Do we give a fig about royal wedding?

“If George comes to Chicago, I’ll crack him in the snoot” – William H. Thompson, former Mayor of Chicago

  -0-

I’m sure by now, many of you are sick and tired of hearing this line, spouted in the heat of the 1927 election cycle as Thompson ran an anti-British theme throughout his campaign for re-election that year.

Do 'we' really wanna 'read all about it?'

Because the “George” he refers to was then-King George V – as in the grandfather of current Queen Elizabeth II (who having been Queen since 1952 has the kind of lengthy term that American politicos can only fantasize about) and great-great-grandfather to Prince Henry (more commonly called Harry), who on Saturday will have the world’s eyes on him as he marries one-time Northwestern University student Meghan Markle.

THAT LINE FROM Thompson is being used by many people who try to come up with some sort of connection between the English royals and those of us native to the “Second City.”

It also gets used by those of us intending to show our disdain for anything happening in London on Saturday. Some of us feel the need to spew trash talk about how we fought a war against those people to break our ties to the English king.

George III, to be exact.

George V, with his 'snoot' intact

While others will want to get caught up in the pageantry of the spectacle and will think it sad that some people will be “haters” – although whenever I hear the word used like that, I’m reminded of the various delusional, and youthful, women who dated Hugh Hefner during his final years of life.

PERSONALLY, I CAN’T say I feel either way.

“Hate” would definitely be the wrong sentiment, because in order to hate something, you have to care about it. You have to have a legitimate sense of feeling that, in some ways, could border on “love.”

Yet I also have the same feelings of apathy whenever anything involving the English royal family comes up. It just all seems so trivial.

All bluster from 'Big Bill'

At least if we were talking about an American power-play wedding, such as a White House-staged event involving President Donald J. Trump’s younger daughter, Tiffany – we could complain about the gross misuse of tax dollars during the Trump years in D.C.

IF ANYTHING, IT bothers me to bring this up because we then have to recall the 1915-23 and again from 1927-31 mayoral reign of Thompson – the man whose tolerance of Al Capone is the reason why a hood was able to achieve such prominence in Chicago.

Remember that scene from Kevin Costner’s 1987 take on “The Untouchables” when Costner’s Eliot Ness is stopped from arresting Frank Nitti for bringing a pistol into a courthouse – because Nitti produced a note granting him permission to legally have the weapon?

A note signed by none other than “William Hale Thompson” himself. That scene wasn’t exactly fictional – although the follow-up scene where Ness throws Nitti off the roof of City Hall to his death inside an automobile (“He’s in the car” was Ness’ response when asked about Nitti’s whereabouts) was pure fantasy.

Do we really want to be recalling the sentiments of a man who makes the political people of our era seem so meek and mild? One who would make Rod Blagojevich seem like a choirboy by comparison and would probably upset the conservative ideologues because Thompson was a Republican – the last GOPer to date to hold the Chicago mayoral post.

NO WONDER WHY our local voters don’t think much of the one-time Party of Lincoln.

The queen w/ Chicago 'royalty'

But the other “local moments” in our history include the July 6, 1959 visit of Elizabeth, herself, to Chicago – spending 14 hours in our city and even having a meeting with Richard J. Daley himself.

Or that three-day visit Princess Diana made to Chicago in the summer of 1996 – with its profound moment being the formal ball at the Field Museum where some local “gent” managed to cut in and got himself a dance with Diana herself.

Although that, at least, left a memento, as the Drake Hotel suite where she stood is now known as the “Princess Diana Suite” (which TripAdvisor.com puts at $187 per night – if available).

  -30-

Do we really wish we still had the Obamas to kick around politically?

I’m sure for the ideologically-minded amongst us, the news of recent days has been particularly dreadful.

Most admired? Invited to royal wedding?

For Barack Obama keeps cropping up in ways that remind us he will be remembered as a respected public official, no matter how much the ideologues want to disrespect his memory.

WHILE THE CURRENT occupant of the Oval Office most likely will never be taken all that seriously – no matter how many times the ideologues rant and rage that he is the ideal of what a president ought to be.

For what it’s worth, I’m not getting too worked up over these particular news reports because I’m fully aware we’re in that time period between the holidays. It’s the end of 2017.

Anybody with sense is finding reasons to take time off. Little of significance (unless it’s dismal) will happen this week. Meaning a lot of trivia will manage to find its way into filling up space and air time for news reports this week.

So am I really getting all giddy that Prince Harry wants Obama invited to his wedding to Northwestern University alumnus Meghan Markle, and British officials are trying to urge him not to issue such an invitation out of fear that Trump will take it as a personal snub against himself?

Feeling snubbed by Brits AND Gallup?

IS IT REALLY all that interesting that Obama gave an interview to the prince who most likely is too far down the royal pecking order to become King of England? Yes, Harry has a program broadcast by the BBC, and from what I gather, the most interesting thing Obama said was that he’s still getting used to having to cope with traffic – rather than his presidential days when security would ensure the roads were cleared for his path and no one caused him a delay.

Or as the president said, “I didn’t experience traffic. I used to cause traffic.”

I could care less about presidential traffic jams. As for Trump’s ego, I don’t doubt he would find reason to take offense to an Obama invitation. Particularly since the whole purpose of a Trump presidency thus far appears to be to erase any evidence that Obama ever was the nation’s chief executive.

'16 voters AND '17 polls prefer Hillary

Which probably is what Trump’s voters most want. The ability to go into denial that they are so far removed from the mainstream of society, and that all their talk of “making America great again” is more about ensuring the exclusion of people so unlike themselves.

WHICH IS WHY I’m sure those individuals are shocked and appalled at the latest Gallup Organization study – the one that says Obama is the “Most Admired Man” in the United States. Which I’m sure is made worse by the notion that Hillary Clinton is the “Most Admired Woman.”

Because to the ideologues, it’s not so much that Trump ought to be thought of as “Most Admired,” but those two individuals are supposed to be the most repulsive examples of what our society offers. Even though to the majority of us, it’s Trump who fills that role.

Although when one looks at the figures Gallup offers, it becomes clear there is no dominant persona that our society thinks highly of.

Bush's No. 2 higher than Trump

For the second-most Admired man in our society? It’s a tie between Pope Francis and George W. Bush – which, if you think about it, may be a concept even more appalling to the Trump types than the presence of Obama.

WHILE AS FOR the women, our city’s formerly very own Oprah Winfrey came in second, while former first lady Michelle Obama finished third – in a tie with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Michelle falls right behind Oprah

As Gallup points out, this is the sixth straight year Obama has been “most admired,” which means that all of Trump’s rancid rhetoric hasn’t really diminished the strong sentiments some of us feel toward him. It just means those in support of this “Age of Trump” are just very loud about shouting out their attacks to make sure they’re overheard amongst the majority of us.

And as for Trump, he didn’t even factor into the rankings. Heck, even Ron Paul, Ted Cruz and Mitt Romney got minimal support for “Most Admired.”

Which makes me believe all the more that Trump-ites live in their own little world, and they think the majority of us (including the Obamas) should have to live there with them in a place of subservience! Ugh!!!

  -30-