One of the first rules for political success is that you have to be able to fake sincerity. Two days ago, I had an unusual opportunity to see, or rather read about, this rule in action. Our local newspaper has two facing editorial pages. The one on the left is, of course, liberal in its views and the columnists it carries. Conversely, the editorials on the right page and its columnists are conservative. The interesting coincidence was that both pages on the same day carried columns about House Minority leader John Boehner.
The conservative column by Cal Thomas entitled, "Mr. Speaker-in-Waiting," was based on an interview (emphasis on "interview") with Boehner, resulting in what can only be called a puff piece. The liberal writer was Bob Herbert whose column entitled, "That's where the money is,"
was based on some facts (emphasis on "facts") about Boehner's ties to big businesses and their lobbyists.
Nothing could be more contrived to put the "fake sincerity" rule to a test than Thomas's asking Boehner what his late parents "given the humble circumstances" of his background might think of him today. Quoting from Thomas, "He begins to tear up and reaches for a box of tissues." Boehner's reported reply: " 'Why me? I ask God,'" he says, " 'I'm just a regular guy with a big job.'" This is the response from the same Boehner whose "suntan" is under scrutiny as to whether it's real or fake and, if fake, does he use a tanning bed or a lotion. From there the interview allows Boehner to don his Republican robes and preach the party gospel.
Regarding the GOP loss of congressional control in 2006, Boehner said, "Our team failed to live up to our principles," the theme for asking forgiveness of fellow conservatives and vote the GOP back into power, at least in the House where his promotion awaits, next month. "I came here for a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government and that has not been what's happening. We don't need any more programs; we need to undo a lot of programs," etc., etc., etc.
Thomas closes out his column, ". . . John Boehner increasingly looks like the next (s)peaker of the House. His parents would be proud."
Contrast Thomas' Boehner-serving interview with Herbert's reporting of actual events involving Boehner and his coziness with the corporate world.
The most stunning example presented by Herbert goes back about 15 years when this "quintessential influence peddler (meaning Boehner) decided to play Santa Claus by handing out checks from tobacco lobbyists to fellow congressional sleazes right on the floor of the House." (Note, I said Herbert was reporting facts; I did not say he was free of judgment about those facts.) When Boehner's Chief of Staff was asked why money would be handed out on the House floor, there was no denial or hedging. The reply: "The floor is where the members meet with each other." Herbert linked this to the reply of the notorious bank robber Willy Sutton when he was asked why he robbed banks: "Because that's where the money is."
Herbert also recalled the more recent event when House Democrats were preparing for floor action on financial regulatory reform. Boehner and other GOP house leaders met with a reported 100 "industry lobbyists and conservative activists" to encourage them to get out and help Republicans defeat the legislation.
To summarize, in contrast to Thomas' Boehner puffery, Herbert puts it this way, "That's Boehner for you--always willing to stick his neck out for the elite."
So, I ask you, which is more fake, Boehner's sincerity or his suntan?
That last question is tough. It's like asking whether you prefer a speaker of the House who constantly lies
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politifact.com/personalities/john-boehner/statements/byruling/false/
or one who doesn't know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/scarce/boehner-pulls-boner
But he does know about the Pledge to America--or maybe he has forgotten that. Or it's possible he confuses the Pledge to America with the Pledge of Allegiance. Will check the links. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI'm not arguing about Boehner, but the alternative isn't much better. Pelosi: Stupidity and Botox
ReplyDeleteTootsie
ReplyDeleteGuess it's all a point of view and that's what this blog site is about, points (plural) of view. And it is my view that Pelosi can afford more than Botox.
Pelosi gets a lot of grief because of her gender. Sexism is alive an well in America. I guess the Botox is equivalent to the toupees and hair plugs male politicians of a certain age favor, but as for stupidity Boehner's got a clear edge.
ReplyDeleteSo if a man is said to be stupid, he is stupid, but if a woman is said to be stupid it is attributed to sexism. What about all the attacks on Christine O'Donnell and especially Sarah Palin as being stupid? Is that sexist as well, or is that true because they are conservatives?
ReplyDeletetootsie,
ReplyDeleteI'm sure O'Donnell and Palin have been subjected to sexism too, no argument there. I was thinking more of the comments about physical appearance which women tend to suffer more than men. On the other hand, Charley and many others, including me, have been persistent in teasing about Boehner's unnatural hue. Just seems to me female politicians are more likely to have their physical appearance criticized which seem sexist. Pelosi was the name you brought up, so that's the one I responded to. I know many people on the right dislike her intensely but I'm not familiar with her being considered stupid. Then again, she seems to know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. And before you fault me for overlooking others I'm sure Nancy Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were targets of sexist comments too. If women, whether conservative or progressive, act with authority they get labeled with the "b" word while men acting in the same way are admired for their strength. To me that's sexism and it applies to women regardless of their political views.
I agree with Sidney. I think that strong and powerful women are often labeled with the "b" word, or worse, in the recent case of Meg Whitman. And, there does always seem to be more discussion about their physical appearance then you ever hear about men. We're hearing more commentary on what political women are wearing and their hairstyle, and much more scrutiny on their looks in general than with their male counterparts. Look at all the headlines that occurred on Hilary Clinton's appearance during the campaign season and all the focus on Sarah Palin's looks. I think this probably also starts crossing the lines of ageism as well. Women are judged about looking older
ReplyDeletemuch more harshly than men.
Desert Girl
ReplyDeleteWatch out how you refer to ageism. My profile says that I am retired; it should say I am long retired. I am aged beyond where Botox would do any good and when a hair piece could not be made to look natural.
Sidney
ReplyDeleteWithin a different context, I recall when George H.W. Bush was going to do an interview with, I believe, Dan Rather. As he was entering the studio he said so it could be easily picked up by reporters that he was going in there "to kick ass". His comment was subsequently interpreted to mean he was trying to show Joe six pack machoism, or as you say "strength", vs. his image as an eastern elite snob.
Sidney
ReplyDeleteA correction. On thinking further, the "kick ass" quote may have been made when he was entering the studio for a Vice President debate with Geraldine Ferraro in l984.