Too much TV -- or am I just watching the wrong sorts of programming?

I used to think I watched far too much television and had way too many details of programming past tucked away in the crevasses of my mind.

But then I look at the public attention being paid these days to a couple of long-running programs that will soon go off the air – and I can’t help but wonder if some people would be inclined to think I don’t know a thing about television.

I’M REFERRING TO the shows “Game of Thrones” and “The Big Bang Theory” – both of which have been on the air for eight and 12 years respectively, but are now in their final days of existence.

But which also are a pair of programs I have to confess; I haven’t ever watched.

The latter show is intended to have its last episode of its first run come Thursday, while the final couple of episodes of “Game of Thrones” will air in coming weeks. By month’s end, both of these shows will be over and done with – except for their potential to live on in rerun-land.

And by “rerun,” I’m not referring to the heavy-set dancer from the 1980s show “What’s Happening.” I told you my brain is clogged with too much trivia about Rog, Dwayne (“Hey, Hey, Hey”) and Rerun.

I LITERALLY HAVEN’T seen “Game of Thrones” ever, and I haven’t felt the need to go out and binge-watch the show. That strikes me as far too much television to watch at once to try to catch up on the show so that watching the final episodes would make any sense.

As for “The Big Bang Theory,” I’ll admit to having watched a few episodes in recent weeks on the TBS channel. Watching the ongoing saga of nerdy college professors/science fiction fanatics (and the incredibly sexy chick who lives in the apartment across the hall) makes me think there’s far too much that has happened I’d have to catch up on to really be up to speed in comprehending Thursday’s finale.

Although I also wonder just how the Sheldon Cooper character (a theoretical physicist) has managed to survive for the dozen years of the show’s run. If I knew someone in reality who was so overbearingly pompous, arrogant and full of himself, I’d have to wring his neck.

While I’ve also heard from those who follow “Game of Thrones” about the combination of violent deaths (almost like “The Sopranos”), combined with the number of excessively beautiful women who strip down and have sex.

MAKING ME THINK that “Big Bang” and Kaley Cuoco’s “Penny” character (no apparent last name) had better stay away – or else she’s likely to find her own heavenly body (not the type her science neighbors/friends would study) impaled in all forms of gruesome manner.

Which also has me wondering just which long-running television hit of the future will I only discover some time around the year 2026 – or around the time that the World Cup soccer tourney will be staged on the North America continent. Even if it will somehow skip over any involvement with Chicago in the process.

  -30-

How big a deal is the Holzhauer game show streak on television's Jeopardy?

I’m not a regular viewer of television game shows. But while helping to watch over a grandparent on Friday, I got to see the latest segment of suburban Naperville native James Holzhauer’s winning streak on “Jeopardy” that’s gaining him national celebrity.

Will anyone remember him after this week?

He’s the guy who bills himself as a professional gambler and has managed to be a daily winner on the show 17 straight days now – having run up prize money totaling nearly $1.3 million.

WHICH MAKES HIM a big-bucks winner, and is about half-way to setting an all-time record (at least by “Jeopardy” standards) if he can keep the streak going to about $2.5 million.

It also has the potential to give him a big chunk of change, so to speak, that he could take back to his current home city of Las Vegas (he is a professional gambler, so to speak) to place bets on the upcoming NBA Finals or next year’s Super Bowl.

Or maybe he’ll try to run up his game show winnings by playing craps or the slot machines or some other game of chance.

If you get the feeling that my thoughts about all of this are a tad cynical, you’d be correct. It seems like quite a phony achievement for people to get all worked up over.

IN PART BECAUSE I find modern-day game shows to be overly loaded with trivia.

Such as on Friday, when there were answers to awkwardly-worded questions that basically relied upon a person’s ability to quote dialogue from the Inspector Clouseau character from the old “Pink Panther” films – or bits of chatter from old

Monty Python” flicks.

I’m not kidding. One of Holzhauer’s Friday challengers took a financial hit when he couldn’t quite remember the line that “Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!”

Not exactly an example of our society’s “best and brightest” showing off their intellect.

PLUS I ALSO couldn’t help remember moments in game show history when, back in 1958, an academic type, Charles Van Doren, appeared on the game show “Twenty-One” and ran up a winning streak.

It gained him national celebrity. But it was later learned that the show’s producers provided Van Doren with questions in advance, along with answers.

Now I’m not saying that Holzhauer’s ability to answer so many questions on a variety of topics is somehow equally coached or fraudulent. If anything, a part of me couldn’t help but wonder if the buzzing devices that let Jeopardy contestants indicate they want to try to answer a question were somehow working improperly.

It just seemed that Holzhauer was quick on the draw to answer so many questions that the other contestants also knew. Which could be a matter of skill, of sorts.

IS HOLZHAUER’S REAL skill that he has an itchy trigger finger (or thumb, actually), rather than superior knowledge. Would this “professional gambler” also be skilled at competitive video game playing.

Will Holzhauer get similar treatment someday?

Of course, it’s possible that many people reading this will wonder how I’m thinking of Van Doren (who died earlier this month at age 93) at all. There may be many who, if they know of the matter at all, will think of it simply as the subject matter of the 1994 film “Quiz Show.”

Which reduced the life of Van Doren (who eventually went on to write for Encyclopaedia Britannica) to a character played by actor Ralph Fiennes. Could the Holzhauer tale someday become a cinematic tale worthy of a film?

Or at the very least a movie production that people watching Netflix will get to see? That is, unless Holzhauer’s lucky streak comes to an end in upcoming days – and James reverts back to being another anonymous nobody scouring the streets of Las Vegas.

  -30-

Who’s the liar now?!?

I haven’t bothered to write a word until now about the saga of Jussie Smollet, largely because I must confess to not having a clue as to who he is.

"Empire" gains unwanted notoriety

I know he’s an actor in the television program “Empire,” but that’s theoretical. I’ve never watched the show, and haven’t felt compelled to check it out in recent weeks on account of the stink over Smollet.

A STINK THAT gained touches of lasting stench on Tuesday when a Cook County judge went along with prosecutorial recommendations that the criminal charges against Smollet be dismissed.

Of course, Cook County will keep the $10,000 cash he had to post as bond in order to avoid being locked up in the Cook County Jail. But Smollet was able to walk out of the Criminal Courts building with claims of innocence and the ability to go about making grandiose statements to the effect HE was the crime victim.

It’s a wonder he didn’t accuse police of improper activity against him. Then again, maybe that statement will be forthcoming.

Smollet was the guy who claimed that back in January, he was walking along the streets of Chicago when two men grabbed him, threw a noose around his neck, and began shouting racial and homophobic slurs at him.

SUPPOSEDLY, ONE OF the men also shouted that “this is MAGA country,” implying that this was motivated by people who firmly believe in the Age of Trump and all the nonsense that President Donald spews on a regular basis.

A Trump-motivated hate crime.

Except that Chicago police fairly quickly found flaws in the account, and the two men then told police that Smollet paid them a few thousand dollars to stage the attack against him.

WATKINS: Dismissed the case

Which led to criminal charges being filed against Smollet, and all the ideologue nitwits of the world being eager to claim this was just another case of fraud. Smollet, who is both black and gay, is just a liar who shouldn’t be trusted, like everybody else who happens to not be white and Protestant.

A REAL AMERICAN, as these people would prefer to define it.

That version of the story, however, fell apart on Tuesday, when Judge Steven Watkins used what was expected to be a routine status hearing to dismiss the case – at the request of prosecutors.

Smollet’s attorneys say there was no advance warning or deal. It’s not anything resembling a plea agreement. The case was thrown out of court. Not that we’ll ever know details, for the judge also issued an order keeping the court file of the case under permanent seal.

With prosecutors saying in court that this agreement is, “a just disposition and appropriate resolution to this case,” it makes me suspect there was some sort of error in the handling of this case by the police during the investigation – something that would have ruined any chance of getting a criminal conviction that would have held up under appeal.

NOT THAT I know that for sure. This case is now under seal, which means we’re never going to be informed as to why prosecutors were willing to write off the case against Smollet, who many were more than willing to demonize as a liar who was worthy of whatever criminal punishment the courts felt like dishing out.

JOHNSON: He's furious

So are we supposed to go back to the account where Smollet was the victim of racially-motivated thugs? Smollet himself insisted Tuesday that he has been, “truthful and consistent from Day One” in talking about the incident.

For what it’s worth, police Superintendent Eddie Johnson was said to be “furious” that prosecutors would dismiss the investigation his officers put together. Of course, Johnson was the guy who went around saying Smollet was particularly contemptible for being a black man who’d stage a racially-motivated attack against himself.

Which means it’s likely that Johnson will be the one who winds up taking the fall for this incident. Even though I’m sure there’s enough “blame” to be passed around. Johnson said early on that this case “pissed everybody off,” and now that list of irritated individuals includes the ideologues who were taking joy from Smollet’s arrest.

  -30-

EXTRA: Reminiscing about Suffrage

Seeing that it's International Women's Day on Friday, it only seems appropriate to dredge up this childhood memory of old.

It's one that I actually remember seeing during Saturday morning television back when it originally aired. Although I wonder, at times, how many people of my generation weren't paying the least bit of attention to Schoolhouse Rock and didn't learn the intended lesson. Instead focusing their attention on "Super Friends" or "Hong Kong Phooey?" Which would explain a lot of the current level of ignorance we've sunk to in so many areas.

  -30-

Playing part of a pol, without having to carry out accompanying responsibilities

Perhaps it’s only natural that people who can’t hold a position any longer (or are just tired of it) use their fame to try to get themselves a television gig.

Will we someday have to see Rahm … 

Being a “commentator” allows them to keep portraying themselves as some sort of expert on whatever it is they’re interested in – without having to carry out any of the actual responsibilities.

OR HAVING TO go through the hassles of continually getting themselves re-elected to office!

Think about it? We’re now forevermore going to see Luis Gutierrez as the outspoken critic of our national immigration policy, while Rahm Emanuel will portray himself for as long as he wishes as Chicago’s “mayor.”

No matter how much the thought of those two men in those positions stirs up levels of contempt and disgust, we’ll always now think of them as “congressman” and “mayor” no matter what it is they really do in life.

These thoughts popped into my head when, on Monday, Gutierrez felt compelled to release a statement saying he’s now a part of CNN. He’ll be someone they can put on the air to talk about immigration policy and the Puerto Rican population of our nation.

… and Luis speak out … 

IN SHORT, THE man who during his two-plus decades in Congress portrayed himself as “Mr. Puerto Rico” himself any time a related issue came up on Capitol Hill can now go about portraying himself as the ultimate expert.

Those of us who remember back even further when he was a City Council member bellowing about like a crowing rooster (giving him the nickname “El Gallito”) will find act old – if not downright repetitive.

Yet the rest of the nation is going to get his share of the act. Particularly the ideologues who often will find themselves on the receiving end of whatever admonishment Gutierrez feels to dish out at any given time.

It assures that even though Gutierrez ceased to be a Congressman last week, he’ll continue to be heard. Personally, I’m waiting for the moment Gutierrez successor Rep. Jesus Garcia, D-Ill., does something that Luis considers to be a screw-up.

… on our television sets?

I HAVE NO doubt the rhetoric will be ugly – in both English en Español.

Not that it will be any more pretty when Rahm Emanuel finally steps down as mayor come May. For the talk is that brother Ari, a professional talent agent in his own right, already is doing the groundwork for Rahm to become one of the ranks of professional commentators himself.

For as a former member of Congress and White House aide under both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, he has a certain amount of issues and policy background. Combined with his eight years as Chicago mayor, he may wind up trying to claim himself as the expert on all sorts of things.

Could Garcia be blasted by Luis and Rahm?

Maybe he can even develop a personality of sorts that would allow him to be declared an unofficial “mayor” of the nation – someone who can forevermore be thought of as having an expertise. Even on issues upon which he knows absolutely nothing.

THAT ACTUALLY WAS the niche Rudy Giuliani once held, as the symbolic “America’s mayor” – at least until he became associated publicly with fellow New Yorker Donald Trump and relegated himself to the niche of the crackpot’s protector.

Will Rahm replace Rudy as 'America's mayor?'

Is the nation ready for Rahm; to speak out at his own will on whatever he thinks interesting? Anybody who tries claiming Rahm doesn’t have Rudy’s stature is engaging in crackpot rhetoric of their own – both men served as mayors of their respective cities for eight years.

But every time they appear on television, we get reminded of their stints – and many of us may wind up thinking they’re still in office doing great things; instead of merely blathering about on various issues that they had little to actually do with.

Which almost has me wondering if the greater point of running for electoral office is to gain the years of experience so that, one day, one can claim the legitimacy so they can someday go on television and have people think they used to “be somebody.”

  -30-

What’s an Omarosa?

Remember back to 1985 and the film “Back to the Future,” where the “Marty McFly” character informs the 1955 version of “Doc Brown” that Ronald Reagan was the president, which inspired the response, “Who’s the vice president? Jerry Lewis!”

The punch line being that one entertainer (remember “Bedtime for Bonzo”) would turn government into a whole crew of entertainers. How ridiculous!

OF COURSE, IT would seem that the ludicrousness of three decades ago is all-too much our modern-day reality. Things we never would have thought credible are the norm of now.

That’s how I’m regarding this whole ongoing situation regarding President Donald Trump and one-time staffer Omarosa Manigault-Newman. The one who these days supposedly says tape recordings exist of Trump using racial slurs, which causes The Donald to now openly refer to her as “that dog.”

The connection between the two goes back to the days when Trump was host of reality television shows, and Manigault was one of the contestants. From what I can tell, her character was the sort-of nasty personality on the program – which I suppose fits some role in the overall show.

I write “from what I can tell” because I have to admit, I never actually watched the show. I never heard of Manigault in those days, and even after I learned that the Trump presidency gave a job to someone who had been a character on his show, I didn’t care enough to really find out who she was.

MEANING I HAD to do some instant research on Tuesday to try to figure out what the big deal was with this instance where Manigault felt compelled to tell of secret tape recordings of Trump and also took the non-disclosure documents she was asked to sign in order to get a job working for Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign and provided copies of them to the Washington Post.

I went all this time without bothering to find out who she was because I really didn’t care. I would have presumed that the idea of anyone affiliated with the Trump presidency back in the days when he played television show host would not have been considered a credible persona to be working in the White House.

Shows you how little I know.

Although to tell you the truth, it shouldn’t be surprising that someone as much a political amateur as Donald Trump would put a whole crew of amateurs into positions of power and authority.

SUCH AS MANIGAULT, who may have been a government staffer back in the days of Al Gore as Vice President (personnel people from back then now say she was “the worst hire we ever made”). But her real credentials are the fact she was on The Apprentice and The Ultimate Merger television programs.

So is she really now as incompetent as Trump is trying to make her out to be? She may be. He may be telling the truth, for once!

But why should he have any reason to be shocked? Who did he think he was hiring when he picked her for a spot in the White House Office of Public Liaison (which basically means she was responsible for presenting Trump’s image to the public)? He certainly had no reason to think she had any real credentials for a public service job.

I’d take this whole controversy (yes, I think it sleazy for someone to go about secretly tape-recording their boss to slip him up) as further evidence of how grossly unqualified Trump is to be this nation’s chief executive and how the 2020 election cycle can’t come soon enough to give the electorate the chance to replace him.

ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE been so many more incidents during this Age of Trump to show us how unfit he is to hold public office – and how delusional that segment of our society is that still, to this day, thinks his election in 2016 was a good thing for the country.

Meaning now that I have bothered to look into this, I wish I could undo it. For I fear that bothering to learn who Manigault is has managed to squeeze some more essential (or interesting) knowledge from my memory.

And as for that old “Back to the Future” joke, it doesn’t seem quite so funny anymore.

Because compared to all the level of nonsense that has occurred in this Age of Trump, the idea of Jerry Lewis as Vice President doesn’t seem anywhere near as absurd.

  -30-

Are we in for five months’ worth of annoying broadcast campaign ads?

We’re five months away from Election Day for Illinois governor, yet the two major party candidates don’t think it’s the least bit too early to start tormenting us with their broadcast ads attacking each other.

BLAGOJEVICH: A gubernatorial issue?

Both Gov. Bruce Rauner and Democratic challenger J.B. Pritzker came out with attack ads this week – Pritzker wants to remind us of how inept Rauner has been in terms of the state being able to come up with a budget in a timely manner.

WHILE RAUNER WENT for the jugular – the tape recordings made by federal investigators of Pritzker talking with former Gov. Rod Blagojevich on the telephone that provided the Chicago Tribune with the details of the stories they wrote earlier this year to imply Pritzker was a bigot against black people will now be heard in brief advertising spots.

Specifically, we get to hear Blagojevich making tacky jokes about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who back in 2008 was the outage of the right wing because the man who was pastor of then-Sen. Barack Obama’s church in Chicago was the one who included the line “God Damn America” in some of his sermons – actually a reference to some of the racial intolerance that has been tolerated within our society.

It seems Blagojevich joked about making Wright his choice to be U.S. Senator to succeed Obama when the latter was elected president. It was a tacky joke, kind of lame.

For the record, Pritzker thought the gag was funny. We hear him say it is “hilarious.”

RAUNER: Budget ineptitude?

IT DOESN’T REALLY tell us anything about J.B. It’s a trivial tidbit.

But I’m sure it has the potential to grab at the emotions of people moreso than the initial Pritzker spot – which tells the story of a construction worker who wound up losing his job because of the fact that the state went for so many years without being able to pass budgets.

Which meant that state government for several years was unable to go through its daily operations.

That didn’t happen this year, because for once Rauner put aside his ideological fantasies (most of which are meant to undermine labor unions that do work with state government) and signed off on a budget for the upcoming fiscal year.

PRITZKER: Racial hang-ups?

WHICH IS WHAT I’m sure Rauner wants us to remember. Forget about all those past years.

And remember a 10-year-old moment of stupidity whose only real point is to remind us that Pritzker for many years was a prominent financial supporter of Democratic candidates for government office.

We could make similar arguments against Rauner, who for many years prior to running for office himself was a prominent financial supporter of those political candidates who preferred to run under the symbol of the elephant, rather than the donkey.

The real point, of course, is that the campaigns now feel the need to start tormenting us with their rants and rhetoric. For the next five months, exactly (that’s how long we have from now to Election Day).

IT DOESN’T SURPRISE me that Rauner would bring up Blagojevich – who is back in the news again on account of President Donald Trump’s suggestions that he’s willing to grant some form of clemency to Rod that would let him out of prison some six years early.

TRUMP: Will he impact Ill. gov. race?

I would have thought he would have waited to see exactly what Trump chooses to do. Because it could wind up that the kind of people Rauner is hoping turn out to re-elect him as governor are the same ones who think highly of Trump – and won’t really like anyone suggesting that the man whom their guy (a.k.a., the Donald) is supporting is really just a political dirt bag.

But perhaps Rauner is just desperate enough to get in the first serious punch of the general election campaign cycle. Which he has managed to do.

One potential plus – it could force many of us to ignore television so as to avoid all the inanities. Admit it, turning off the TV set and finding something else to do is something that would benefit all of us.

  -30-

Valerie Jarrett makes the news by not putting foot in mouth, unlike Roseanne

Valerie Jarrett has quite the life story – a former advisor to mayors Harold Washington and Richard M. Daley. A senior adviser during the presidency of Barack Obama.

Roseanne tried to insult Valerie Jarrett, ...

She’s even a former chairwoman of the Chicago Transit Board (which oversees all those CTA trains and buses) and also has held positions on several corporate boards. She even is the first female student to attend the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. That’s a lot more accomplishment than most people achieve in life.

... but wound up trashing herself instead

YET LET’S BE honest. There’s a good chance that in the eyes of the general public, Jarrett is going to be noted as significant for the fact that she took down the career of one Roseanne.

And she didn’t have to do anything directly – only conduct herself with more sophistication than the actress/comedian who seems to want to think she’s the voice of all those people who think Donald Trump represents “real Americans.”

Now keep in mind that it isn’t the least bit unusual for people to use social media accounts such as Twitter to spout out stupid things.

Will 'Roseanne'  rerun rep become as tainted ...

Which is what Roseanne did when she posted a little blurb Tuesday where she managed to use less than 50 characters (much less than the 140 maximum permitted) to defame Jarrett.

AS ROSEANNE PUT it, “muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj.” It’s not at all uncommon for bigots to make wisecracks comparing black people to apes. Some people just have a proclivity for saying something stupid.

But when people tried responding to Roseanne by calling her out on her ignorance, she initially tried responding that calling someone “muslim” isn’t racist and that the whole thing was intended to be a joke.

As though it’s the fault of others who want to call out bigotry. Either that, or else Roseanne is like many other ideological nitwits who think that freedom of speech only applies to themselves and that NO ONE is permitted to respond.

... as "The Cosby Show" rep?

Even though the concept really means we all can retort to each other until our minds are all worn out.

BUT THE OUTCRY became intense enough that Roseanne felt compelled to send out a final twit saying, “I apologize.” While also saying she was through with Twitter.

Not good enough, as ABC has said they’re cancelling Roseanne’s self-named comedy program. The one that gave her a television legacy some two decades ago and which she attempted a reboot this year.

That reboot actually finished up its first comeback season last week and had network executives convinced she was going to be a significant part of next TV season’s programming lineup.

That is, until Tuesday afternoon, when ABC officials decided that the outcry over Roseanne’s Twitter account was so intense that they’d just as soon cancel her. Several of the Roseanne cast members are now going out of their way to distance themselves from her gag. Its very likely that when Roseanne dies and her obituary is written, this will wind up being a significant moment – perhaps even the lede.

Life's lesson; 'Planet of Apes' gags are lame

CAREER SUICIDE IN a matter of hours. And for the record, Jarrett only referred to the incident as "a teaching moment," admitting she benefits from many people willing to come to her defense. Comparable to the way some perceive a level of class and sophistication the Obama years gave our society, compared to this Age of Trump we’re now in.

Not that Jarrett needs to say anything against Roseanne. Why help your critic by doing or saying anything that detracts from their own stupidity?

The sad thing is that the show’s producers tried to make some comedic hay out of the fact that Roseanne herself is a Trump backer and might actually become a way of putting a more positive spin on those people.

Yet did Roseanne unintendedly wind up showing us a real truth with her so-called sense of humor? Which, for those of us who feel a sense of shame that anybody in our society finds these days appealing, makes this incident the ultimate punchline for use against the Trump-ites.

  -30-

Sinclair gives me gas, and not the useful kind like the old service stations

I’ll say it now, and I’ll say it loud – the concept of “liberal media” is a myth!

Many different faces all saying the same thing

If anything, we’re more likely to have a trivial media – over-anxious to feed us details about every stupid pseudo-celebrity and gory homicide, rather than report details about issues that the corporate execs who run many news organizations these days likely think are “boring!!!,” and also downright costly to cover.

Won't be Chicago's 'very own' much longer

SO WHEN I read this week of the reaction of Baltimore-based Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc., officials who said that all print news media are biased and that their collection of television stations are the only ones they trust to tell the “truth,” I couldn’t help but think that somebody is feeling a tad insecure about their status.

Or lack, thereof.

Although I suspect their lack of a corporate thick skin is going to result in many more diatribes by this entity – which is the one that is in the process of acquiring control of WGN-TV and the other television stations across the country that used to be known as Tribune Media.

Is broadcaster defaming oil company's name?

You’d think that Sinclair officials would be used to this. Although the company thus far has focused its properties on the South and in smaller media markets – the ABC affiliate in Springfield, Ill., is the only Sinclair-owned entity I’m aware of anywhere near Chicago.

WITHIN THE NEWS business, Sinclair has long had a reputation for the commentaries they put together – then expect ALL of their television stations to air unedited. I don’t doubt that for the Smith family that owns controlling interest in the company, their ability to get their ideologically conservative viewpoint out IS their primary reason for being in the broadcast news business.

And now that they want to buy up the old Tribune TV properties, they will have themselves in the New York, Chicago and Los Angeles markets – along with many other major cities across the country.

Its been a long while since Sinclair operated anywhere near Chicago

Their grasp over the nation will grow significantly (what’s the figure, 72 percent of the U.S. public will have the option to get their “news” from Sinclair-owned stations). Which has some people scared and hoping that the FCC is somehow capable of thwarting the deal.

But with the FCC a part of the federal government now under the control of President Donald Trump – who recently Tweeted us to say how much he approves of Sinclair’s spin of the news – I’d say it’s highly unlikely any federal regulators would do a darned thing to interfere.

PERSONALLY, I THINK the only people who complain about “liberal media” are the ones with such ideological hang-ups of their own that what they really want are “far right” programs to the exclusion of all others. It says more about their own leanings than anything that is wrong with what exists on television.

The idea that so much ideologue tripe is being spewed (and that there are those who think alternatives ought to be prohibited) is something that gives me gas.

And not of the type that is pumped into our automobiles at Sinclair Oil stations across the country – although not anywhere in the Chicago-area any longer (they only have three stations in Southern Illinois and four stations in Indiana – one of which is in Indianapolis.

Whenever I hear the Sinclair name, it has brought to my mind the green dinosaur that is part of the Sinclair logo.

BUT NOW, IT threatens to bring to my mind the nonsense being repeated everywhere – such as in that recent collection of commentaries aired on assorted television stations by many different broadcasters, but all containing the exact same wording regardless of where it was aired.

I’m sure it will be just a matter of time before someone on WGN (which for years has been “Chicago’s Very Own") will wind up having a Baltimore-prepared commentary for them to broadcast; informing us of how irresponsible and reckless Chicago is on whatever issue that Trump happens to have buzzing about in his pea-sized brain that particular day. As though we Chicagoans ought to feel shame at our opposition to this Age of Trump we’re now in. Rather than continuing our resistance.

Will broadcaster suffer a similar fate?

If we’re lucky, perhaps the Sinclair overbearing attitudes will have a similar effect as the end of the 1990’s-era children’s show “Dinosaurs.” In that show, Earl Sinclair (a dim-witted dinosaur nowhere near as lovable as Dino from “The Flintstones”) inadvertently caused the environmental calamity that brought on the Ice Age and made dinosaurs extinct.

Maybe enough dim-witted commentaries that go against the mood of the nation (Morning Consult’s latest poll has Trump with a 54 percent disapproval rating for March – and 60 percent in Illinois) is what will turn the viewing public against watching Sinclair-owned television properties or trusting anything they have to say,

  -30-

I didn’t watch State of State (or Union)

I’m sure somebody out there will get outraged and want to call into question my credentials as a political-watching geek. But I didn’t bother to watch any of the government speechifying that took place this week.

Missed Rauner's 'State of State' rhetoric

I avoided the State of the Union address Tuesday night, meaning I didn’t hear Donald Trump’s nasally voice tell us how wonderful our nation would be – if only we’d just shut up and do what he tells us to do.

NOR DID I feel the need to watch the broadcasts of the State of the State address presented during the noon hour Wednesday by Gov. Bruce Rauner, whom I’m sure tried coming up with a way of saying essentially the same thing about Illinois while also droppin' some "g's" to make himself sound like the "common" man.

That, and “Blame Madigan!,” which seems to be the lone message Rauner has to say these days – and which I’m sure he will repeat all the way through to the Nov. 6 general election.

I’m sure some will want to criticize me by claiming I’m ignoring the serious messages these two elected officials have to present to us. They’ll use this to try to criticize anything I might want to say or think, by claiming I’m not following the “facts.”

To which I say “Nonsense!” I read a transcript of the Rauner address before he even gave it, and also enough summaries of what Trump had to say. I probably paid greater attention to the content than anybody who watched television.

THE FACT IS that what I don’t pay attention to are the actual broadcasts. I have no interest in watching this kind of stuff on television. I believe the impression we garner from television is distorted – to the point where I find it phony.

I’m reading enough accounts of the events to garner what was said, and much of the rebuttal – which in all honesty is canned rhetoric written in advance. Talking points that could have been spoken before either Trump or Rauner ever spoke.

Part of this attitude is because I have covered State of the State addresses presented by other Illinois governors, along with presidential events as equally staged as the State of the Union.

Missed the Trump show, and not sorry

Those events can be intriguing to watch, if you can see them presented live. Actually be there in the chambers of the Illinois Statehouse or on Capitol Hill can be a memorable experience.

PARTICULARLY SINCE ONE can see for themselves how all those rounds of applause at key points in the speeches are fake. They might as well erect “applause” signs to let the politicos know when to clap.

Also, the fact that the opposition party will usually go out of their way to sit silent while the chief executive speaks. Which in its own way can be as telling as anything they’d say.

You don’t pick up on any of this on television. You just get to watch a white guy in a suit reading off a teleprompter some pre-written material that politicos will interpret to believe whatever it is they want us all to think.

Which may well be what most offended some people about the administration of Barack Obama – it went against their sensibilities of what a president was supposed to look like, and which those who believe that “Make America Great Again” rhetoric think has been restored by Trump.

YES, I’LL WANT to read the details of what Trump and Rauner had to say. I believe I’ll learn more that way than by actually watching the broadcasts – which to be honest can be deadly dull television.

Something way too easily parodied – you just know we’re getting a Saturday Night Live sketch this weekend giving us a version of Trump’s speech played for laughs. Which will be more interesting than the actual speech presented by either man.

Was more interesting Tuesday than Trump

Then again, I watched reruns of “Murphy Brown” on Tuesday and “Welcome Back Kotter” on Wednesday, which gave me more laughs than I would have got from watching either Trump or Rauner.

Which could mean that if Mayor Rahm Emanuel were compelled to give a major address that was broadcast live, I’d likely be going in search of a “M*A*S*H” re-run. Maybe I’ll find that episode where Hawkeye and Trapper order ribs takeout to Korea from Adam’s Ribs, which supposedly had the best ribs in all of Chicago.

  -30-

Can big bucks buy J.B. human persona?

J.B. Pritzker is the millionaire would-be politico who’s showing a willingness to spend his own money to try to run for governor in next year’s election cycle.

Gubernatorial candidate J.B. Pritzker's late mother, Sue, is featured in his latest campaign advertising spot now airing on television. Does this make him appear more human? Photograph by Gregory Tejeda

Democratic opponent Daniel Biss (whose campaign appeal seems limited to anyone who lives in or near the suburb of Evanston, where he lives) is trying to use Pritzker’s wealth against him – he issued the statement that pointed out Pritzker’s campaign is spending some $120,000 per day – which he says is more than the annual income of he and his wife.

YET JUST WHAT could Pritzker be spending so much money on?

Perhaps it is those campaign ads that began appearing on television this week – the one where Pritzker doesn’t talk about the state of the state or how sleazy his gubernatorial challengers (or incumbent Bruce Rauner) are. Instead, we get to hear a first-hand story of how wonderful his mother, Sue, was.

He talks about how after his father, Donald, died when J.B. was merely a 7-year-old, his mother struggled to support he and his siblings. Her efforts were made all the more difficult by the fact that she was an alcoholic.

PRITZKER: Most empathetic?

She could easily have been overwhelmed by becoming a widow. Instead, she managed to raise all her children to adulthood where they succeeded in life, and J.B. says he gained “a kind of empathy and understanding” about people who struggle.

HE CLAIMS THAT empathy will be put to use if he becomes governor. He’ll sympathize with all of us.

Which usually I’d be inclined to dismiss as a whole lot of schmaltz.

But this particular statement is something off-beat and usual. I’ve never really seen a political campaign try to put forth such a statement. Usually, something personal would be more likely to have Pritzker allies (although not J.B. himself) telling us what a despicable excuse for a human being Rauner is.

BISS: J.B. nothing but money?

Turn this into a battle of the two candidates likely to try to self-fund their way to the Executive Mansion in Springfield following the Nov. 6, 2018 elections.

BUT IT IS because this statement is so much like something just about anyone would say about their mother. I could easily come up with a similar accounting of how strong my late mother became following her divorce from my father – all because she wanted me and my brother to not suffer due to the split some four decades ago.

In fact, my quarrel would be to say that my mother was just as special as his mother. Something I’m sure just about every voter would argue.

That touch of humanity, and not just another political geek looking to ram his ideological leanings down all of our throats, is what Pritzker seems to want us to think – and what he’s trying to buy with the dollars that the Biss campaign would like us to think are merely evidence of another rich guy trying to buy himself a government office so as to appease his ego.

Of course, that could also be evidence that the Biss campaign’s momentum is withering away on account of the smudge on his political image after having to pick a new lieutenant governor running mate.

RAUNER: Not just a GOP version of J.B.?

HE’S NOT RAISING money for his own campaigning at the same rate he was early on. Although in this particular campaign, the J.B. Pritzker campaign was always going to be the one that grossly outspent everybody else on the Democratic side.

With incumbent Rauner’s personal wealth and the roughly $50 million he claims he’ll come up with to support his own re-election and that of sympathetic legislators for the General Assembly likely to dwarf his own spending.

Which is why Illinois House Speaker and state Democratic Chairman Michael Madigan has long been a Pritzker backer – his money could compete with the Rauner money.

Which also is why the Illinois Democratic County Chairs Association (Democrats in the rural parts of Illinois) are likely to do their own endorsement of Pritzker – even though the Republicans claim the association is “taking orders from Madigan” and nothing more. Maybe the GOP can’t think of something nice to say about their own candidate?

  -30-