Will Anyone Answer, “The Bada Bing”?
Where Did They Shop?
Welcome Instapundit.com readers! Thanks for your entertaining and insightful comments.
The Hearst papers of Connecticut (Connecticut Post, Danbury News-Times, Greenwich Time, and Stamford Advocate) have posed 16 questions the candidates for governor and the United States Senate. They’ve also requested a photographer be allowed to take pictures of each candidate’s living room.
What kind of watch do you wear? Where do you buy your business attire? What is your favorite alcoholic beverage?
If you were a tree, what kind of tree, oh, sorry, that one’s missing. Nothing on the economy or issues of war and peace, either.
There is a tone that aims at class division, like Mario Cuomo’s ugly royalty and rabble call to arms. The most vexing issue personal issue, unmasked in the fullness of time, is whether a candidate possesses a lethal sense of entitlement. That’s never revealed by what they spend of their own treasure on themselves, but can be seen in what they do with campaign contributions and taxpayers’ money.
Habits and interests can provide insights into candidates. Whether and what a candidate reads can give us a hint at whether or not he possesses any intellectual curiosity, an attribute often overlooked in a campaign. A candidate’s favorite restaurant does not tell us much.
Will they tell the truth?
If South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford had been asked where he goes on vacation, would he have answered, “Argentina, of course”?
Here are the Heart Newspapers’ questions. The answers and photographs are expected to be published on Sunday.
1. How many residences do you own? What is the size of each house (including lot size)? How many rooms? What is the assessed value? Would you agree to have a photograph taken in your living room?
2. Would you provide us a photocopy of the front sheet of your most recent IRS tax filing, including income, tax deductions and taxes paid?
3) What are the years, makes and models of the personal vehicles owned or leased by you/for you and your immediate family members?
4) Are any boats, planes or recreational vehicles owned by you or leased by you or for you? If so, please provide the particulars.
5) What kind of watch do you wear?
6) Where was your most recent family vacation? Where did you stay?
7) Where do you buy your business attire?
8) Where do your children attend school?
9) Are you a member of any private clubs – country clubs, dinner clubs, etc.?
10) How much do you pay for a haircut/hairstyling? Where do you go?
11) What is your favorite alcoholic beverage?
12) Do you have any hobbies?
13) What restaurant do you most frequently patronize?
14) With what insurance company do you have family health coverage? Is it employer-provided? What are your own monthly premiums? Deductibles and co-pays?
15) Do you employ any household staff? If so, please detail.
16) How much did you donate to charity last year? What charity is the principal recipient of your donations?
44 comments
Sounds like a questionnaire Robin Leach might use to qualify guests for his TV show Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Sadly, this is what passes for journalism in CT today.
I can understand question number two being asked, but the other fifteen are really mindless sentences of fluff, specifically designed to insult the intelligence of the candidate.
Sad.
George, sadly this is the type of questions that need to be asked of our aspiring Governors and Senators. Most are either lifetime politicians very wealthy or both.
I know the questionnaire does seem kind of weird, but to be honest I am actually curious about them. In all honesty, I do want a governor that can relate to me. Is it wrong to say that?
Actually, a completed questionnaire of this type would paint a fairly good picture of not only just `who’ the candidate is, but how they see themselves as well.
A #3 listing anything built by Toyota would indicate the candidate has no problem boycotting Connecticut workers; effectively driving down the street giving everyone else the finger with a “I’ve got mine, too bad about your job….” attitude.
Note:
Toyota is the only vehicle manufacturer worldwide that has zero Connecticut content throughout their entire line; even the Russian Lada has some CT content in some vehicles.
A #5 answered “Timex” would be particularly revealing for example, and as clear an illustration of normalcy as any.
I also suspect most anyone would find #7 answered “Syms” as indicative of a thrifty shopper, something we could probably use in Hartford right about now.
Not sure if this makes sense. Are we trying to normalize a candidate by showing he is like “most of us” and if he is not, then he does not deserve our vote. Cars, watches, wealth mean nothing to me. I look for and hope for and intrinsic honesty in a candidate. I mean someone who doesnt necessarily play by the so called rules that is required by todays power brokers. All this other stuff goes away when your candidate is a truly honest man. I dont want someone who throws his (or our) money around. I want someone who will protect it.
DJ, how would Franklin Roosevelt’s answers to those questions have looked? Relateable to you? I doubt it. But does anyone doubt that he related to the common man? Questions of wealth and possessions tell you absolutely NOTHING about whether or not a candidate can “relate to you.”
Reminds me of a sermon once at church where the preacher railed against all of the “rich” people who became president. Started with Kennedy and talked about how all the succession of presidents were “rich X” where X was playboy, lawyer, actor, farmer, etc. I walked out confused because (with the exception of Kennedy) ONLY someone who aspires to significant achievement will run for president – at least in our age. And lets face it – Washington, Adams, Jefferson were all prominent citizens of their time. So instead of asking what type of watch someone wears, or how many houses they have, how about asking some substantive questions about their fiscal/monetary policy? Their willingness to reduce spending at their level (local, state, federal)? Etc, etc, etc.
“Relate” to me? What the hell does that mean? It sounds like it’s more about my feelings than anything substantive.
I think, if you care about the questions of whether a candidate cares about people like you or will fight for people like you, you must be a Democrat.
Why don’t any of the questions ask about the candidate’s experience that might qualify him/her for the job? Isn’t that more relevant than about beverages, watches, or restaurants? Except for #2, the whole list is remarkably shallow, as is whomever who drafted the list.
Shouldn’t that maybe be Hearst newspapers instead of heart?
“Questions of wealth and possessions tell you absolutely NOTHING about whether or not a candidate can “relate to you.””
No, but it provides ammunition a reporter can use against someone who doesn’t support a reporter’s agenda.
I’d return it blank with a note saying, “Send me yours first.”
I guess nobody should be surprised that every question focuses on money, money, money given the media and cultural obsession with such. Even the hobby question appears designed to uncover polo, horse breeding or art collecting hobbies. It might be nice to explore the character issues that created the wealth or lack thereof. Attend church? What was your first job and how old were you? Who paid for you to attend school? How well do you know US history? etc.
Typical dinosaur media BS. Stirring up irrelevancies that provide no character insight and plenty of class warefare ammunition. Living room pictures…Are you kidding me?
Too bad Connecticut that you are served by newspapers that think these soundbites of nonsense matter. Maybe someone that built a business and the wealth that comes with that and enjoys the fruits of that success might have the right stuff to replace the corrupt Senator Dodd in representing the state?
How would Charles Rangel answered these questions? He could have aced this test. A lot of the politicians in office look good on paper.
Ya know, I actually like these questions. How on Earth can we expect someone with two houses to understand a budget?
1. 2850 sqft. 12 counting utility and baths. $240k (Depressed area). Sure
2. Sure
3. 08 F150, 06 VW Passat, 01 Accord, 04 VIbe,
4. 2010 HD, 2008 HD
5. Swiss Army. Birthday gift 15 years ago. Maybe $120 new.
6. Haven’t had one in so long don’t remember.
7. Men’s shop in a mall usually since our one menswear store closed.
8. C of C
9. No. Have been but none now.
10. $17. Every 5-weeks. Local beautician.
11. Dark beer. Preferably on tap.
12. Motorcycles, golf, etc.
13. Freds. Local diner.
14. Yes. BCBS. Yes. I’d have to look.
15. No.
16. $3k. Soldiers Assistance Program, United Way.
Bonus: Serving on 2 boards including Red Cross.
Is this an official filing for President?
“But does anyone doubt that he [FDR] related to the common man?”
Yes.
FDR understood that it was politically necessary to fool the common man into thinking that they could relate. And he did so, successfully for the most part. He did not fool his own class.
Maybe the whole point is to hide question number two amongst a forest of meaningless fluff in the hopes that the candidates will be dumb enough to answer yes to #2.
Ok, I will bite:
1. I own one residence. The appraised value is MUCH higher than anything I came close to even paying for. Don’t most homes/properties appreciate in value 1,000%+ in less than a year?
2. This is just MY returns, correct? You don’t need to know that my wife received a 300%+ raise at her “non-profit” within days of my election to the Senate? Personally, I have never really been employed per se, do book royalties count as income?
3. Who needs cars when I can have a driver and a limo? I try to avoid assets that depreciate. At least, that is what Larry tells me I should avoid.
4. Recreational vehicles? Like an ATV? That is for those citizens that cling to their guns and religion not the enlightened east coast intellectuals.
5. Time stands still for me, so really no need.
6. Hawaii over Christmas, errrr, during the Holidays.
7. Buy? Umm, technically, I don’t “buy” anything really.
8. Sidwell Friends School (private).
9. None that you can find record of.
10. Pay? I don’t even tip!
11. Beer.
12. Golf. Basketball. Levitation.
13. Yes, I am very patronizing, but only towards the electorate not restaurants.
14. Employer provided. I will probably continue to have it for at least the next 3 years and most likely, no matter what we do, I along with my colleagues will continue to enjoy for as long as we live. Some may call it a “cadillac” plan, but I own GM now, so I think it is all very apropos.
15. Does Rahm count?
16. Well, I donate a lot to charity. Not personally, per se, but I am very charitable with OPM. I suppose before I answer further I should qualify if the charity is currently under some sort of fraud investigation. Please disregard my original statements.
15.
ACR: So you demand candidates pick their personal conveyance based on “What’s in it for a few local workers”?
You want a governor or senator that cares more about vaguely, indirectly, minimally supporting a few manufacturing workers than about spending his own money wisely? (Or more aptly, more about symbolism than about getting a good car?
You’d prefer someone daft enough to buy a Lada because, hey, it has some vague connection to a worker in Connecticut?
Hint: It ain’t a “boycott” unless they choose the car specifically because it “has no CT content”. Nobody would actually ever do that.)
I hope the next governor and senator for CT drive Toyotas, if the alternative is deep concern over “having any CT content in their cars”. It’s economically insane and would show precisely the preoccupation with image rather than reality that leads to shoddy decision-making.
This is what passes for journalism these days. As a former journalist the question at the top of my list would be “What are the last five books you’ve read.” That alone would reveal 80% of what the electorate needed to learn about the candidates interests, thought patterns, curiosity and scope. And the only other question on the list with potential relevance is the “do you have any hobbies?” as what a man/woman does with their free time for recretaion is a direct view into what they value overall.
I guess with all the layoffs in their editorial department this biggy was given to the lifestyles guy/gal.
The questions on IRS tax filing, primary residence, where kids attend school, household help, and charity are fair game. They help weed out the Al Gore types who jet around lecturing the rabble on reducing carbon footprints, and the Tim Geithner types who are happy to raise taxes but not so enthusiastic about paying them. The other questions should probably go into the “None of your damn business” file.
OK, questions 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 are stupid crap I don’t care about, but rest of them are good because they all relate to corruption and hypocrisy. Think Chris Dodd. You want to know who’s bought this pol. You want to know if he’s milking the state for personal perks. You want to know if he thinks taxes are just for the little people. You want to know if he has servants and if those servants are illegal immigrants and if he’s paying benefits and taxes on them. Those are all real-life 21st century politics.
So “G” says that only one question has value, and the rest are “mindless sentences of fluff, specifically designed to insult the intelligence of the candidate”. Really? Although I think G is really saying they would be “offended”, let’s suppose the questions really do nothing but insult/offend the candidates.
Then why should we care that candidates are insulted/offended by questions? Because the silly, softball puff pastries tossed at them don’t insult or offend them, and they’re completely useless to the voters. Not wanting to offend candidates for high office, as if we work for them instead of the other way around, has done much to put us on the road to disaster.
But those are BRILLIANT questions. Indeed, if we could find a way to guarantee honest answers, those 16 little questions would make totally superfluous every future gassy campaign speech, Potemkin-village “townhall meeting” or neutered “debate”. Those 16 questions would tell the voters more about what candidates believe, what is important to them, what their character is and how they’ll act in the future than ANY other campaign device ever employed.
Well done. Now make them answer the questions!
Dear Hurst Papers of Conn. I apparently accidentally received a email from one of the writers of your Style section, perhaps intended for a tv or movie performer. I anxiously await for your real email with substantial questions relating to the duties for which I am running. Like the budget, taxes, trade etc. No doubt somewhere there is an actor wondering why the Conn papers are wanting to know his position on gasoline taxes.
Thanks.
Some guy running for Gov of Conn.
As a subscriber to the Stamford Advocate, I can tell you it has really gone downhill since its recent acquisition by Hearst (not Heart). This does not bode well for me renewing my subscription.
I think you’ve put more Heart in Hearst newspapers than they deserve…
If those questions are reasonable and important, then surely we should ask them of news folk as well.
Plus one more – who did you vote for wrt every level of govt that you cover?
I had three responses to the questionaire:
1. The odd assortment makes me think, did one party get the paper to ask these because they know that their opponent’s answers won’t play well?
2. Do I really want someone in a highly responsible position if they have not managed to break out past the mean income? Is it a plus if they have not managed their assets well enough to afford nice things? Some of these questions seem like “gotchas” for the successful.
3. The person who gives the best answers will be the one who sits down with advisors and concocts their response as part of their campaign messaging. (Regular folks call this lying.)
I gotta disagree. One recent county commissioner was very effective at looking out for the bottom line by asking precisely that sort of questions of prospective county administrators. By his logic, someone that packs a lunch is less likely to throw away public money than someone that goes out to lunch on a daily basis.
[…] Rennie’s Daily Ructions outlines one of the more “comprehensive” questionnaires ever proffered to Connecticut […]
The only correct answer:
I will be happy to answer all of these questions, as long as you will agree, in advance, in writing, to run the answers in full next to your publisher’s answers to the same questions. Thank you for your interest.
If answered truthfully, this actually would tell much about a candidate. I have no confidence that any politician would answer truthfully.
Basic fairness demands that the publisher, editor, opinion page editor, and political editor of those newspapers put up the same information – with photographs and story placement chosen by the editors of their rival papers.
The only question I would like answered is; where do your children go to school? Teddy Roosevelt’s children attend public schools in Washington, DC.
of course i wouldn’t base my vote on only this survey, but i don’t see the harm in learning the answers. i might get a little extra insight into the candidate. how is that a bad thing ? wasn’t this exactly the problem in the last presidential election: we knew almost nothing about the winning candidate.
Ed: “Ya know, I actually like these questions. How on Earth can we expect someone with two houses to understand a budget?”
You’re joking, right?
I like most of the questions and I fully appreciate the right of the candidate to say noyfb. The best question I ever heard asked in a televised ‘debate’ was “Can you name any issue where you don’t think the gov’t has any business being involved in?” I’d add that in as well. When I learned Scott Brown owned a timeshare I had serious second thoughts.
[…] On his blog yesterday, Hartford Courant columnist Kevin Rennie, a former Republican state legislator, runs down the 16-item questionnaire Hearst gave each of the candidates. See “Will Anyone Answer, ‘The Bada Bing’”?, http://www.dailyructions.com/will-anyone-answer-the-bada-bing/. […]
How much do you figure it would cost to have the campaign PR firm fabricate some sort-of, quasi-accurate but pithy answers that don’t quite honestly answer the question asked but appear to?
No matter how much Brian Lockhart tries to justify this, it is not journalism. It is a glorified self-reported survey.
A real newsman who was interested in reporting this story would have used current sources or developed new ones, and would have obtained the information himself. He would have appeared at candidates homes unannounced to obtain the photos, instead of giving the candidates to pose for glam shots.
I’ve heard of lazy reporters, but expecting the person you’re supposed to vetting corruption to give you the goods on himself really takes the cake.
Actually, I don’t think that the candidates would be offended by the questions. I think that they would consider them fluff, or at their very worst, questions that can answered with very flippant answers.
Me personally, since I have more than a passing interest in Linda McMahon, simply because I’ve been following Titan Sports/WWWF/WWF/WWE since the mid 70’s, I would like a few of the candidates to actually press the various issues about those steriods, those drugs, those early deaths, the corporate thumbing of Congress and the circle wagon mentality of hysterical overreaction when anyone does ask her a tough question.