Mike Stagg LIVE: Louisiana Coastal Plan

Wednesday, 18 June 2014 08:16
Cassidy's “Illiterate”, Hillary’s “Dead Broke” Gaffes: the Political Fumbles
Written by 

cassidyIt is not usual that when a politician gets used to being in the public eye and too loose with his or her words or begins thinking of himself or herself as a celebrity rather than a leader, that they become too relaxed, trip up, and blunder their way into embarrassment. It is at that point that a politician has to explain “what I meant,” and “what I meant” explanations are never good.


Congressman Bill Cassidy (R-LA) is running against Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA). During comments to the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association, the Congressman and Senate candidate said that those without health insurance tend to be “illiterate,” and many of them are his patients. Did he really mean that people without health insurance are too dumb to know that health insurance is a good thing to have or that his own patients are also dumb and stupid since many of his patients, according to the Congressman, are some of those without insurance? I don’t think so, and no reasonable person would think so either. It is clear from his remarks that that is not what he meant. Of course, that did not stop Democrats from jumping all over Mr. Cassidy and his comment. In doing so, Democrats highlighted what sounds like a very arrogant remark for a man in Mr. Cassidy’s position. However, when you read the full context of what he said, Mr. Cassidy does not come across as someone who is insensitive or condescending. But that is not the point. The mere fact that the Congressman and Senate candidate had to explain what he meant is not good.  It never is and never will be.

Republicans are not immune from misspoken statements. Just ask Hillary Clinton. The Clintons like to portray themselves as one of the folks. Bill likes to be viewed as Bubba, someone you would like to have a beer with and chew the fat. Hillary, on the other hand, struggles with the role that Bill has so artfully created for himself. In a recent interview regarding her new book, Hillary stated that she and Bill were “not only dead broke, but in debt” when they left the White House in 2000. The next day Hillary was explaining what she meant.

Mrs. Clinton’s statement was meant to make Bill and her look like regular folks working hard to make ends meet. Her claim was not believable on its face since the Clintons receive a six figure income from having spent eight years in the White House and a book deal for Hillary worth a reported $8 million. It has also been reported that Hillary receives up to $200,000 for a speech. It sounds as if another book deal and few more speeches should be more than enough to take care of Bill and Hillary’s monetary problems, if any, and provide a very comfortable financial future. In her case, Mrs. Clinton made remarks that were not believable on their face. No one believes that the Clintons were dead broke when they left the White House. Their financial future had no ceiling and has none today. But once again a politician had to explain herself, and that is never good.

Gaffes like these occur and occur often because politicians want to look like the average guy, understanding their problems, and appearing to be sympathetic to the real life problems of raising a family and paying the mortgage and monthly expenses. Sometimes politicians want to sound deeply intelligent but make statements that need extensive explanation. These statements will always get the speaker in trouble.

When politicians act like someone they are not or speak without thinking, their words can be twisted or misconstrued. That’s when further explanations are needed. The problem is that by the time the explanation is given most people will not hear the explanation and are left only with the impression created by the initial statement, and that may or may not be a good thing. It is also very likely that the explanation will be more confusing than the original statement.  One thing you can rely on, however, is that such gaffes will happen again and again, and the opposition will jump on them with both fists swinging even when their guy is fumbling with his own words.

Lawrence Chehardy

For thirty-four years Lawrence Chehardy served as Assessor of Jefferson Parish. He has been the leading authority on Louisiana’s property tax laws. In addition to his political commentary and public speaking engagements, Lawrence Chehardy is a founding member of the Chehardy, Sherman, Ellis, Murray, Recile, Griffith, Stakelum & Hayes Law Firm and serves as its managing partner.

Visit Bayoubuzz's Google Page

Login to post comments
Powered By JFBConnect
  • Edwards gets Graves challenge on Louisiana flood relief money
  • Gov. Edwards's pugnacious state of union gave wrong Louisiana vision
  • Trump plus 80 days: Jim Brown, Bernie Pinsonat talk US, Louisiana politics
  • Trump should be like Reagan, not like Bush

graves c 3Shades of Katrina?

    Is political partisanship raising its ugly head again in the face of another Louisiana disaster?  Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards thinks so.

    Edwards got some rough treatment from a congressional committee in Washington, D.C. when he testified before it recently about the state’s response to flood problems.

Read More

jbeWith equal parts pugnaciousness and disingenuousness, Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards’ highly-politicized 2017 State of the State speech laid out a truly flawed vision for Louisiana going forward.

Read More

jim bernieIs Russia now our enemy, once again?

Did Donald Trump make the right move or was the latest attack, simply some wag the dog?

Read More

Iron nancy reagan 6n 1986, United States President Ronald Reagan authorized military aircraft to unleash a torrent of bombs in Tripoli, Libya to send a strong message to Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. The attack was in response to Gaddafi’s involvement in the terrorist bombing of a Berlin disco that resulted in the death of American soldiers. 

Read More


Sen. Appel talks budget, economy


Dead Pelican

Optimized-DeadPelican2 1 1