Wednesday, May 07, 2008
"Cheat at home, cheat everywhere"
I'm dead tired of this idiotic notion. It pops up in every discussion of Clinton vs Bush. Everybody "knows" that a man who cheats and lies in his private life will cheat and lie in public. First, it's a weak correlation. Second, cheating and lying are NOT automatically bad qualities in a leader. It depends on how they're used. Lies and deception are dangerous when they destroy public confidence, but they are critically necessary to win a war. An executive who isn't comfortable with lying will lose a war.
Look first at Bill himself. A champion cheater and pathological liar in private life. But did he cheat the public? No. He ran in 1992 on three basic promises: improve the economy, end welfare entitlements, and make war against Milosevic. He accomplished all three promises. The Yugoslavia thing turned out to be a bad idea, but that's an entirely different question.
Now look at a clean apples-apples comparison between two men: Nixon and Eisenhower. Both served in the White House at the same time, so the cultural milieu is constant. Both had the same political position, at least by our poor labeling system. So we've controlled for other variables. How about their private vs public lives? Ike cheated on Mamie, but ruled with a steady and consistent hand. Dick never considered cheating on Pat, but ruled with a historical maximum of sneakiness and deceit, mostly unnecessary and stupid.
You won't find a more perfect opposition, a more perfect negative correlation. ¶ 12:28 PM
Look first at Bill himself. A champion cheater and pathological liar in private life. But did he cheat the public? No. He ran in 1992 on three basic promises: improve the economy, end welfare entitlements, and make war against Milosevic. He accomplished all three promises. The Yugoslavia thing turned out to be a bad idea, but that's an entirely different question.
Now look at a clean apples-apples comparison between two men: Nixon and Eisenhower. Both served in the White House at the same time, so the cultural milieu is constant. Both had the same political position, at least by our poor labeling system. So we've controlled for other variables. How about their private vs public lives? Ike cheated on Mamie, but ruled with a steady and consistent hand. Dick never considered cheating on Pat, but ruled with a historical maximum of sneakiness and deceit, mostly unnecessary and stupid.
You won't find a more perfect opposition, a more perfect negative correlation. ¶ 12:28 PM
