fbpx

June 28, 2019

The Most Powerful Line of the Year: ‘I Couldn’t Get it Done’

It was a shocking moment.

In the middle of all the bluster at the Democratic primary debate Thursday night, with one candidate after another promising they would fix all of our problems, one candidate, Pete Buttigieg, decided to go in another direction.

He decided he would tell us the truth and admit failure.

In so doing, he exposed a deeper truth: There’s just so much a politician can do to make our lives better. All too often, they fail. The problem is, they never admit it. They’re afraid that if they do, they will lose our vote. And maybe they’re right. Maybe we’re just suckers for hucksters who promise us the moon. We want to believe that someone, somewhere, can make our lives better. The alternative— that the solution to most of our problems is inside each one of us — is too burdensome.

It’s a lot more convenient to believe that some charismatic politician with the body language of an earnest savior can swoop in and save us. Then we’re off the hook. If we end up miserable, we can just blame the huckster who failed us. Rinse, repeat.

With one honest line Thursday night, South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg blew up that silent contract between huckster and sucker. When MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked him a tough question about the worsening race relations in his city under his watch, he didn’t dodge. He took the blame.

If you ever wonder why the credibility of Congress is at an all-time low, and why cynicism is at an all-time high, look no further than the inability of politicians to ever admit failure and their reflex to overpromise.

In a line that ought to resonate in all civics classrooms and enter the pantheon of our political discourse, Buttigieg looked at us and said, simply: “I couldn’t get it done.”

The idea of a politician admitting failure so publicly was so disruptive to the prefabricated media drama of candidates battling each other that it slipped by like a ship in the night. No one dared touch that piece of plutonium. If the media got too close and started examining it, it might blow the cover on the lucrative hoax that politicians have the power to transform our lives.

They don’t.

Even the greatest dream merchant of modern times, Barack Obama, showed us the limits of exterior forces to fix our little worlds. He showed us that promising the world may seduce us, but, in the end, it won’t help us. It’s just another sugar high on the road to never-ending disappointment.

Yes, it’s wonderful when politicians can get things done. But it’s not wonderful when they feel obligated to look like superheroes and make unrealistic promises because they think that’s all we’re capable of hearing—that we’re too weak to hear the truth about the limits of political power.

Not one candidate had the courage to tell us the limits of politics, to tell us what they can’t do for us. Instead, all we saw was another carnival of overpromising.

If you ever wonder why the credibility of Congress is at an all-time low, and why cynicism is at an all-time high, look no further than the inability of politicians to ever admit failure and their reflex to overpromise.

It’s only by trusting the truth that one can regain trust. If all politicians do is tell us what we’re programmed to hear, they don’t treat us like humans, they treat us like robots. That is what these two primary debates over the past two nights felt like to me—a procession of well-meaning political robots. Not one candidate had the courage to tell us the limits of politics, to tell us what they can’t do for us. Instead, all we saw was another carnival of overpromising.

Pete Buttigieg broke that pattern when he fessed up to failure. What he modeled for us with his answer to Rachel Maddow was humility, honesty and courage. Those character traits are bipartisan, and they’re more useful to our lives than any political promise everyone knows won’t be kept.

 

The Most Powerful Line of the Year: ‘I Couldn’t Get it Done’ Read More »

Rosner’s Torah Talk: Parshat Shelach with Rabbi Tamar Elad Appelbaum

Rabbi Elad-Appelbaum is the founder and spiritual leader of Kehilat Zion of Jerusalem and co-founder of the seminary for Israeli rabbis of Hamidrasha and the Hartman Institute. Rabbi Elad-Appelbaum’s works to advance a Jewish spiritual and ethical renaissance.

We discuss parshat Shelach, the story of the spies and the mitzvah of Tzitzit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v-BEb3oxEU&feature=youtu.be

Previous Torah Talks on Shelach

Rabbi Michael Melchior

Rabbi Jeffrey Arnowitz

Rabbi Debra Newman Kamin

Rabbi Shana Mackler

Rabbi Marci Bellows

Rabbi Benji Stanley

Rosner’s Torah Talk: Parshat Shelach with Rabbi Tamar Elad Appelbaum Read More »

Election Handbook: Enters Barak

 

We call this format a Timesaver Guide to Israel’s Coming Elections. This will be a usual feature on Rosner’s Domain until next Election Day, September 17. We hope to make it short, factual, devoid of election hype, and of he-said-she-said no news, unimportant inside baseball gossip.

 

Bottom Line

The opposition gets both more fragmented and stronger.

 

Main News

Former PM and Defense Minister Ehud Barak entered the race with a new party. His goal is to form a bloc with Labor and possibly Meretz to the left of Blue and White.

Polls give Barak only few seats, but show a weakened rightwing bloc, if one discounts Lieberman’s Israel Beiteinu.

Meretz elected Horovitz as its leader, replacing Zandberg.

Labor election coming next week.

The initiative to cancel the election seems dead.

 

Developments to Watch

Opposition: Does Barak gain more seats, and where do they come from?

Likud: Would the entrance of Barak reinvigorate Likud’s electorate?

Right: While the left maneuvers and seems active, the right seems numb. Shaked has no party, Bennett is still running his own show, no mergers were completed.

Public: An eventful week finally made us feel we are in the midst of an election campaign. But will it hold throughout the long summer?

 

The Blocs and Their Meaning

With the entrance of the new Barak party (no name, for now) the picture becomes more complicated. Look at the following numbers, based on the average of the last 5 polls, followed by several points of analysis:

 

 

1.

Netanyahu cannot have the coalition he wants. He will need to either get Lieberman to rejoin him, or form a coalition with Blue and white (or Barak).

2.

The opposition is also stuck. Without Lieberman there is no coalition of the opposition to Netanyahu. And it’s hard to imagine a coalition that both Lieberman and the United Arab Party support.

3.

Unity is possible. But B&W keep hinting that Netanyahu is no option. Barak is somewhat more cautious not to make a never-Netanyahu vow.

4.

Or – we can go back to where we were back in April and no one will be able to form a government. In such case, would Netanyahu agree to step aside (or, more likely, be pushed aside) to allow unity? This is probably the scenario Lieberman and Gantz and Barak are hoping for.

Note that the numbers are currently somewhat awkward. That’s because we calculate averages, and Barak just entered the race (so the overall number of seats is higher than 120).

 

A Party to Watch

Israel Beiteinu, Avigdor Lieberman’s party is responsible, in many ways, to the current impasse in Israel’s politics. IT was expected to gain many seats following his decision to become the spear that stabs the Haredi political dragon. And indeed – it gained. But not as much as Lieberman expected. Here are the last 10 polls. Currently, the party holds 5 seats in the Knesset.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Election Handbook: Enters Barak Read More »