Occasionally I've been invited to talk to young people who want to get into the communication game, either through speechwriting or some other avenue.
The first thing I tell them is, "What the &*%#@ are you thinking of?"
After I calm down, I tell them if they're going to try to help leaders communicate, they should look for one kind of leader, and avoid the other kind like the plague.
Some leaders think they got where they are by keeping their cards close to the vest. By waiting until the right moment and making the right move. By not activating their turn signal until the last moment so no one even knew they were trying to squeeze in.
These are leaders one doesn't want to work for.
One wants to work for leaders who think they got where they are by having good ideas and getting those ideas across to people. By listening closely and deeply to ascertain what people really mean, what they really want. By making themselves available and thus by being likable.
Barack Obama, it occurred to me last night while watching his press conference, is essentially the second kind of leader.
Yes, he airbrushes reality, he couches his answers, he stays on message, he frames the discussion, he pulls his punches, he bobs and weaves, he even umms and ahs. But you get the feeling he's doing that to keep from stepping on toes, to avoid unnecessary making commitments, to keep from making a vastly complex political situation impossible.
And you get the feeling that he knows if he really gets cornered, he's ready to put his hands up, step from behind the lectern and say, "All right, look. Here's what's really going down—in Congress, in my cabinet and in my brain."
And you get the sense that he's doing everything he can do short of saying that.
This may not be the case during his whole administration. Things may get barnacle-covered and there may be things he'll want to completely keep secret.
But last night, I felt my president was trying his level best to explain to me what's happening as he sees it, and what he's honest-to-goodness, right or wrong, trying to do about it.
You may disagree with Obama, but you can't possibly disagree with me, that Obama is the kind of leader a communicator wants to work for.
Can you?
Me? Of course I can’t disagree with you. I can’t imagine a more thrilling, respect-generating, or forthright “CEO” to work for. Even with the hellish situation he’s inherited, I would drop everything and live in a refrigerator box in D.C. if Obama asked me to come and work for him.
I’m anxious, however, for “you-know-who” to weigh in on this post, because you and I both know that HE can, and almost certainly will disagree with you on this one. His comments should be entertaining at the very least.
Kristen, of course I have no idea who you’re talking about.
Of course not! My mistake.
Kristen:
Who are we talking about? Rush Limbaugh? I can’t wait to see what he has to say about this either!!!
Steve C.
Kristen:
Who are we talking about? Rush Limbaugh? I can’t wait to see what he has to say about this either!!!
Steve C.
Actually, I was thinking more of Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly, but since it seems we will have to wait a bit on them getting around to posting their comments, and since YOU’RE here now, would you care to share YOUR thoughts with us?
You know, just to keep the conversation rolling along.
Well, I choose to abstain. David and I are going out Thursday night for the first time in six months to shoot pool and drink many beers, and I don’t want to get things off on the wrong foot.
Suffice to say that I believe that there are way more than two kinds of leaders, and Obama doesn’t fall into either of the categories David outlined above.
Steve C.
Well, I choose to abstain. David and I are going out Thursday night for the first time in six months to shoot pool and drink many beers, and I don’t want to get things off on the wrong foot.
Suffice to say that I believe that there are way more than two kinds of leaders, and Obama doesn’t fall into either of the categories David outlined above.
Steve C.
I would only add this, from a communicator’s perspective: By many accounts, this White House is the most controlled, the most careful, the most scripted administration in a long time . . . and has been since the campaign.
While that has allowed Obama to avoid any major slip-ups, I imagine it must be really hard for the communicators, and somewhat nerve-wracking for them, to operate in that environment.
So . . .no, I’m not sure that Obama is the perfect leader for a communicator to work for.
The man has a bit of A-Rod in him. Everything is scripted and vetted and he wants to be seen as perfect, and wants his administration to be seen as having no drama . . . which I imagine make it hard on the communicators.
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the the cabinet appointees started dropping like, well, like flies.
THAT must have been fun for the communicators.
Steve C.
I would only add this, from a communicator’s perspective: By many accounts, this White House is the most controlled, the most careful, the most scripted administration in a long time . . . and has been since the campaign.
While that has allowed Obama to avoid any major slip-ups, I imagine it must be really hard for the communicators, and somewhat nerve-wracking for them, to operate in that environment.
So . . .no, I’m not sure that Obama is the perfect leader for a communicator to work for.
The man has a bit of A-Rod in him. Everything is scripted and vetted and he wants to be seen as perfect, and wants his administration to be seen as having no drama . . . which I imagine make it hard on the communicators.
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the the cabinet appointees started dropping like, well, like flies.
THAT must have been fun for the communicators.
Steve C.
Yes, Steve, you make a good point (he said, thinking ahead to Thursday night).
Obama’s show is controlled, and that would be nerve-wracking for communicators, and in some ways make their jobs more difficult.
But it’s hard to pine for a White House that lets it all hang out (any more than Uncle Joe does anyway). I mean, the press and the Republicans seize on the slightest contradiction, and they don’t accept, as we do, “Hey man, life is complicated. Sometimes I say shit one day that I have to disown the next.”
I don’t know the alternative to being controlled if you’re Obama, with all his ambition and all his responsiblity.
He promised transparency: That means, we’re going to tell you what we’re doing and why we’re doing what we’re doing. I thought he worked hard at doing that last night. (Did you see the press conference?)
But Obama did not promise that he’d free-associate at the lectern or spontaneously share his ideas with the nation before running them by his cabinet and leading lawmakers first.
How would you have him act differently, to make his communicators’ life easier or to earn your trust and still keep his plans on track?
David, my friend: You make excellent points as well, as usual (he said, looking toward 11:30 p.m. Thursday at the Burritos As Big As Your Head Shop).
I don’t know that I have any advice for Obama on how to act. The man is talented. The man has more charm and brains than Bill Clinton, is tougher than Hilary Clinton, more visionary than Reagan, and more polished than all of them put together.
If you like his policies, he’s a Godsend. If you don’t, he’s the Devil.
But I think this portrait of him that you paint of listening to all people, being available to everybody, being partisan, looking at things from all sides . . . well, I think that is all just so much stagecraft.
He’s brilliant at it. But when not one Republican in the House votes for his bill, and only three in the Senate do, you have to wonder how hard he’s listening to people.
I get the feeling his communicators are handed messages (“if this bill doesn’t pass, the economy, and this country, will be in a state of catastrophe that we won’t be able to dig ourselves out of. Repeat, then repeat again. Keep repeating) and God help them if they ever get off the message.
He’s a brilliant man, and an even more brilliant politician. The smartest politician I ever saw was Clinton (ahead of even Reagan); Obama makes Bill Clinton look like Roger Clinton.
Steve C.
David, my friend: You make excellent points as well, as usual (he said, looking toward 11:30 p.m. Thursday at the Burritos As Big As Your Head Shop).
I don’t know that I have any advice for Obama on how to act. The man is talented. The man has more charm and brains than Bill Clinton, is tougher than Hilary Clinton, more visionary than Reagan, and more polished than all of them put together.
If you like his policies, he’s a Godsend. If you don’t, he’s the Devil.
But I think this portrait of him that you paint of listening to all people, being available to everybody, being partisan, looking at things from all sides . . . well, I think that is all just so much stagecraft.
He’s brilliant at it. But when not one Republican in the House votes for his bill, and only three in the Senate do, you have to wonder how hard he’s listening to people.
I get the feeling his communicators are handed messages (“if this bill doesn’t pass, the economy, and this country, will be in a state of catastrophe that we won’t be able to dig ourselves out of. Repeat, then repeat again. Keep repeating) and God help them if they ever get off the message.
He’s a brilliant man, and an even more brilliant politician. The smartest politician I ever saw was Clinton (ahead of even Reagan); Obama makes Bill Clinton look like Roger Clinton.
Steve C.
“the Devil”? Eek!
Anyway, I don’t think House Republicans’ recalcitrance has to do with Obama’s powers of listening. He’s listened to these babies and their babyish demands. He’s not required to do what they say.
“This is a spending bill!” Um, like, yeah, dumb fuck.
I also think the “messages” he’s handing his communicators happen to be correct, and I’m sure he believes they are correct.
I don’t think he looks at everything from all sides any more than any grown-ass man does. But I think he HAS talked to a lot of different people and looked at most things from many sides, and has come to some sound conclusions.
You don’t have to agree with that, of course.
In fact, all you have to do is rack ’em up.
Babies? Double Eek!!
Nothing wrong with a spending bill. That’s what Democrats do, for God’s sake. And sometimes they even spend it in the right areas, and for the right reasons. Not often, but sometimes.
But to disguise the spending bill as some sort of “stimulus package” that is going to create jobs and pull us out of the hole
. . . .
and then to tell the great unwashed masses repeatedly that if said bill isn’t passed it will spell the end of this country as we know it . . .
when the bill is loaded with stuff that will NOT create jobs, when it is loaded with a slew of Democratic wish list projects . . .
well, that’s a little devlish. Real smart. Real Machievellian. Real political. Real Obama.
I’m not saying he’s the Devil. He believes the ends justify the means, and he believes in his ends 1000 percent with no doubt.
So did some of the best leaders in the world. And so did some of the worst . . .our most recent president being and example of the latter.
That’s fine, if you agree with him. If you don’t, then his ability to sway what Mencken called “The Booboisee” in this country, is scaaaaaaary.
Steve C.
Babies? Double Eek!!
Nothing wrong with a spending bill. That’s what Democrats do, for God’s sake. And sometimes they even spend it in the right areas, and for the right reasons. Not often, but sometimes.
But to disguise the spending bill as some sort of “stimulus package” that is going to create jobs and pull us out of the hole
. . . .
and then to tell the great unwashed masses repeatedly that if said bill isn’t passed it will spell the end of this country as we know it . . .
when the bill is loaded with stuff that will NOT create jobs, when it is loaded with a slew of Democratic wish list projects . . .
well, that’s a little devlish. Real smart. Real Machievellian. Real political. Real Obama.
I’m not saying he’s the Devil. He believes the ends justify the means, and he believes in his ends 1000 percent with no doubt.
So did some of the best leaders in the world. And so did some of the worst . . .our most recent president being and example of the latter.
That’s fine, if you agree with him. If you don’t, then his ability to sway what Mencken called “The Booboisee” in this country, is scaaaaaaary.
Steve C.
Happy, Kristen?
Yeah, Kristen:
Happy??!?!?!?
I love you both, and hope Obama is right on at least half of what he wants to do. He has such an ambitious agenda, if he’s half right, we’ll be okay. If he’s wrong on most of this stuff, God help us, and God help our children.
Steve C.
Yeah, Kristen:
Happy??!?!?!?
I love you both, and hope Obama is right on at least half of what he wants to do. He has such an ambitious agenda, if he’s half right, we’ll be okay. If he’s wrong on most of this stuff, God help us, and God help our children.
Steve C.
Okay, seriously! It isn’t as if my one little request for an opinion, after you guys have been friends (and been arguing politics together) for how many years now??? – was the VERY FIRST TIME you ever disagreed!!!
Besides, do ANY OF US really think that when the two of you get together tomorrow night, with, now how did Steve put it?? Oh yes “many beers” that you wouldn’t have eventually gotten around to arguing politics and had this conversation all on your own????
However, if it helps the two of you to bond by agreeing that it was ALL KRISTEN’S FAULT you disagreed about the stimulus package, and that you would NEVER have had that conversation if she hadn’t stuck her nose into your business, I am happy to be the bad guy. Feel free to bash me all you like over the pool table tomorrow.
What can I say? I’m a giver!!
The only stimulus conversation that’s going to be happening tomorrow night is Steve stimulatin’ my personal economy, and the only argument will be whether it’s going to be on the five ball or the nine.
Old Murray’s about to engage in his own bloated spending program . . . by the end of the night, he’s going to be calling me “earmark” cause he’s going to be handing over so much dough.
Kristen: thank you for giving. Thank you for always giving.
Steve C.
Old Murray’s about to engage in his own bloated spending program . . . by the end of the night, he’s going to be calling me “earmark” cause he’s going to be handing over so much dough.
Kristen: thank you for giving. Thank you for always giving.
Steve C.