Murray herself says in the article:
I’m not comfortable all the time in the spotlight. If there’s an issue, I talk about it, but I don’t necessarily need to grab the mike or the camera. . . . I believe being head of the Senate, I should promote my members.
To which Abraham responds:
Selflessness is laudable, but it’s not the heart of leadership.
So what then is leadership all about, self-interest and promotion? Not in my book. Great leaders make other people better. They empower not enfeeble. If Murray is not actually sucking all the oxygen out of the Senate herself, but is willing to let her members take some of the initiative and lead, the Senate can only be healthier for it. We’ve had far too many legislative leaders who turned their chamber into a vehicle for their personal agenda or political ambitions. If Murray has so far shunned this predilection, that is a good thing.
And what this article also demonstrates is the media’s narrow focus on the big three on Beacon Hill. The other 198 members of the General Court are afterthoughts in the media eye, unless of course, they commit a crime or something. The media bias toward legislative leaders as the only legislators that count (which may be somewhat true) is if anything a self-fulfilling prophecy – the more they focus on them the more leadership power is accentuated. If the Globe, or others, actually cared about making a better legislature, they would do more to look into the work of others on the Hill and not just get soundbites from Sal.
Terry Murray should feel no pressure to change her style to satisfy pesky reporters. Sharing power (if in fact that is what she is doing) and shying away from the lure of the klieg lights are virtues I hope she retains.
Yes —she does keep a low profile. I would deem that prudent, not bring gunshy. She didn’t get where she is being a shrinking violet. Casino’s were DOA. Why waste dry powder on something already assuming room temperature.
<
p>BTW. It appearsthat Sal and by extension Therese were right on Casino’s. They are tanking!
<
p>http://www.newsweek.com/id/135638
<
p>http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080506…
<
p>Wouldn’t it have been just great if the Commonwealth had spevt millions and possibly a billion on White Elephants.
<
p>Just another reason that Deval has gotta go—the sooner the better. The man has only one priority:himself.
Terry Murray’s focus is on the good of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I have never met a harder worker, or someone who is better with numbers.
<
p>My priorities may not always be the same as hers, but I usually find out it is because I was focused on one issue and she sees the “whole picture”.
I think Abraham’s column makes some valid points.
<
p>Politics and leadership is about building larger groups of supporters to pass initiatives. The press–or blogs–are tools that can be used to build support.
<
p>There is a lot to say for being subtle, timely and using discretion in your public statements. And with Patrick and DiMasi taking so much of the air time (whether they generate it themselves or not) it IS difficult for Murray to get time, especially if her statements aren’t as provacative.
<
p>But in the end, I think we all would like to believe that legislative leaders are not just wrangling for support in the chamber. We want them to fight for support from the general public.
<
p>And when the members are trying to do or have done good things, it is the leader who must make the push for public attention.
<
p>I’m not saying she should be “Red Light” Terry Murray. But there is an opportunity to look good in comparison to Deval and Sal. Always an interesting balance.
She’s doing the actual work of governing, while her counterparts spend their time planning media strategies and ducking indictments. Cashman vs. Ameriquest – can you name ANYTHING she’s done that has caused that sort of lack of confidence?
<
p>If she wouldn’t be insulted by the gender, I’d call her Gary Cooper – someone who doesn’t speak until they have something to say, and whose words are that much more powerful when she does speak.
<
p>And she should trade that kind of authority for touch-feely Together We Can angst-driven crap that we get daily from the OTHER solons?
<
p>She IS a leader – she doesn’t have to prove it on the five o’clock news.
Take style out of it. Style is a secondary concern.
<
p>It’s our business she’s doing up there. Why shouldn’t she tell us more about how she’s leading the effort on our behalf?
<
p>Abraham doesn’t think Murray is doing enough to communicatie with the outside world. She sees that as part of the leadership role for the leader of the Senate.
<
p>Murray is essentially denying outside communication is an important function of her leadership position.
<
p>I agree with the point I think Abraham is making: that an effort to communicate the business of the chamber is a good and necessary duty of the leader.
<
p>Who says she can’t do a good job on the “people’s work” and not communicate that work at the same time? I mean this as constructive criticism. I think she’s missing an opportunity to build support for initiatives and increase public confidence in the body.
<
p>I like her and I’d like to see and hear more from her.
…is one smart cookie. I think she has been in the Senate long enough to establish a style that works for her, and I don’t think she is about to change. Good for her.
<
p>Great post, by the way.
Who has the best chance of still being in Massachusetts politics? How about eight years from now?
<
p>Not DiMasi. Not Patrick.
<
p>Murray knows exactly what she’s doing, and not pleasing the Globe is part of that (cf. Tom Menino).
looks like the most mature and dedicated public servant. While Patrick and DiMasi have sort of made asses of themselves in various ways (which, incidentally, is great for selling papers), Murray seems to be performing her duties well, and to have generally conducted herself in a manner that is above reproach. However, I’m not an expert on her career or anything. “Selflessness not the heart of leadership”, does that mean that selfishness is the heart of leadership? Zounds! is that cynical or what?
<
p>Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
She is smart enough I think, to work towards being that top player, but more behind the scenes. She will let the credit go all around and make sal and Deval and the senators get credit, But she will spin her web and get what she wants.
<
p>I love her going after the medical profession and the frauds they are.
<
p>Sorry you doctors out there, but as frauds and duplicities go, you guys are worse then the house of reps.
<
p>Listen up Doctors, that hot chick from Phiezer that brings lunch to the office and has a drink with you at the paid for conference in Aruba ain’t fuckin’ you. Just like the waitress at Hooters ain’t fuckin’ you.
<
p>Ya bunch of turd losers.
<
p>Wait I forgot. the problem with medical profession are lawyers and med mal suits.
<
p>Doctors are tools of teh pharmaseuticals and insurance companies.
<
p>Go Terry Go!
Why did you give me a “zero” for the above. It is not bad when compared to my other crap.
<
p>Being serious here and just wondering.