Reason Writers Around Town

In USA Today, Matt Welch makes the argument against candidates revealing the nitty gritty details of their personal lives.

Comments

NoStar | March 11, 2008, 3:14pm | #

Matt is shilling for Big Cover-Up because he's afraid his trysts with Hillary, Barack, and John will become public knowledge.

Geotpf | March 11, 2008, 3:23pm | #

I dunno. I think info like the medical status of a president is something voters should know. If a presidential candidate is in poor health, the VP nom becomes much more important than if the candidate is in good health.

Bingo | March 11, 2008, 3:25pm | #

Chances are that in 30 years we will have a presidential who had a myspace during his/her teen years. Now that will be interesting.

sage | March 11, 2008, 3:28pm | #

Wow. Good exposure, Matt. You'll be just another talking head before you know it. ;-)

some guy | March 11, 2008, 3:46pm | #

a presidential [candidate] who had a myspace [account]

I doubt it. MySpace is for humans. Subhumans, to be sure, but humans all the same.

Warren | March 11, 2008, 3:49pm | #

Is Welch running for something? I RTFA, it appears to be written in standard English but I have no idea if he actually said anything. What was the point to that?

PC | March 11, 2008, 4:27pm | #

Well the way society is going either everything will be acceptable because everyone will have done it or the major parties will only be able to nomninate Mormons.

NoStar | March 11, 2008, 4:40pm | #

PC,
Well, that would explain G. W. Bush.

Oh wait, you said Mormons.

Rhywun | March 11, 2008, 4:42pm | #

Barack Obama ... looks smashing with a cigarette dangling from his lips.

Doesn't everybody?

Voros McCracken | March 11, 2008, 5:03pm | #

I generally agree with Matt most of the time and in a sense I agree with him here.

But my concern is that whenever we start to discuss what information should and should not be grist for the public mill when it comes to presidential candidates, I always become frightened that someone is planning on making that decision for us.

To me we're all better off if the filters are stuck in the off position and let the people sort it out. As the discussion above highlights, different people are going to think different things are important so I think it's best to just let them have at it.

I don't like some of the topics being discussed right now, but I dislike the 'solution' more. I realize Matt isn't advocating that, but that doesn't mean others aren't.

brotherben | March 11, 2008, 5:27pm | #

I recognize the voyeuristic tendencies in me. But I also am egotistical enough to assume I can make correct deductions about a person's character and leadership ability based on their prior decisions and actions. Inquiring minds want to know.

Jeff Wartman | March 11, 2008, 5:58pm | #

I disagree with Matt's overall premise, but he's right on with this point:

Obsessed with McCain's medical records? You should care more about what happened the last time he converted calls for "transparency" into federal law; suddenly, Americans could no longer donate even $200 anonymously to a federal candidate and were faced with heinous restrictions on paying for political ads.

Right on.

Jose Ortega y Gasset | March 11, 2008, 6:14pm | #

We'd like to ask you a question about this picture taken of you and an Argellian fruit bat before you came one of our alien galactic overlords....

zzzzzzzaap!!!!

And now for today's weather.

thoreau | March 11, 2008, 6:15pm | #

I want to know if a VP nominee is proficient with firearms. At least 2 of our Vice Presidents have shot people while in office, and I think the public has a right to know on this important topic.

As far as Presidents with MySpace accounts, yeah, that will be interesting. I can't wait for the "guilt by 6 degrees of separation" game: "Derek Smith was a MySpace friend of Dakota Chernov who was a friend of IndieRawkGrrlll31 who was a friend of BongoDude who was a friend of that dude who did the school shooting of 2010."

But what thye're forgetting is that the school shooter was a MySpace friend of Kevin Bacon!

Jose Ortega y Gasset | March 11, 2008, 6:23pm | #

Kevin Bacon may be part of the alien advance team... now that I think about it.

Tbone | March 11, 2008, 6:26pm | #

The notion of personal information privacy is a fading anachronism in the information age. I would like more effort spent on making the penalties for government misuse/mishandling of this information have real consequences (e.g., felony, jail time).

As to how much one's life is available/interesting to the public or media, each of us is free to seek anonomity. If you seek wealth and power, notoriety and scrutiny usually come along for the ride.

smartass sob | March 11, 2008, 8:35pm | #

In 2001, President Bush issued an executive order giving living ex-presidents the right to block disclosure of their records long after a 12-year waiting period granted by a 1978 1aw.

Yes, I recall that; I also recall that it was mostly to block disclosure of his father's presidential and vice-presidential papers. If I recall correctly, he did this during the spring or summer before 9/11. I just can't imagine what Georgie would be wanting to hide about Daddy (and Daddy's administration) - such a wonderful, principled personage, sooo deserving of having ships and airports etc. named after him - him and his friend, James Baker. Truly, I just can't fathom it; what would such moral paragons have to hide?

John-David | March 11, 2008, 8:57pm | #

So it's ok for my magazine to be sent through the mail with a satellite photo of my house on the cover, but it's not ok to ask people gunning to be the leader of the free world to disclose everything that may be troubling about their presidencies? Good to know.

This magazine has sucked since Nick Gillespie took his new position. And to think I used to miss Matt Welch.

Jennifer | March 11, 2008, 9:58pm | #

Damn you, John David, it's too late for me to take a drink.

Matt Welch | March 11, 2008, 10:27pm | #

I just want to say that having the inventor of DIPS leave a comment here really makes my day.

smartass sob | March 11, 2008, 11:39pm | #

Okay, I've looked but couldn't find it; what the heck is "DIPS"?

thoreau | March 12, 2008, 1:53am | #

Yes, back in the good old days, when Julian Sanchez was working here. That's when it was a REAL libertarian publication.

:)

wang | March 12, 2008, 5:25am | #

I support the law. But by practice , the government is too bad.

Matt Welch | March 12, 2008, 2:08pm | #

Without cheating I believe it stands for Defense Independent Pitching Statistics. Basically, it was the semi-revolutionary insight that the best way to predict a pitcher's future success was not necessarily his past success (as measure by ERA or whatnot), but his success in preventing batted balls in play. Probably one of the 10 biggest breakthroughs in baseball analysis over the past decade, though surely I'm mischaracterizing it somewhat.

smartass sob | March 12, 2008, 10:04pm | #

Without cheating I believe it stands for Defense Independent Pitching Statistics.

Thanks, Matt.

Voros McCracken | March 12, 2008, 10:23pm | #

Happy you feel that way Matt. I check in from time to time. Mostly lurk.

For some reason a lot of baseball stat geeks have libertarian leanings. Couldn't tell you why.