[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 155 (Saturday, December 19, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2362-E2363]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


             PUBLIC FIGURES CAN PAY A HIGH PRICE FOR CANDOR

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, December 18, 1998

  Mr. BOB SCHAFFER of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce 
for the Record, an article published by Kent Holsinger of my staff. 
``Public Figures can pay a high price for candor'' appeared in the 
December 10, 1998 Denver Post. Mr. Holsinger's analysis of how public 
speaking, delivered through the media, affects public sentiment towards 
government is particularly relevant as we consider tomorrow whether to 
impeach the President of the United States. I urge my colleagues to 
keep the following in mind as we deliver our messages to the country.
  Public cynicism towards government may stem from the difficulty 
politicians and public figures have giving forthright answers to 
difficult questions. Behind the cynicism is a complex, and dynamic saga 
of American politics and culture. In the midst of this saga, the media 
serves as a conduit between public figures and the public. As the 
nature of reporting has changed dramatically with the information age, 
so too has the nature of public speaking.

[[Page E2363]]

  History was made by public statements of public figures. Before 
pollsters, media consultants and ghost writers, great orators like 
Daniel Webster, Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun mesmerized their 
audiences in the halls of Congress, thus securing their roles in the 
nation's history. People rushed to the Capitol, filled the galleries 
and watched the great debates in person. Of those, Daniel Webster's 
speech on the Senate floor for a united country, one liberty and one 
people, is among the most famous in American history. Webster 
proclaimed that public speech, while it may be manipulated or sculpted, 
``[It] must exist in the man, the subject, and in the occasion.''
  But are those principles of dialogue maintained in modern times? How 
public speech is delivered, and reported has changed dramatically over 
time. Modern reporting is instantaneous and relentless. Papparazzi 
pursue celebrities with cameras and microphones, while news is beamed 
continuously to households around the world, around the clock. To cope 
with modern reporting, media advisors and press secretaries craft 
skillful, but evasive, replies for their bosses. Throughout the Monica 
Lewinsky scandal, President Clinton has emerged as a master of 
evasiveness and media ``spin'' on the political battlefield. Why don't 
public figures just speak their minds? They may be taking their lessons 
from what rash public statements have done to others before them.
  On the real battlefield, General George S. Patton, Jr. swept the 
Third Army through Europe and helped secure an allied victory in World 
War II. Characterized by his gruff personality and hard demeanor, 
Patton demanded strength and discipline from his men. Inwardly, he 
studied philosophy and wrote poetry; but outwardly he was ruthless and 
offensive. He may have carried his troops more than once by 
determination alone. Never afraid to speak his mind, Patton once was 
asked by a preacher whether he ever managed to read from the Bible he 
kept on his nightstand. ``Every--damned day,'' Patton replied.
  At times hated and loved by his men, Patton commanded loyal troops 
who performed the impossible during the war. His fierce determination 
to pursue and conquer the enemy, coupled with his unapologetic prose 
was at times glorious and disastrous. He was one of the greatest 
tactitions and generals the United States has ever seen. General Patton 
led his armored units with speed and daring, his philosophy: ``Catch 
the enemy by the nose and then kick him in the pants.'' This philosophy 
carried the Third Army across more territory and captured more 
prisoners than any other army in American history.
  Patton, as battlefield commander, enjoyed unparalleled success. 
Patton, as a public figure, suffered greatly. Many times his brash, 
unapologetic statements, made off the record, ended up as newspaper 
headlines. His statements about fighting the Russians to free Eastern 
Europe and using ex-Nazi's during reconstruction were hotly criticized. 
Those controversial, but matter-lf-fact statements were said quietly, 
or in private. But they eventually cost one of our guest generals his 
command of the Third Army.
  It is no wonder today's public figures sometimes hesitate to speak 
their mind. Modern reporting, often geared towards sensationalism, 
creates that need for evasiveness and spin in public speaking. This 
dichotomy fuels public cynicism and distrust. But sensationalism sells. 
So long as it does, public figures will guard their words, and the 
public long for heroes, like Patton, whom are unafraid to speak their 
minds.

                          ____________________