A Heckuva Job, by Paul Krugman, Commentary, NY Times: ...Katrina was special in political terms because it revealed such a huge gap between image and reality. Ever since 9/11, former President George W. Bush had been posing as a strong, effective leader keeping America safe. He wasn't. But as long as he was talking tough about terrorists, it was hard for the public to see what a lousy job he was doing. It took a domestic disaster, which made his administration's cronyism and incompetence obvious to anyone with a TV set, to burst his bubble.
What we should have learned from Katrina, in other words, was that political poseurs with nothing much to offer besides bluster can nonetheless fool many people into believing that they're strong leaders. And that's a lesson we're learning all over again as the 2016 presidential race unfolds.
You probably think I'm talking about Donald Trump, and I am. But he's not the only one.
Consider, if you will, the case of Chris Christie. Not that long ago he was regarded as a strong contender for the presidency... Now Mr. Christie looks pathetic — did you hear the one about his plan to track immigrants as if they were FedEx packages? But he hasn't changed, he's just come into focus.
Or consider Jeb Bush... What happened to Jeb the smart, effective leader? He never existed.
And there's more. Remember when Scott Walker was the man to watch? Remember when Bobby Jindal was brilliant?
I know, now I'm supposed to be evenhanded, and point out equivalent figures on the Democratic side. But there really aren't any; in modern America, cults of personality built around undeserving politicians seem to be a Republican thing. ...
Which brings us back to Mr. Trump.
Both the Republican establishment and the punditocracy have been shocked by Mr. Trump's continuing appeal to the party's base. He's a ludicrous figure, they complain. His policy proposals, such as they are, are unworkable, and anyway, don't people realize the difference between actual leadership and being a star on reality TV?
But ... those predicting Mr. Trump's imminent political demise are ignoring the lessons of recent history, which tell us that poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time. Someday The Donald will have his Katrina moment, when voters see him for who he really is. But don't count on it happening any time soon.
www.nytimes.com
That is an odd commentary...
Pinning Katrina failures on W and then comparing W to Trump?
Quote from: SunKing on September 01, 2015, 06:07:57 PM
That is an odd commentary...
Pinning Katrina failures on W and then comparing W to Trump?
The government's myriad failures in responding to the hurricane will have to be pinned on the President - the buck stops with him.
The article - as ham-fisted as it is - isn't so much comparing W and Trump as it is the creation of cults of personality around politicians (apparently just Republican ones).
Maybe I should have bolded the point of the commentary for those too dense to get it:
poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time
Quote from: finehoe on September 02, 2015, 09:31:36 AM
Maybe I should have bolded the point of the commentary for those too dense to get it:
poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time
And no mention of the poster child for this quote ^^ in the NYT article - Hillary Clinton... Of course... [eyerolliest of eye rolls follows]
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 12:36:46 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 12:30:00 PM
Quote from: finehoe on September 02, 2015, 09:31:36 AM
Maybe I should have bolded the point of the commentary for those too dense to get it:
poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time
And no mention of the poster child for this quote ^^ in the NYT article - Hillary Clinton... Of course... [eyerolliest of eye rolls follows]
I wonder what you think that the former Senator, former Secretary of State and forty year advocate of Health Care reform has 'conned' people about?
I think these are lazy terms, and I often wonder what people mean when they say them.
Yes she has been exemplary at projecting an air of accomplishment while padding her resume and growing her political machine base... but what does she have to show for all of her "service"? What great bills did she introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft? Look forward to seeing a list of actual accomplishments.
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 01:06:37 PM
compared to other Senators and Secretaries of State?
How about compared to any Republican running for president? What do any of them have to show for all of their "service"? What great bills did any of them introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft?
Looking forward to seeing a list of actual accomplishments.
One doesn't have to like Clinton. But it's ludicrous to pretend she's somehow worse than any other Senator or Secretary of State.
Quote from: finehoe on September 02, 2015, 01:10:26 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 01:06:37 PM
compared to other Senators and Secretaries of State?
How about compared to any Republican running for president? What do any of them have to show for all of their "service"? What great bills did any of them introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft?
Looking forward to seeing a list of actual accomplishments.
You think Hillary has done more than Trump?
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 01:06:37 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 12:56:44 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 12:36:46 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 12:30:00 PM
Quote from: finehoe on September 02, 2015, 09:31:36 AM
Maybe I should have bolded the point of the commentary for those too dense to get it:
poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time
And no mention of the poster child for this quote ^^ in the NYT article - Hillary Clinton... Of course... [eyerolliest of eye rolls follows]
I wonder what you think that the former Senator, former Secretary of State and forty year advocate of Health Care reform has 'conned' people about?
I think these are lazy terms, and I often wonder what people mean when they say them.
Yes she has been exemplary at projecting an air of accomplishment while padding her resume and growing her political machine base... but what does she have to show for all of her "service"? What great bills did she introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft? Look forward to seeing a list of actual accomplishments.
compared to other Senators and Secretaries of State?
Here is her Senate Career in summation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton
I think you really haven't thought through your statement. Its a lazy accusation that uses the No True Scotsman logical fallacy as its main support.
Being a Senator during an economic collapse and two wars is going to give a senator from the nation's most important city (and the victim of the George Bush Administration Era's Terrorist Attack on 911) plenty to do of substance and importance. Its bizarre that you didn't already assume as much.
She then had to go back and put together the shambles left behind at the State Department as a result of the Chimperor's appointment of Condaleeza Rice and her disastrous global policies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton%27s_tenure_as_Secretary_of_State
So a pretty substantive career for the past 16 years. She helped change a planet, both politically and symbolically.
What did you do?
Now don't get snippy Steven... You've provided a loooong list of..... nothing. Sponsored naught. She carpetbagged a Senate seat in a state she had no ties to and could wield her political machine's influence in securing the vote. Did nothing for NY. Rode some coattails in the Senate into a horrific term in a figure head role as SoS, which was more political payback for her waiting patiently and supporting Obama...
There is really nothing behind her political career of substance at all.
^^
Except a long list of scandals.
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 02:39:20 PM
You think Hillary has done more than Trump?
Well, yeah, seeing as how Trump has never held public office. Using your own criteria, what does he have to show for all of his "service"? What great bills did he introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft?
[/quote]
She carpetbagged a Senate seat in a state she had no ties to and could wield her political machine's influence in securing the vote.
[/quote]
She completely gets a pass for this doesn't she
"Carpetbagging" sounds dirty.
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 09:39:54 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 02:49:03 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 01:06:37 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 12:56:44 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 02, 2015, 12:36:46 PM
Quote from: Sentient on September 02, 2015, 12:30:00 PM
Quote from: finehoe on September 02, 2015, 09:31:36 AM
Maybe I should have bolded the point of the commentary for those too dense to get it:
poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time
And no mention of the poster child for this quote ^^ in the NYT article - Hillary Clinton... Of course... [eyerolliest of eye rolls follows]
I wonder what you think that the former Senator, former Secretary of State and forty year advocate of Health Care reform has 'conned' people about?
I think these are lazy terms, and I often wonder what people mean when they say them.
Yes she has been exemplary at projecting an air of accomplishment while padding her resume and growing her political machine base... but what does she have to show for all of her "service"? What great bills did she introduce and champion? What great acts of statecraft? Look forward to seeing a list of actual accomplishments.
compared to other Senators and Secretaries of State?
Here is her Senate Career in summation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton
I think you really haven't thought through your statement. Its a lazy accusation that uses the No True Scotsman logical fallacy as its main support.
Being a Senator during an economic collapse and two wars is going to give a senator from the nation's most important city (and the victim of the George Bush Administration Era's Terrorist Attack on 911) plenty to do of substance and importance. Its bizarre that you didn't already assume as much.
She then had to go back and put together the shambles left behind at the State Department as a result of the Chimperor's appointment of Condaleeza Rice and her disastrous global policies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton%27s_tenure_as_Secretary_of_State
So a pretty substantive career for the past 16 years. She helped change a planet, both politically and symbolically.
What did you do?
Now don't get snippy Steven... You've provided a loooong list of..... nothing. Sponsored naught. She carpetbagged a Senate seat in a state she had no ties to and could wield her political machine's influence in securing the vote. Did nothing for NY. Rode some coattails in the Senate into a horrific term in a figure head role as SoS, which was more political payback for her waiting patiently and supporting Obama...
There is really nothing behind her political career of substance at all.
You mean other than the fifteen or so important bills and policies for which she is known? Like do I really have to resist them for you here or can you just read the links provided?
New York must have hated her. That state, so well known for being easily impressed by money and power, and so timid in expressing its disapproval, elected her twice to office. Must have been all that carpetbagging.
After Condaleeza Rice and that retard of the House of Bush literally destroyed America's moral standing and diplomatic superiority in the world with two immoral wars and the approval of torture---lets not forget that Dick Cheney still can't travel to most of Europe because of War Criminal charges awaiting him---, Clinton re established America as a modern diplomatic force.
Just because you throw out a couple of ad hominem attacks doesn't make them true, you know.
You do realize that Clinton voted in favor of going to the "immoral wars" in Afghanistan and then Iraq under Bush? And she voted for the Patriot Act? She is practically a Bush supporter on her record BTW... As an aside, I know you love to relive the angst and vitriol of the Oughts, and that bad bad Bush, but really, you need to move on from the era, not the least because the music was so bad...
And she supported Afghanistan again under Obama? And left the US weaker vis a vis Russia and China, the Mid East and North Africa to boot. Meanwhile the drone wars continue in trying to clean up the mess...
LOL
Quote from: stephendare on September 03, 2015, 10:42:00 AM
so are you reversing yourself? You do seem to know that she voted on important bits of american policy. in your last posts she was a lazy good for nothing little missus carpetbagging her way into a life of pretending she was doing something.
I think you need to go back and look at what I wrote Stephen... I said " Sponsored naught."... It's right there in the quote above. Her record is perfectly in line with the premise of the OP - "poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time"... Yeah she rode coattails, yeah she popped up having "worked with" the actual sponsors of bills... exactly my point. She carried no water, but lives with an outsized reputation because of her political machinations and well funded machine. There will be no Hillary Clinton statues outside of Wellesly. Total con job.
Quote from: Sentient on September 03, 2015, 10:50:17 AM
Quote from: stephendare on September 03, 2015, 10:42:00 AM
so are you reversing yourself? You do seem to know that she voted on important bits of american policy. in your last posts she was a lazy good for nothing little missus carpetbagging her way into a life of pretending she was doing something.
I think you need to go back and look at what I wrote Stephen... I said " Sponsored naught."... It's right there in the quote above. Her record is perfectly in line with the premise of the OP - "poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time"... Yeah she rode coattails, yeah she popped up having "worked with" the actual sponsors of bills... exactly my point. She carried no water, but lives with an outsized reputation because of her political machinations and well funded machine. There will be no Hillary Clinton statues outside of Wellesly. Total con job.
" well funded machine." which she inherited from her husband I hasten to add... even more ironic, no?
Quote from: stephendare on September 03, 2015, 10:58:37 AM
Quote from: Sentient on September 03, 2015, 10:55:57 AM
Quote from: Sentient on September 03, 2015, 10:50:17 AM
Quote from: stephendare on September 03, 2015, 10:42:00 AM
so are you reversing yourself? You do seem to know that she voted on important bits of american policy. in your last posts she was a lazy good for nothing little missus carpetbagging her way into a life of pretending she was doing something.
I think you need to go back and look at what I wrote Stephen... I said " Sponsored naught."... It's right there in the quote above. Her record is perfectly in line with the premise of the OP - "poseurs with a knack for public relations can con the public for a very long time"... Yeah she rode coattails, yeah she popped up having "worked with" the actual sponsors of bills... exactly my point. She carried no water, but lives with an outsized reputation because of her political machinations and well funded machine. There will be no Hillary Clinton statues outside of Wellesly. Total con job.
" well funded machine." which she inherited from her husband I hasten to add... even more ironic, no?
lol. you clearly don't know much about the political history of the Clintons sentient. Other than what Rubert Murdoch and the Duponts have spoon fed you.
I forgot, she is a self-made woman... except she is standing on the shoulders of one of the most powerful men in the world... One who has made over $100M personally since leaving office and whose Foundation had received over $2 Billion dollars, and who raises mor emoney for Democrat Party candidates than anyone else... but it's the "Housewife from Little Rock" that's pulling all the strings right?
Well I take some of that back, she was a pretty good commodities trader that one time.
Quote from: stephendare on September 03, 2015, 11:16:07 AM
lol. You sound like a misogynist to be frank.
Her Wellesley connections were the original funding mechanism for his political career incidentally. A lot of people think he would have ended up either pumping gas in Little Rock or a well loved Mayor of some city without her goading him on with her better social connections. Like I said, you clearly don't know much about their background.
And I think its funny that you think she is standing on his shoulders, but you aren't talking about JEB standing atop the shoulders of his father. I suppose you think the same thing about W? Funny that Ive never heard you mention it about his career. I mean, what is he even now? An ex president? Like, as if.....
He was really a spoiled carpetbagger from Massachusetts whose daddy bought him a baseball team and a governorship. Then using his daddy's name he became a measly president. What did he ever even do? amiright?
It sounds silly doesn't it?
You sound like a Vietnam war protester going on about Nixon... "this friggen war man!"... Let the Bush stuff go Stephen.
and reflexively trying to link me with supporting Bush... well where did I ever come out with any support for this line of thinking? You are just so one note though... Pointing out Clinton's lack of stature = support for Bush, right? Maybe you should write for the NYT.
It is worth pointing out though that both Bush boys actual ran large states...unlike Hillary.
I think we should be spending more time talking about ideas and less time talking about people.
I'km glad you bolded these sections, they are worth reading closely...
"Hillary started out as a faculty member at the University of Arkansas Law School, where Bill was teaching"
Bill first.
" Bill won his first elected position as Attorney General of Arkansas and the couple moved to the capital city of Little Rock. There, Hillary began working at the well-established and politically connected Rose Law Firm"
Hmmm a politically connected law firm hires the wife of the state AG... whose name was.... Bill!
"In 1979, Bill became governor of Arkansas," Bill again...
"and in February of 1980, Hillary gave birth to their daughter Chelsea." Bill had. let's say "a hand" in this too!
"Hillary played an unusually prominent role as Arkansas' first lady during Bill's total of five terms as governor" BILL GUVN'R FOR LIFE!!! - but really because of his wife, who people in Arkansas loved so much she had to change her name for political reasons...
"she earned a spot on the National Law Journal's list of the 100 most influential lawyers in America" Great job there... imagine the wife of a 5 time Governor, while associated with a politically connected law firm, winning such accolades. I mean, what ARE the odds?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24475798.html for some more background on the corporate interests she served while at Rose...
She was a hell of a futures trader though... credit for that. Who thought - what with all of her service and all - she knew so much about cattle futures... and then once that Everest was climbed, retired on top!
"Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday.
The computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm
Quote from: Adam White on September 03, 2015, 11:43:23 AM
I think we should be spending more time talking about ideas and less time talking about people.
Which brings us back to the original posting:
cults of personality built around undeserving politicians
Quote from: finehoe on September 03, 2015, 11:49:04 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 03, 2015, 11:43:23 AM
I think we should be spending more time talking about ideas and less time talking about people.
Which brings us back to the original posting:
cults of personality built around undeserving politicians
I thought that exact thing after I posted that.