Charlie Baker’s tears have launched a fishing expedition for the old man and the sea: the subject of his moving story. So far, nothing, which doesn’t help the Republican (the story is “real to me,” he says, a somewhat egotistical standard). Jonathan Carvalho investigated for New Bedford’s Standard Times (hat tip to Commonwealth Magazine’s excellent The Download free email service):
Questions surface about Charlie Baker’s story about a New Bedford fisherman
The day after Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker emotionally recounted the story of a New Bedford fisherman in a televised debate, people intimately involved with the city’s fishing industry and high school athletics say they don’t know of a family that fits Baker’s description. …
“No one comes to mind that I can think of,” said Jim Kendall, president of New Bedford Seafood Consulting. “I’ve gotten several calls on this, texts and emails, too. … I’ve checked around, and no one seems to be able to put a finger on who it would be.”
Kendall said he believes he would have pinned it down because he’s been working in the fishing industry for 51 years.
“I’ve been running several fishery groups in the city, that’s all I do,” he said. “I would think I have a pretty good grip, if not knowing the individual, knowing who to reach out to, and so far I’ve been unsuccessful.” …
A source with a longtime association with New Bedford High athletics said after many years familiar with the program, he did not know of any two brothers at NBHS receiving football scholarships, never mind going fishing instead.
Meanwhile, Yvonne Abraham underlines Baker’s emotional fragility to make a broader point — a sharp contrast, one might add, to the maturity, experience and resolve Coakley displayed at the debate:
Republican Charlie Baker was going along nicely in Tuesday night’s debate, exuding competence, speaking with authority about taxes and paid sick leave.
Then the gubernatorial hopeful came apart, telling of meeting a fisherman ruined by federal catch rules. “I may not make it through this story,” he began, promptly succumbing to tears.
kirth says
The superiority of the Free Market. The huge financial burden of Welfare Fraud. The benefits of Casino Gambling. The wonderful contributions of the Health Insurance Industry.
These things and others probably are real to him. Kind of sad that they don’t actually exist.
kirth says
The Overregulation of the Fishing Industry. How could I forget that?
dasox1 says
I take Baker’s statement — the story is “real to me” — as an admission that the fisherman doesn’t actually exist. In other words, he’s concocted this falsehood to support his candidacy even though it’s not true. American conservatism in a nut shell: “It’s true because we say it’s true, and we will continue to say it’s true no matter how many times it’s proven otherwise — facts and science be damned. That which we believe is true is true. We will run on it, legislate on it, attack people who challenge us on it.” The press and Coakley campaign have been given a gift. Use it.
Al says
so much as contrived. Asked about what might have brought tears to his eyes, I might have answered something personal such as the death of a loved one, or the birth of a child, but not this, not something made up to support a political position. Actually, it sounds a bit like those beauty pageant answers. You know the ones where the contestant says “I want to work for world peace and to feed the hungry” because she believes that is the answer the judges want to hear.
historian says
It’s true to me in standard English means it isn’t true. Is the Globe prepared to go there, or does being in love mean never having to say you’re sorry?
bluewatch says
After five years, fish stories start to smell pretty bad.
SomervilleTom says
How will finding the family, if it exists, change the story (beyond the stupidly superficial media buzz)? Why has the media decided that no issue can be covered without personalizing it into a single overnight celebrity? Why does the media insist on pursuing Kaci Hickox, rather than explore America’s response to Ebola?
The “fish tale”, as claimed by the candidate, is that a fisherman destroyed the future of his children by persuading them to be fishermen themselves. Why does it matter whether the subject of the story is real or not? SOME children of SOME lifelong fishermen are making the mistake of following their parents into a dead profession — a profession killed by itself and by government regulators who refused to impose reasonable regulations early enough to save the fishery. Surely the moral of that story has more to do shepherding the environment and with taking responsibility for actions than with government action.
This story, as told, strikes me as akin to crying at funeral for an abused child in sympathy with the grief felt by the child’s killers. If tears are to be shed, weep for the children.
The inescapable import of the tale is that government should not have imposed the restrictions — the boldfaced LIE is that the government, rather than the father himself, destroyed the son’s livelihood. Forgive the perpetrator? Of course. Even weep for the shared pain of lessons learned too late.
But, for crying out loud (pun intended), FORGET ABOUT whether the story is “real” or not. It is real. The existence or identity of its protagonists are and should be irrelevant.
jconway says
Big Jim (dad) didn’t seem to know much about it, he was still gloating over the Pats drubbing of the Bears and sad about Menino when I asked about the crying and he said he heard about it on the radio “and when a politician does it, its usually bullshit”. Hopefully that anecdotal sample size is good omen. He is fired up for Coakley (he always liked her more than me), Healey, and Goldberg.
And why am I the only one who thinks the mythical father, were he to exist, is a terrible person for crushing his sons dreams and forcing them to be just like him? That’s like something out of the Great Santini or a Cheever novel. It’s not what good parenting is about. Dad wanted to stay in the mental health profession and turned down grandpas offer to work with him and grandpa was fine with that. Dad told me early on, that he only wanted me to follow in his footsteps if that made me happy, otherwise, as long as I was happy and doing something that didn’t profit off of hurting other people he was ok with it. The father is the villain here, not the EPA.
Pablo says
We have a candidate for governor, breaking down in tears, when asked about the last time he cried. He is crying for a phony phictional phisherman that was invented no later than 2009. This is well beyond the normal bounds of political speciousness, and we are all in trouble if someone who does this gets elected as our governor.
bean says
This encapsulates the fundamental fakery that has been Baker’s whole campaign. He’s one of the 1%, who has worked for the 1%, and who is being backed and funded in his run for office by the 1%. He has been “me too-ing” (in weak tea versions) the things that Democrats espouse and, in general, trying not to seem like a Republican in this campaign in order to get elected. This one fish story is his whole approach and strategy in a single sound bite. Charlie Faker.
jconway says
Great column says what I’ve been thinking.
Jasiu says
This goes for any parent trying to force their kid into any occupation. Just as bad are the “good school” suburb parents I’ve seen pushing their kids into honors and AP classes just so they can have the right resume to get into the “right” school which will lead to the “right” job.
The reason why people are focusing on whether or not it actually occurred is the lack of evidence that it did occur. It is juicy enough for the media to focus on.
jconway says
And it pains me to see so many creative and passionate kids being forced down the elite school ‘creative class’ pipeline where they will become I-bankers, financiers, consultants, lawyers and computer programmers rather than the writers, journalists, and teachers they were born to be. I am trying my best to direct them elsewhere-I will say the class is one of the big reasons I am thinking about going into teaching. I may persuade my kids to go to state school since the Ivy plusses are overrated credential factories, but thats is probably my jaded and indebted 26 year old self talking.
Jasiu says
Not sure why this didn’t hit me until this morning.
It seems that Baker (and the fisherman Dad) would have been OK with the whole (now probably fictional) situation if the fishing industry wasn’t collapsing – the blame which Baker puts at the feet of the feds. My view is that the Dad ruined the kids’ lives in either case by nixing the scholarships – that’s where the blame goes in this story.
Christopher says
…still think it was the question itself that was stupid and phony. I really don’t care how either of them answered or how true those answers were.
HR's Kevin says
Are you following some sort of “rules of evidence”? You won’t pay attention to responses to stupid questions even if it shows something important about the candidate?
His crying was a wildly inappropriate response to his poorly explained and probably confabulated story. Everyone around the table looked at him as if he had just drooled all over himself after he said this.
Christopher says
…especially when I put myself in the candidate’s shoes and realize that if I had been asked the question my response would have been stammering and a dumb look. While he was answering I was still trying to unstick my palm from my face over the question even being asked. I do not care when a candidate last cried or if he embellishes the telling. Coakley cried at a funeral, which is normal, but my knowing that doesn’t tell me what legislation she would propose or what kind of people she would staff the government with or anything else actually relevant. If Baker wanted to talk about regulations it would have been nice if the candidates were asked, “What are some examples of regulations that should be revisited?” I just have no patience for questions not directly about one’s record or plans for the office. It may not have been his finest hour, but the way “debates” are conducted they often don’t offer much insight. With only an hour allotted that question was a colossal waste of everyone’s time.
historian says
From the Globe in a news article taking time off from the mission to puff gentle breezes on Baker: It is also possible that the sons in the story may not have had athletic scholarships at all, Conroy said, the result of an embellishment in the fisherman’s telling or of Baker’s own mishearing.” Conroy is Baker’s campaign manager.
Pablo says
Reporters have scoured the docks of New Bedford looking or the source of the story.
Perhaps…
or maybe…