28043877
The other day, Uncle Nunzi caught me eating a hoagie and throwing away the bread. I was trying to keep my carbs down, but Uncle considers throwing away perfectly good Italian bread a mortal sin. “Really,” I remarked, “eternal damnation for getting rid of a roll?” Uncle reminded me I once wrote a column entitled “No bread, no life.” Things have changed. My blood sugar was behaving itself back in the day. Nowadays, I am left balancing whether I should eat a piece of a baguette or a small serving of pasta. I admit being forced to choose between favorite foods is not exactly “Sophie’s choice” material, but it has made me disagreeable.
I am disagreeable about many things. I rant. I rage. Take Donald Trump for instance (comedian Henny Youngman would have said, “Take him somebody, please take him”). Trump embraces violence at his rallies and then denies it when violence inevitably occurs. What about the video showing incidents such as a 78-year-old man sucker punching an African-American youth? “Who are you going to believe,” Trump seems to say, “me or your lying eyes?” And his people believe him. Now, la Donald is predicting that if he is denied the Republican nomination, there will be riots. I don’t think so. I think most of Trump’s voters would react by spending Election Day at one of the casinos. I think most of them would shake their head at Trump being rejected at the Republican Convention in Cleveland and say, that’s why we don’t believe in politics. Tell it to President Al Gore.
I read where the late Jackie Kennedy Onassis has a comedienne granddaughter who looks exactly like her. I’m not sure I like that picture. Jackie O doing Sarah Silverman’s act just doesn’t fit. I love Silverman, but I’m picturing Jackie O standing on a stage at the Helium Comedy Club saying, “So a priest, a rabbi, and a Greek millionaire are on this yacht…” Don’t think so.
President Obama has nominated 63-year-old Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. Take note of that name because even if he were Judy Garland, Republicans wouldn’t give him a hearing. In 10 years, some TV quiz show host (the son of Alex Trebek?) will ask, “What is the name of the person whom President Barack Obama nominated to the Supreme Court in 2016 and who was never confirmed or rejected?” Congratulations, Merrick Garland, now you can tell the rest of us if there really is a place called Limbo.
Republicans such as Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who once praised Judge Garland as being the “perfect” judge, now shun him like the Amish in a bad M. Shyamalan movie. If I were the President, I would just keep sending up names like Superman, Abraham Lincoln, and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan. Why Ryan? Speaker Ryan has become the Republican version of the White Knight riding to the rescue of his Party (please tell David Duke we are not using the adjective “white” in a racial way so he need not endorse him). Ryan, you’ll remember, took the Speaker’s job in a self-sacrificing career move that reminds me of Warren Beatty taking a role in “Ishtar.” Now, there are rumors he might just be the person to nominate at a contested convention to stop Trump. Establishment Republicans can’t sleep at night because of such fantasies. Maybe Ryan, whose wide-eyed stare reminds me of a high school boy finding out that Taylor Swift has agreed to be his prom date, can make it a trifecta – Speaker of the House, losing GOP presidential candidate in this fall’s presidential election, losing vice presidential nominee in the last election, and nominee for the Supreme Court who couldn’t get a hearing from members of his own party.
Here’s why Garland is not the perfect candidate and why Obama has done a disservice to his own legacy and that of his own party:
Garland is a moderate. Nothing wrong with moderates unless one wants to establish a progressive Supreme Court to replace the conservative court where Justice Antonin Scalia once ruled. Moderate appointments have historically been unreliable votes in case you were thinking of doing away with Citizens United, the ruling that has allowed big money to dominate our election process. Garland could be another Anthony Kennedy, not Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And let’s not forget Garland is 63 years old. He would be the oldest nominee in 44 years to be appointed to the Supreme Court. There’s a reason presidents don’t nominate us older folks to the Supreme Court. The older the appointment, the less time he or she will serve, according to the actuarial tables. Why would one want to name someone, no matter how qualified, to a term shortened by the realities of life expectancy? Maybe Obama selected Garland precisely because he knew some prominent Republicans had once said nice things about him and they would look more foolish by not giving him a hearing. It could be a Harvard-educated law professor’s version of the middle finger.
Uncle has brought some Parma prosciutto with him. I toss away the carrot sticks and reach for the meat. You live only once. Besides, I hear that prosciutto is low in carbs. ■
