Awaiting anxiously these days for word from the groundhog and the Trumpster. Then again, maybe we shouldn't be!

The Donald or The Groundhog (below), … 

So just what is that gol-danged groundhog going to have to say to us come Saturday about whether springtime is on the way; or if we’re going to have to wait six more weeks for the coming of pleasant weather?

Although a part of me is now wondering even more just what that gosh-darned fool we call a president is going to have to say to us come Tuesday – the date he finally gets to stand before Congress and give the annual State of the Union speech.

… who do you place more faith in?

NOT THAT I expect anything of real significance to come from the lips of The Donald – who at times reminds me of the old Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf wisecrack about New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner.

Remember. “How can you tell when Steinbrenner is not telling the truth? His lips move!” It sounds like a pretty accurate assessment of Trump – who actually once had his own ties to the Yankees owner and has about as overbloated an ego as the one-time shipping magnate-turned-baseball boss.

The only difference is that Steinbrenner put together teams that achieved their goal of winning World Series. While Trump, for the good of us all, has consistently failed to achieve his goal of building that ridiculous wall along the U.S./Mexico border.

Steinbrenner and Trump -- two of a kind?

Which is what I really suspect Tuesday’s address in the House of Representatives will be about. He’ll harangue Congress for not meekly giving in to his every political desire.

HE’LL TRASH THE Democratic caucuses of Congress for behaving responsibly and standing up to his nonsense desires.

I couldn’t help but notice that yet another Trump e-mail received Friday asked us all to take a five-question “State of the Union” prep survey. Trump wants us to say that Democrats aren’t being blamed sufficiently for the 35-day-long shutdown of federal government, and that we’re being told lies about the conditions along that U.S./Mexico border that Trump probably wishes he could erect an electrified barricade along its 1,900-plus miles.

Punxsutawney Phil will do his act Saturday; will he be more accurate than Trump?

Above all, we’re supposed to say we approve of Trump and are happy with the economy – so that Trump can use all of this as the factual basis of a speech that claims The Donald is being unfairly maligned.

Which will truly be a level of nonsense that I suspect the masses won’t be swayed by in the least. We’ll believe it about as much as we’ll believe the silly little poem that the people of Punxsutawney, Pa., write up as the “words” of their groundhog – who is supposed to tell us Saturday just how close we are to springtime.

YOU KNOW THE drill. The groundhog supposedly knows the date, comes out of hibernation, then flees back into his hovel if he sees his shadow. Which would mean six more weeks of winter weather.

Whereas if that groundhog stays outside and enjoys some fresh air, then spring is nearby! The worst of winter is over!

What I’ve never understood is this; if Saturday is a nice sunny day (as it’s supposed to be in the Chicago area), doesn’t that increase the chances of the rodent-like creature seeing a shadow?

Should we be desperately hoping for a cloudy, overcast day on Saturday so as to increase the likelihood of shadows being invisible?

OR IS IT more likely that the only people who place any faith in the weather-predicting ability of the groundhog are the same ones who fall into the 37 percent (according to the Gallup Organization) who these days still look favorably upon Donald Trump’s performance as president?

More faith in Bill Murray than either!

I’m actually inclined to think that the groundhog and anything Trump has to say as part of his national address will be equally absurd and filled with nothing but pure horse-hockey.

But then again, the concept of Groundhog Day did give is that somewhat entertaining 1993 film by Bill Murray – the one in which every day is Groundhog Day and he has to keep reliving the experience no matter how insipid.

Just suppose that same concept happened to Tuesday and every day we would have to hear Trump give a ridiculous address for the State of the Union? That would be the worst thing that could happen to all of us!

  -30-

Did McCarthy single-handedly win, or lose, the mayoral election on Monday?

Chicago woke up Monday morning to the first significant snowfall of the season, which of course got some more trivial-minded broadcast types determined to ask the ultimate political question.

McCARTHY: Cracking down on 'dibs'

Dibs, or no?

AS IN SHOULD people be allowed to stake out a parking spot near their homes and claim it for their own, just because they managed to clear it of snowfall.

Because it also was a day for many of the mayoral aspirants to file their nominating petitions to get on the ballot, it meant candidates got the question put to them – yea or nay?

And no pussyfooting about how it’s a stupid non-issue meant to divert attention away from serious problems confronting Chicago. Which is the way I feel about the issue – a stance that I’m sure will cause some to want to mock me.

For the record, most of the candidates tried to get out of answering the question, but ultimately wound up deciding that people have a right to stake a claim to a parking spot come winter weather.

ALL EXCEPT FOR Garry McCarthy – the one-time law enforcement official from metro New York who came to Chicago to be police superintendent, then got fired by soon-to-be-former Mayor Rahm Emanuel to try to divert criticism from himself over the police shooting death of teenager Laquan McDonald.

McCarthy is likely to be he preferred mayoral candidate of those people eager to express support for law-and-order and police above all others, and who see anything less than such an extreme attitude as being chaos run amok upon our society.

But on this issue, he came out in favor of cracking down on people who think they have a “right” to a particular parking space.

“That’s a bad idea. It causes conflict. Anything that causes conflict, I think, is a bad idea,” McCarthy told reporter-type people.

NOW I’LL BE the first to admit that it’s a total pain in the behind to have to use a shovel to clear one’s car free from heavy snowfall. It takes time, it can be freezing, and one comes off totally soaking wet – then having to get into the car and tend to whatever business they’re doing.

To then come back home to find out someone else took the space for their own automobile? I can comprehend how some people would be p-o’ed.

But it’s one of the realities of urban life. Parking one’s car is always a problem. If you want to have a guarantee of a private spot, then you have to pay for it.

Either that, or go move to a suburban area, or some part of the country where snowfall just isn’t much of an issue. My guess is that if you go out there, you’ll find out just how preferable your life situation is better off here, and your complaints about winter-time parking will come off as downright petty.

BUT THERE ARE those people who want to view it as some sort of inherent right, somewhere along their ability to own a firearm, to have a personal parking spot and stake a claim to it. Almost as though they think they’re 19^th Century prospectors panning for gold in isolated spots.

So I have no doubt that McCarthy’s comments, no matter how trivial they truly are, will instigate some people to vote against him, Heck, I’ve already seen one anonymous commenter label McCarthy a “communist.”

Which I’m sure would grossly offend Sen. Joe of Wisconsin, as though his name were being taken in vain.

But the fact that some voters will make their Feb. 26 decision based off of the early Monday snowfall is the fact that actually grossly offends me – quite possibly more than those who think they have the right to vandalize a car that dared to park in a spot they think is theirs!

  -30-

More of those moments when logic seems (at first) to fly out the window

The cop who sent a text message to a 12-year-old asking her to send him “sexy” pictures of herself who will not face any additional discipline?

Or the mother who claims she got fired from her job at a grocery store because she chose to stay at home with her son on one of the days when Arctic-like weather caused the schools to be closed?

THOSE WERE A pair of stories that turned up in the news coverage on Wednesday; both of which are meant to arouse the reaction of us shaking our fists in anger and shouting out some epithet about damned fools who just can’t appreciate logic.

Although I’m sure there is a letter-of-the-law interpretation by which both actions are completely justifiable.

Personally, I’m more offended by the predicament facing Woodstock police Sergeant Chip Amati, who did get a 30-day suspension without pay after it was learned he sent the text message seeking salacious photographs.

The girl was the daughter of the woman Amati was dating at the time, and she was the one who objected to his conduct when she learned of it.

WOODSTOCK MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS penalized Amati back in October, particularly after it was learned that the sergeant also had used police computer databases to learn more about his girlfriend – even though police policies specifically prevented officers from using the databases for personal use.

The Chicago Tribune reported Wednesday that village officials determined no additional punishment is possible because Amati cannot be disciplined more than once for the same offense.

So those people who want to view Amati as some sort of miscreant for his behavior toward the 12-year-old are going to have to accept the fact that nothing more will happen.

Even though the newspaper noted that he never really lost a month’s worth of pay – because the Police Department in Woodstock is choosing to split the time up into increments; thereby reducing its impact on his personal and professional life.

AARGH!!!!!!!

Some people are having that same reaction this week about Rhiannon Broschat, a 25-year-old from the Logan Square neighborhood who used to work at a Whole Foods grocery store in the Lake View neighborhood.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported Wednesday that about 40 people picketed the company’s regional headquarters in the River North neighborhood on Broschat’s behalf.

She says that when the Chicago Public Schools were closed on Jan. 28 because of the wintry weather, she was unable to find someone who could stay with her “special needs” son. So, she says she called the store to tell them she could not show up at work – even though she had a shift scheduled for that day.

WHOLE FOODS OFFICIALS won’t comment on the incident, but Broschat says her store called her the next day, telling them she had abused the company’s attendance policy.

On the surface, it easily becomes a case of a callous company punishing a person for not putting corporate needs ahead of their personal ones. Although my gut reaction is to wonder how many other times had she been forced to call in absent because of personal needs.

I can comprehend how the job needs to get done, and that the company might want to find someone else who is capable of doing it. Yet I don’t know that this is the exact circumstance that led to this woman’s current “unemployed” status.

Who’s to say how this particular case turns out.

ULTIMATELY, IT COMES down to perspective, as Broschat herself told the Sun-Times she’s convinced she made the “right decision” when she chose to stay home with her son.

I’m sure that with all the cold weather and number of days the local schools have been closed in recent months, there are a slew of parents who suddenly found themselves in the same jam that Broschat made and will be totally sympathetic to her choice.

  -30-