannabes/'actualities'...there's a whole lot in common, indeed - but no, they are not, they are far from - in every other respect - 'birds of a feather' or any such thing.
Yet having stated all the foregoing, it's perhaps best to focus upon those few similarities at the outset.
In eschewing conventional politics and the traditional (**big party) route to political power, it's true that both Trump and Perot - much like their independent-minded, century-separated predecessor, the two-term (Republican Party) President and later significant third-party candidate Theodore Roosevelt, himself unquestionably was - are the very epitome of direct, straight-shooting, tell-it-as-it-is political speech and action... models of political populism, even honing this arguably to a political artform (and then some)...
Ross Perot's presidential candidacy was a memorable one, even had I not at that precise moment in time - during Perot's on-again, off-again presidential candidacy, that is - been on my way to America, and indeed well underway with what turned out to be an almost three-year sojourn in the land of my parents and other forebears...
Among other things no doubt, all and what I can specifically remember was his position on drug-pushers, the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, and the dire financial plight of American workers.
Refreshingly eschewing the traditional, "Isn't America the bee's knees, there's none other like us?" type of patriotic, gung-ho call to arms and downplaying of the very real issues within the body politic of "the world's greatest nation", Perot proposed (itemizing these three proposals from last to first):
#Equalizing American workers' wages with those of their European counterparts, or suchlike, at very least 'upping' 'em onto some sort of a realistic par... Can anyone (in the US of A, anyhow) ever forget the spectacle of the *****'diminutive' Perot holding up carefully-produced 'pie-charts' or the like showing the relatively abject position of Americans vis-a-vis said European compatriots?!?!?
#Exiting NAFTA, or, more precisely, if I recall rightly, not even entering it in the first place...
#Rounding up the 'drugees' (i.e. drug-pushers) sauntering back and forth across the U S's southern border... - yes, something about that does sound familiar; mind you, only to throw 'em in the slammer, not to leave them to die, much less to summarily execute them (in the modus operandi of Filipino President Deterte(sp?))...
Perot's drug-pusher stance earned him the undying enmity of urban and ever so urbane sophisticates, whilst his other two proposals - opposing that major free trade agreement in the interests of America Inc, whilst decrying the plight of American workers - certainly wouldn't have earned him any brownie points among the (relatively sizable) business class and right-of-centre voting 'bloc'.
Unfortunately - for the United States (and all of us worldwide, I suspect) - Perot's dropping out of the race a good way on, and then, relatively last-minute, coming back in, deflated his otherwise gradually gathering momentum and thus cost him in the election; perhaps indeed being one he could well have won...such was the quite understandable disaffection with the two establishment candidates (incoming President Clinton and the then President Bush Senior)...
Though a dual (kiwi-U S) citizen - evidently since President Ronald Reagan's Administration, or that of his immediate successor, George Herbert Walker Bush, relaxed the rules thereabouts - I somehow didn't realize I could vote (even offshore) at the time...
...but if I had, it most certainly wouldn't have been for either Bush nor for that matter his replacement, William Jefferson Clinton. No sirree, no way Jose. It'd have been, notwithstanding the longtime, outstanding U S consumer advocate and sometime presidential candidate Ralph Nader himself possibly standing (as far back as 1992; though I don't believe he did), for one particular candidate, and only that particular individual: yep, the great American Ross Perot.
Yes, at least vis-a-vis Perot and Trump, anyhow - though the comparison could doubtless be transferred on to Roosevelt as well - the two men have championed a non-business-as-usual, vigilante-style populism, aided and abetted by liberal doses of both charismatic manner and fluent/colourful speech/rhetorical flourish, whilst eschewing modern era, neo-liberal, 'supply side' Reaganomics and late 20th Century orthodox economics...
But there all comparisons fade into insignificance, I'd respectfully submit...
For Ross Perot - innovator extraordinaire, intellectual maverick, decent citizen and true patriot, and above all else true blue benefactor/philanthropist - stands in a league of his own, far above the inclement malaise inhabited by those other, pragmatism- and/or self-worshiping political figures...
A man - unlike ****all those aforementioned (Trump, Bush Senior, Bill Clinton) - who not only wouldn't have left Americans by and large embarrassed and shamefaced (Clinton and Trump for obvious reasons, need I detail that any further?) -
...while I also include Bush Senior, in terms of, if not his seemingly glowing legacy (read: the breakup of the entire Eastern Bloc/Soviet Union on/under his watch), but rather his much less than impressive track record (when examined carefully that is) - see a 'piece' (blogpost) I wrote upon him following his death awhile ago, entitled something along the lines of 'Speaking Badly of the Dead'...
...but would have indeed, verily made America great again...in reality not just in sloganeering...
*That is, to the extent they've even bothered to report upon it. Thus far, said pickings have been fairly few and far between (that is, upon New Zealand's broadcast (TV and radio) media), the only reference thereto thus far being a two minute at most commentary by some woman in the know this morning on BBC World Radio...(which of course isn't even kiwi-run much less -based).
**Yes, I well realize my comparisons quickly break down with Mr Trump, since everyone knows he became a Republican Party nominee and therefore 'Republican' President...yet as so many well know, ***in everything but name Donald Trump is anything but an orthodox/traditional Republican.
***End of story, except to add (as I am wont, and frankly can't help myself, being almost the author of the endlessly progressing 'postscript'), that this very thing - though already implicitly understood by any political junkie worth his or her salt - was stated way back when (prior to the 2016 American Presidential Election, I'm pretty sure) by RNZ National's Kathryn Ryan upon her weekday 'Nine to Noon' radio programme...
And, more importantly - from my perspective, anyhow - is incorporated within the text of an extensive, 42-page backgrounder to U S Election 2016 by Yours Truly...next to my 21/22-pager upon the election of the first (openly) Jesuit Pope in Vatican history, 'Pope Francis the First: Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, or, 'Surprise, Surprise', Sheep in Wolf's Clothing?' (available only by post, incidentally, if you're really interested), probably my most thorough and carefully-researched, historically-situated, even, dare I say so or suggest it, inspired (but not in the biblical sense) 'opinion piece'...
The foregoing being the blogpost (approximately my 24th or 25th on that particular blogsite) dated August 22nd, 2016 - as I say, upon my now (in all but name and cybersphere 'situation') effectively defunct original blogsite
Http://Nuff Said: consideryourself-frombothsidesnow. blogspot.co.nz/ (or .com/).
****Yes, excluding (the first) President Roosevelt, who far as I can ascertain served America well, breaking up monopoly capitalism with a sledgehammer and leaving it with its unparallelled network of world-famous national parks, an environmental record leaving modern 'greenies' in the dust...
*****As described this morning (New Zealand time) by the aforementioned BBC correspondent. Evidently the precise same height as Yours Truly, '5 foot 6 (inches)' (in ye ole 'imperial measure'), though occasionally, when comparing and contrasting relative heights - but rarely weights! - with my older bro - either he or myself comes in at the marginally lesser '5 feet, 5-and-a-half inches'...
...but who's counting...?
No comments:
Post a Comment