By Bob Gaydos

Not even marginal.

A colleague of mine who gets paid to write his opinions for others to read recently referred to himself as a “pundit.”

    “Hmmm,” I said to myself with a touch of surprise, “guess that makes me a pundit, too.”

    This colleague, you see, took over my opinion-writing job when I retired, but I still fill in for him when he feels like taking a break from punditing. It’s in the blood.

    The problem I have with using the word, “pundit,” and why I never regarded myself as one is that it always suggested to me a certain level of expertise in some subject area rather than an ability to deliver opinions on a variety of subjects and sound fairly rational and moderately intelligent (most of the time) while doing so.

     Also, today the word seems to imply so much more than what is delivered. Once upon a time there was William Buckley. I disagreed with him often, but I’d still call him a pundit. More recently, George Will and Charles Krauthammer from that side of the aisle. But today Steve Doocy is a pundit? And Brian Kilmeade? Lou (start a war with China) Dobbs? Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham?

     Yes, they are all from the Fox pundit stable, but if they qualify as pundits, well …

    I went to Wikipedia: “A pundit is a person who offers to mass media his or her opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences, technology or sport) on which he or she is knowledgeable (or can at least appear to be knowledgeable), or considered a scholar in said area.”

    The phrase “or can at least appear to be knowledgeable” leaped off the screen. Aha! Thank you, Wiki, for clarifying the issue. Talking heads who deliver unsupported opinions with conviction — a TV invention — now are regarded as pundits. In that case, move over looney tunes Anne Coulter and Tucker Carlson. I’ve been at this punditry business longer than you two and I know racists when I hear them.

    So, punditly speaking, I find myself depressed and mystified that polls continue to report that 80 percent of Republicans approve of the job Donald Trump is doing as president. Of course, these pollsters are considered pundits, too, and they told us, with all their expertise, that Hillary Clinton would beat Trump in 2016. There’s that “at least appear to be knowledgeable” part again. Many of those polled Republicans, of course, are being fed “expert” analysis from those Fox pundits.

    Unfortunately, so is Trump.

    And so what has government by failed businessman/congenital liar/amoral Russian asset guided by phony Fox pundits gotten us?

— A “president” sitting alone in the White House on Christmas Eve, having shut down the federal government in spite because Congress didn’t give him the $5 billion box of Legos he wanted to build a wall he proudly promised his buddies Mexico would pay for. Instead, government workers went without pay for the holiday, whether they worked or not. Members of Congress did get paid, even though they clearly weren’t doing their job. A pundit might say this looked particularly bad for Republicans since they control all three branches of government and still couldn’t keep it open for Christmas. Happy New Year?

— A ‘’president” whose most recent chief of staff quit or was fired and who can’t find anyone qualified who is willing to take the job. Mick Mulvaney, of course, who is glad to have any and every job in the administration, even temporarily (budget director, Consumer Protection head), said he’d be glad to do it because he has no problem swallowing his pride and being ridiculed daily as long as he can continue to deprive needy Americans of government assistance.

— A “president” who, in addition to having an “acting” chief of staff, has an “acting” secretary of defense, an “acting” attorney general, no secretary of the interior, an “acting” EPA administrator, no United Nations ambassador (but one of those former Fox News blonde talking heads being prepped for the job), no ambassadors to Bolivia, Brazil, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Egypt, Estonia, Jordan, Libya, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Turkey and Venezuela, and dozens of other vacancies in key positions throughout government.

— A “president” who has antagonized all U.S. allies and cozied up to murderous tyrants.

— A “president” who tells a 7-year-old girl on Christmas Eve that believing in Santa Claus is “marginal,” while he still insists that global warming is a myth.

 — A “president” who is under investigation in every area of his life and who no longer takes credit for the performance of the plummeting stock market.

  — A “president” who presides over a political party without the  courage or moral fiber to stand up to his utter incompetence and corruption.

    There’s more, but let me return to that pundit thing, if I may. The word comes from the Hindi “pandit.” It, in turn, was derived from the Sanskrit “pandita,” which means “a learned man or scholar.”

    That’s where I came in. I’m still uncomfortable with the word, but I will state my view with conviction: I believe Donald Trump has exposed the dark, ugly, fearful nature of much of American society, which has been hiding in the shadows for years. He has shown the Republican Party to be full of cowards and sycophants, and greedy ones at that. He may well be the death of the GOP as we have known it. Finally, he has revealed the hypocrisy of the evangelicals.

    A pundit might say these are important lessons for any society to learn in order to survive and evolve. A good thing. I get it. Perhaps I should be thankful. But evolution can be a slow process and those polls of approval for Trump by Republicans do not inspire patience. It isn’t easy being a pundit.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

“I loved my previous life. I had so many things going. This is more work than in my previous life. I thought it would be easier.”

— Donald J. Trump, in an interview with Reuters

Who knew?

Wow, has it really been only 100 days since America started to be great again? Seems like … a heck of a lot more. In fact, it seems like ages since the same Mr. Trump said, “We are sending an armada, very powerful. We have submarines, very powerful, far more powerful than the aircraft carrier. We have the best military people on Earth. And I will say this: [North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un] is doing the wrong thing.”

Remember that? He was talking to Fox News. That was way back when he tried to fake out Kim by warning him that an aircraft carrier group was steaming towards North Korea when it was really heading in the opposite direction to the Indian Ocean? Kind of like hiring someone to do a job and then not paying them, you know? It always worked in business, so I guess he figured it was worth a try on an unpredictable dictator with a million-man army and a hankering for nuclear missiles.

Although, I’d imagine Mr. Trump must have been somewhat embarrassed when his admirals said they didn’t know anything about any ships steaming to Korea. But heck, they finally worked it out and they’re there now, so good for them, right? And Mr. Trump said not to worry, war-lovers, a “major” conflict with North Korea was still not out of the range of possibility if Kim continued to engage in provocative behavior. Except Mr. Trump doesn’t like to use big words, so he said something like, “If Kim (which one, guys?) keeps doing bad things we might have to attack him.”

The narcissist-in-chief (NIC) likes simple declarative sentences. Nothing complex. Direct communication. Look at his tax plan. One page, 200 words. No messing around with details like revenues and deficits. Huge tax cuts for very rich people. I promised it, now do it, staff. That’s a leader. This is what those voters wanted to see and hear.

Not that he’s a dictator, though. He showed how flexible he can be on his campaign promises by not insisting that a budget bill to keep the government operating for another week include $3 billion to start that wall the Mexicans keep refusing to pay for. Well, he did insist at first, but when Congress said no, he showed he could be flexible. He put off the wall for a few months.

He did the same thing with his threat to cut off funds that allow poor people to get health insurance through Obamacare if Congress didn’t get rid of his predecessor’s legacy achievement. Yessir, the NIC said in clear, concise terms that he’d hold up any budget deal and cut off Obamacare Medicaid funds unless Congress made good on his promise of a new health care plan right now. But again, he showed how flexible he could be by saying OK when Congress said “no way” to his threat. Now that’s a good leader, right?

… This is not normal, people.

The only honest thing the NIC has said since being elected is that he thought the job would be easier. He couldn’t bring himself to say it’s way too hard for him, that he’s woefully ill-prepared intellectually, emotionally and spiritually for the most important job on the planet. He did manage to say that measuring a president by his first 100 days in office — a traditional benchmark he promoted strongly while running for the office — was actually an artificial (he probably said “fake”) measure of a president’s accomplishments … although he also said his first 100 days were clearly the best ever.

Well, they did result in the lowest approval rating at that juncture of any president — 41 percent. In fact, according to the YouGOV/Economist poll, “What Americans saw in President Trump as he was inaugurated nearly 100 days ago is more or less the same things they see today: Opinions of his qualities and his presidency have changed little. The public is more negative than positive about his performance, and most continue to find weaknesses in his honesty, empathy and temperament.”

Let that last, subtle sentence sink in.

And yet, 31 percent of the public (mostly Republicans) say he has performed better than they expected, according to the poll. This may suggest that a lot of people had really low expectations of Trump going in, or that they are just as delusional as he is. I offer no Option C.

That poll also reported that, in general, Americans like Barack Obama a lot more than they do Donald Trump. Shocker. To the question, “Regardless of whether you agree with him, do you like Donald Trump as a person?” people responded: Like a lot, 23 percent; like somewhat, 20 percent; dislike 45 percent.

On Obama: Like a lot, 44 percent; like somewhat, 27 percent; dislike, 18 percent.

So most Americans would probably rather play golf with Obama than Trump.

Still, a bit more than 10 percent of the people polled apparently couldn’t decide if they liked or disliked either man, which to me is mind-boggling and also a contributing factor as to how we wound up with a phony, misogynistic, narcissistic, lying, ignorant, immature, rude, bullying, lazy, ill-informed, bigoted con man in the Oval Office.

It’s 100 days. Let’s not beat around the bush anymore folks.

rjgaydos@gmail.com