But the criticism that came from me and others, in the eyes of Jack Welch, is tyranny: "Imagine a country where challenging the ruling authorities -- questioning, say, a piece of data released by central headquarters -- would result in mobs of administration sympathizers claiming you should feel 'embarrassed' and labeling you a fool, or worse. Soviet Russia perhaps? Communist China?"
Cue the violins.
Let's get real for a minute here: Jack Welch is not a victim. He is an extremely well-connected, widely-admired guy who not long ago made a large fortune running one of the most powerful institutions in the U.S. and even the world.
The fact that he is so quick to play the victim card and pretend that his freedoms are somehow being curtailed in any way because many people happen to think that he said a very stupid thing in a very public forum is absolutely ludicrous.Welch goes on to make a case in his op-ed that the federal government's employment data are flawed, a well-known truth that few people would dispute and that happens to be completely irrelevant to the criticism that is being leveled at him. Finally, he admits that his tweet was "incendiary" (indeed, it was), but he doesn't say anything about why (a topic that he would clearly like to avoid). He goes on to add that if he could tweet it all over again, he would add some question marks after it, because that would "make it clear I was raising a question." Wow, that's real big of you, Jack. Thanks for clarifying. But wait, this great American business hero isn't done. He saved his smoking gun for last: Austan Goolsbee, the former chairman of the Obama administration's Council of Economic Advisors, once questioned the