A fine how-do-you-do, and a punch in the face
I've got to be honest with you. There are only a few things I do every single day, and they're all private.
I feel sorry for bloggers who post their ideas, however thin, every single day, and I feel sorry for the families of those bloggers.
I plan to post my ideas, however thin, about as often as I put aside all my writing work and family responsibilities to play golf: Less than once a day, but more than once a week.
I will, on the other hand, check my blog every single day洋aybe several times per day. Why? Henry David Thoreau said that the man who eagerly checks his mail hasn't heard from himself in a long time.
Does anybody else want to punch Thoreau in the face?
Okay: Push in clutch, move stick up and to the left:
Speaking of people wanting to punch people in the face, Don Rumsfeld must want to clobber whichever touchy-feely information officer it was who got the bright idea to put the Secretary in front of a town hall-style meeting with all those dogface GIs in Iraq.
Maybe Rumsfeld had been reading too many Douglas MacArthur quotes like this one, about American soldiers in the South Pacific during WWII: "They plod and drone, sweat and toil, they growl and curse, and at the end, they die; unknown, uncomplaining, with faith in their hearts and on their lips a prayer for victory."
You know why they died uncomplaining? Because they were never invited to town hall meetings! You think they wouldn't have had some seriously open and honest feedback for their leaders? These are the grunts, after all, who invented at least two new words to describe the idiocy of their leadership. (FUBAR meant "fucked up beyond all recognition, and SNAFU meant, "situation normal: all fucked up.")
How do you think Secretary of War Henry Stimson would have fared in front of these guys? (Call me Hank, everyone!) I don't think he, or Eisenhower, or MacArthur would have been foolish enough to find out. (Ah, yes, Major Boyington, in the front row �.)
Shouldn't Rumsfeld get credit for having the guts to go in front of the troops? Sure, I'm a communication guy. I'll give him credit. But John McCain didn't, and history won't.
Rumsfeld was badly, overwhelmingly, shockingly out of touch with the mind of the men and women "on the ground," as the obnoxious abstraction goes. And somebody should have either briefed him, with a hammer, if necessary, about the festering frustration of those troops and the potential for an angry question, or advised him not to do the town hall.
And if he's forced out of his job, the glib nonsense about going into war with the army you have rather than the army you want will be cited, simplistically but not altogether incorrectly, as the screw-up that did him in.
Did I say "screw-up"? I meant, "snafu."
Comments (6)
Welcome to the blogosphere! Good to see you driving forward.
Please don't let your recent experiences weigh too heavily on your shoulders, David. People will warm to your blog and continue to respect you for being willing to share your ideas.
Of course, starting with a fender-bender: "I feel sorry for bloggers who post their ideas, however thin, every single day, and I feel sorry for the families of those bloggers" may not help as your initial foray. I could be wrong. And, it is 'your' blog.
I don't know anyone that is 'right' all the time. That is part of the blogging experience. I know that I am going to learn from you. Your writings will help me, I am sure. And, I thank you for being one more great resource I may read.
For example, your thoughts on Rumsfeld were enjoyable to read.
Peace and good cheer to you and your family, David. Happy Holidays!
Take care.
Robert
Posted by Robert | December 18, 2004 5:24 PM
Posted on December 18, 2004 17:24
Dave,
OK, I know it doesn't count because I'm your publisher, but I'll tell you anyway. Your first blog got me laughing at 6: 30 a.m. this morning--and that's not easy to do.
My favorite bit: That soliders died un-complaining because they were never invited to a Town Hall meeting. Perfect.
I look forward to many more Murray Musings (hey, why didn't we call it that?)
Mark
Posted by Mark Ragan | December 20, 2004 7:02 AM
Posted on December 20, 2004 07:02
David,
I agree that your first post got me laughing AND thinking. I never knew what SNAFU stood for. I'll be sure to use it with a bit more restraint in the future given its true meaning.
But I've got to disagree with your perspective on Rumsfeld. This is a very seasoned communicator. My gut tells me he fielded questions because he wanted to, not because some staff soldier told him it works really well with the MTV Generation. My point is that prior to being Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld was White House Chief of Staff and CEO of two Fortune 500 companies. Surely he knows how to respond to unrehearsed questions...
Which gets me to my question: When is the communicator no longer responsible for the idiocies that come out of executives' mouths?
Mary
Posted by Mary | December 20, 2004 9:01 AM
Posted on December 20, 2004 09:01
Mary, you make a good point; maybe the town meeting was Rumsfeld's idea.
And you ask a good question: Why blame the communicator?
But here's my question back to you: If Rumsfeld is so seasoned, how could he possibly have not been prepared with a decent factual answer about this body armor ... and how could he not have brought the anything like the right empathetic mood to this occasion?
I mean, this is what seasoned communicators do: They figure out what's on the mind of the audience ahead of time, and they assess the audience's mood and they communicate accordingly. Rumsfeld seems to have done neither in this case.
If a Rumsfeld communicatoin staffer did his or her best to help the big guy understand the true depth of the frustration, bewilderment, rage among the troops over issues like body armor and overlong deployment and a host of other festering issues (really, he probably got off easy with only one confrontational question) and Rummy said, "Yeah, yeah ... I'm a pro ... I know what I'm doing ..." then you're right: I shouldn't blame the communicator.
But experience tells me it's entirely possible that the communicator was a Pentagon yes-person, perhaps as completely out of touch with the troops as his or her boss.
I agree that an executive can't delegate empathy, sensitivity and basic humanity to his/her communicators. Still, he was owed--and we don't know whether he received--a gentle grab of the lapel and a whispered, "Remember, these guys have been through a hell of a lot," before he hit the podium.
Posted by David Murray | December 20, 2004 9:15 AM
Posted on December 20, 2004 09:15
Sometimes even the best staff preparation can save an executive from themself. D. Rumsfield's insensitive reply really should be no surprise as he's a got a well-known trait for responding "off-the cuff" with un-witty one-liners. He gets away with it because in most cases he is "the boss." Many of us know people like him. and even our best efforts sometimes cannot overcome their traits.
Good blog. I'll keep reading.
Posted by Reg McGhee | December 20, 2004 10:02 AM
Posted on December 20, 2004 10:02
Rumsfeld held his first Town Hall meeting Aug. 10, 2001. (See link below.) I don't know the exact number, but I believe news reports have stated that Rumsfeld has conducted dozens of these events.
He deserves credit for being more accessible to the press and public than his Commander In Chief.
As for your final paragraph, "telling truth to power" is not the issue. I would bet you that he heard your 'reminder', in some form or another, from the moment he stepped foot on Iraqi soil right up until the moment he left.
(1st Town Hall Meeting: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug2001/n08102001_200108102.html)
Posted by Robert | December 20, 2004 10:22 AM
Posted on December 20, 2004 10:22