Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Russ Baker: 'The incestuousness (of the Bush WH) boggles the mind.'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 09:26 AM
Original message
Russ Baker: 'The incestuousness (of the Bush WH) boggles the mind.'
Edited on Mon Mar-06-06 09:36 AM by bigtree

Appointees Guarding The Henhouse

Russ Baker
March 06, 2006
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/03/06/appointees_...

{snips}

. . . the Dubai Ports deal is clearly another of many instances in which this White House invited either the Wily Fox or the Corrupt Klutz into Henhouse Management. From mine safety to agriculture, drug benefits to communications policy, its always the same with this gang: the defiling of lofty missions. Since Bush appointed and then forced out qualified and fair cabinet members like Paul ONeill at Treasury and Christine Todd Whitman at EPA, there have been four categories of acceptable hire: political crony, industry hack, corrupt apparatchik and destruction-minded ideologue.

With George W. Bushin case after casehiring practices constitute a blatant nose-thumbing at the public that put him into office. We saw that most recently with FEMA, where Bush first appointed his campaign manager, Joe Allbaugh, a man with no appropriate emergency or management experience. He then installed as his successor Michael Brown , a man who had never managed more than two people, and whose career pinnacle was investigating misconduct at horse shows.

Here are just a few of the more egregious examples from the Bush record:

Bushs first mine safety chief, David Lauriski, resigned in late 2004 after CBS' 60 Minutes revealed that his agency had improperly awarded no-bid, single-source contracts to coal industry companies to which he was tied. Lauriski also tried to push through changes in coal dust regulations that miraculously benefited only his former employereven other mine operators were opposed.

Thomas Scully, the man who served in the Bush Administration just long enough to implement the badly-flawed Medicare Drug Benefit , came from a job with the hospital association and left directly to the drug industry.

David Safavian , the head of the White House Office of Federal Procurement Policy was a former lobbyist and Hill staffer with no prior experience in government contracting; he has since been arrested in connection with the sprawling corruption investigation surrounding lobbyist Jack Abramoff, an old friend and colleague. His expertise was the getting of contracts for politically powerful outfits.

more: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/03/06/appointees_...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. I can see the argument for integration of the economies of the middle
east with the USA. I just don't get why the ports. There is already so much in the way of petro-dollars in the USA. The issue seems to me to be a distribution of wealth in the middle east. And I don't see how selling the ports to elites helps at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. UAE is a feudal monarchy, pure capitalism with no legislatures
to sour the deals and no democracy that would carry any public protest. Also, they're like Saudi Arabia with their US weapon's purchases, planes and stuff. It's just business with the Bush regime, with a good bit of militarism mixed in. UAE will be a base of operations for whatever military meddling Bush aspires to, Iran, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-07-06 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Just like Quatar. And you know, after 9/11 it was not a bad idea
to change military bases to outside of Saudi Arabia - since Koran says explicitely no. Koran also says explicitly that Israel should be about where it is. There have to be bases there. Just not so sure about how this deal is going to help democracy in the middle east. As if neocons are going to somehow be for the nationalization of the UAE port corporation in the future by the people of the UAE. I don't see how this improves the lives of the UAE people. And helps integrate those lost middle easterners who get lured inot Jihad due to poverty and the radical islamist leaders who give sustenance to the poor - at a price of activating them into intolerant people bent on getting rid of all things modern. Perhaps they think that by luring petro-dollars to investment of things like "ports" where no american billionaires want to be - they are playing sort of a "okay - you buy our junk business since ports are going to crash in 20 years when the cost of fuel becomes excessive". So perhaps that is the tactic.

I don't understand why the USA would not be taking back its ports seeing as how the biggest future threat is a dirty bomb.



Aside from the security issue - I don't understand why more petro-dollar investment in the USA is a good idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 22nd 2014, 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC