Patterico's Pontifications

1/29/2009

Hiltzik “Business” Column Plenty Political

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Hiltzik — Patterico @ 7:06 am

We’ve always known that Michael Hiltzik, the sock-puppeting “business” columnist, has ambitions to be a purely political pundit. Let’s take a look at a couple of passages from his recent “business” columns.

January 22, 2009:

It’s proper to recognize that “experience” isn’t always all it’s cracked up to be. Sometimes it’s merely a smoke screen for the hidebound, burned out or lazy.

Nor is it a substitute for judgment and intelligence. Just the other day we inaugurated a president who repelled attacks on his supposed “inexperience” by displaying intellectual depth and a singular maturity of purpose. The defeated ticket, by contrast, was led by a superannuated politician who seemed to have forgotten all the lessons of a lengthy public career and a running mate whose “administrative experience” cloaked a worldview so shallow it would drown in a wading pool.

That one had something to do with experience and business.

January 12, 2009:

No. 1 on the perp walk hit parade of 1987, for instance, was the arrest of three Wall Street traders allegedly involved in the big insider trading scandal of the moment. As news cameras rolled, one was led tearfully from his trading floor and handcuffed by agents of Rudolph Giuliani, then the federal prosecutor in Manhattan.

The charges against all three were dropped four months later. Who was the net beneficiary of this stunt? Only Giuliani, who gained a political platform that enabled him to infest our national politics for the next 20 years.

See, he’s talking about Wall Street there, so it’s “business.”

He’ll be back taking potshots at Hewitt and me and all the other right-wing bogeymen before you know it. It’s not personal. It’s strictly “business.”

27 Responses to “Hiltzik “Business” Column Plenty Political”

  1. Do I see signs of hoof-and-mouth disease? He really should wipe that froth off his mouth before he talks.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  2. I think that every reader should send this guy a sock in the mail. No note. No nasty stuff. Just one sock.

    Just so he is reminded, several times a week, that he is not fooling everyone.

    Eric Blair (e92b94)

  3. The goal of every good, decent Conservative is to get pictures of a high profile liberal doing something naughty.

    Liberals are mentally diseased.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  4. …. which is why you see this every day in the MSM and with their “enlightened” Politicos.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  5. #2 is a great idea; could someone post an address?

    Old Coot (543f9d)

  6. I have a business idea for Hiltzik – why not write about the terrible business prospects regarding the MSM (what’s that? eleventy!) and examine pubs like the LAT and NYT’s failing business models, and why it’s completely the fault of Darth Cheney and Chimpy McBushitlerHalliburton.

    Dmac (eb0dd0)

  7. James Taranto calles them “Wannabe Pundits”.

    I did snicker at the “maturity of purpose”. What does that even mean?

    (Gregg Easterbrook is a habitual violator. I don’t know how he can write a 10,000 word column anymore now that he can’t devote 4,000 words of it to bashing Republicans, then getting back to football)

    Techie (6b5d8d)

  8. “calls”

    Techie (6b5d8d)

  9. What is a five letter description of Hiltzik that rhymes with Hiltzik and starts with “P”?

    PCD (7fe637)

  10. Ah Patterico, you missed today’s load of Bandini from Hiltzik “Pushing Detroit onto a greener road”.

    Detroit’s technology “marches on—-yet its whining and bellyaching never seem to change.”

    President Obama signaled that “the automaker’s tantrums” won’t count for anything in Washington etc.

    Hiltzik is as big a clown when writing in the business section about the auto industry’s problems as he is on any other topic.

    Aside from being a lying sock puppet type; it takes real skills to be a liar in three or more different personalities, but Hiltzik has that ability–Hiltzik is as dumb as a box of used con rods.

    Mike Myers (674050)

  11. Rick Elllers take extreme umbrage at that statement.

    Dmac (eb0dd0)

  12. “…Singular maturity of purpose.”

    I have never heard of a “mature purpose,” nor have I ever heard or read someone using “maturity” as anything but an abstract noun. I have never met Hiltzik and thankfully probably never will, because he sounds like the type of person who, when asked what the devil he means by “singular maturity of purpose,” would say “If I have to explain it to you, you’ll never understand.” I don’t like to put myself in situations that make my middle finger itchy.

    On the subject of “wannabe pundits” (thanks, James Taranto), I remember many years ago when San Francisco Chronicle sports columnist Ray Ratto, writing about a topic that I have long forgotten, used a homeless beggar as a metaphor. He made some remark about wanting to be a nice guy and drop a quarter into his cup, but then reasoning, “Who’s to say he won’t use it to call Rush Limbaugh?”

    If he knew anything about Rush’s show, he would know that Rush’s phone number is toll-free.

    L.N. Smithee (5875fb)

  13. Comment by Eric Blair — 1/29/2009 @ 7:33 am

    Like Hiltzik’s writing and logic, that sock should have holes in it.

    AD (7d0655)

  14. When Hiltzik was once again named as columnist, didn’t Jamie Gold say that in the eyes of the paper he had “rehabilitated” himself. I guess we know what passes for rehabilitation in the eyes of the paper’s editors — rote parroting of left-wing talking points. Not like Hiltzik had shunned that sort of writing previously.

    JVW (bff0a4)

  15. Sixty-five million years ago, when the big asteroid hit, the dinosaurs didn’t think that their easy, cushy existence would ever come to an end. The same is true today. And the dinosaurs still have brains the size of a pea.

    Official Internet Data Office (4e5efd)

  16. “…he had “rehabilitated” himself…”
    Was that at that Saudi re-hab center?

    AD (7d0655)

  17. If this is rehabilitation, he must have been a real peach before.

    JD (9e86cd)

  18. The “business” column of superannuated and ethics-challenged Michael Hiltzik has now and in its previous unlamented incarnation, always been largely political.

    This is a good specific example of the LA Times not knowing or caring what it is doing. Because he hasn’t gotten into any scandals lately, Hiltzik is rewarded with a column where he can waste space with his political animosities, instead of doing what he was ostensibly hired for, to report about business.

    Why not move Hiltzik out of business and into the opinion pages with his fellow political bloviator Tim Rutten where he belongs?

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (e24bda)

  19. Hi Michael!

    I think the nice thing about posts like this is that you know Hiltzik has read it and is monitoring the comments. He’s just dying to wade in but knows he can’t afford another self-inflicted internet scandal. It would be fun to slap him around in person again on a blog.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  20. Hiltzik has a notoriously inflated ego, hot temper and thin skin that might override his caution. So does Rutten, for that matter.

    I’m guessing the LAT editors have forbidden them to comment here. But I’d love to be proven wrong and see the verbal shredding they’d take.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (e24bda)

  21. Hiltzik is a douchenozzle. Bring it, beeyotch.

    JD (a635b5)

  22. Again I ask: Who are they laying off? Given who they hire at the same time, it’s clear. Hard Left or left out.

    There seems to be a bit of competition between Hiltzik and David Lazarus for most leftist political cant inserted into a biz column.

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  23. Lazarus used to be quite good at the SF Chronicle. He had a great way of eviscerating customer-unfriendly practices at big uncaring companies. Perhaps his Chronicle editors kept him on a tighter leash.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (e24bda)

  24. I read Hiltzik’s book, Dealers of Lightning, a few years ago and thought it was good. I was subsequently shocked to learn he was the author after all the sock puppetry and his left wing blather. Last week, I read a better book about Xerox PARC, the subject of Hiltzik’s book, by a couple of Harvard Business School guys. The difference in the two books is interesting.

    In Hiltzik’s book, Xerox is this stupid behemoth of a corporation that doesn’t realize what a treasure it has in PARC.

    In the other book, they go into the history of Xerox and the process of xerography and how they were devoted to research and innovation when they started PARC. By the time there were real products coming out of PARC, like the Alto computer, which had a mouse and a GUI interface, and a laser printer, and ethernet network, Xerox had been taken over by a new generation of executives, all trained at Ford. The authors have an excellent explanation, even though the book was written in 1989, of what has happened to the US auto industry.

    That is the difference. Hiltzik can understand technology and innovation but has no clue about business or management. The other authors understand, not only technology, but the history of Xerox and the principles of management. Those principles can lead to great inventions and success, like Henry Ford and Joe Wilson can build great companies by being innovators.

    Hiltzik is not a business writer. But the Times doesn’t know any better.

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  25. You guys are just jealous!

    Mikekoshi (796deb)

  26. If Hiltzik won’t take on rightwing buffoonery, who will? The man is providing a service.

    jack (1f4d17)

  27. Isn’t or wasn’t Mikekoshi one of Hiltzik’s pet sock puppets? Has Hiltzik risen to the bait in post #25 and is he going to get his bigmouth bass landed on shore? Hope so.

    But I agree that everything Hiltzik knows about business could be written on his left testicle in 36 point type and still leave lots of room on that little jewel.

    Mike Myers (674050)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2208 secs.