I do not think it is any different it is just that the results are public or publicly debated for these people. None of us would likely perform any better, probably worse in similar circumstances.

Anyway… given the fact this happens.

The position that one should speak as if the mic is always on, has me wondering how can someone actually accomplish this? It would be no small feat if not impossible.

Does that assume that the person speaking must always say what they believe at all times? Therefore, they would never slip up and say the wrong thing, the problem is it may not align with the goals they wish to achieve. Some public lies may be required to make partnerships work or garner the support of the majority.

Perhaps that a person in the limelight must be “always on” always voicing their public position or defending it regardless of what they really felt? Likely end in a breakdown of some type, no one could keep this up indefinitley.

The easiest would be to have the speaker consider who can they trust? So, anytime there is the possibility of a mic around there is none to be trusted. Here however, we are back to being victims of ubiquitous technology that is always on everywhere we go.

The other side is we can hope for enlightenment of the masses who understand the subtlties, who will see through the media circus and not pick sides rather be more accepting of these situations. Ya, that is not going to happen at all.

Signed,
ye of little faith

awC

awC

Its’ an even bet we will see McCrystal running for public office now that he has established his tea bagger credentials. He is even a martyr for the right since he was forced to resigned over the issue.

Does anyone see the hypocrisy of conservatives who would have apoplexy if a general had dissed President Bush yet believe President Obama to be unfair when he disciplines McCrystal?

A hard lesson I learned when I was in the military, was that I was on duty 24 hours a day and I should never speak ill of a superior or their orders.

The remarks of McCrystal and his staff were definitely for public consumption, but they are smart people, with Rolling Stone’s article comes plausible deniability. “Wait…what? Are you saying reporters publish the answers I give them during interviews?”

Dr.Shermer, I’m surprised to see you so far off base.

Further, when a subordinate screws up it reflects poorly the leader. That’s part of being a leader: you’re responsible for your actions plus your subordinates’ actions. (If you don’t want that responsibility then don’t be a leader!)

McChrystal was responsible for the statements of his staff – it was his job to keep his guys in line and he failed. But sh!t rolls up hill: It was ultimately Obama’s job to see to it that his staff was on top of things and ensured that those who answer to them did their jobs effectively.

Faulty leadership at multiple levels. Not a good thing.