Four thousand throats may be cut in one night by a running man. -Klingon Proverb
October 5, 2005 6:49 AM Subscribe
Death by a Thousand Cuts. The choices of the Bush team are most confusing, what with the amount of unqualified individuals nominated (and confirmed). But what’s even more curious is the ties that bind them together. (Here’s some of the serious and not-so-serious diagrams of BushCo.) More inside...
This post was deleted for the following reason: Reads like a personal blog post, first link doesn't have much to do with speculation within or the many unrelated diagrams. Proves nothing but the poster's opinion.
It's payment, and also insurance against coming needs--the Plame thing and various other indictments, as well as the need to test the Constitutionality of many of Bush's policies--tax money for discriminating Charities and Schools among them, etc.
posted by amberglow at 6:56 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by amberglow at 6:56 AM on October 5, 2005
The requested URL /diagrams/Bush was not found on this server.
for your "here's" link. And can we get tinier diagrams please?
posted by Edible Energy at 7:19 AM on October 5, 2005
for your "here's" link. And can we get tinier diagrams please?
posted by Edible Energy at 7:19 AM on October 5, 2005
with the amount of unqualified individuals nominated (and confirmed)
Can you name me anyone other than Harriet Miers that is unqualified for their post?
And in answering that question, please remember that your disagreement with their politics is not a reflection of their qualifications.
posted by dios at 7:20 AM on October 5, 2005
Can you name me anyone other than Harriet Miers that is unqualified for their post?
And in answering that question, please remember that your disagreement with their politics is not a reflection of their qualifications.
posted by dios at 7:20 AM on October 5, 2005
This whole administration is so crooked on its face.
How can anyone still be ignoring the blatant, blatant corruption, graft, and falsehood?
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:20 AM on October 5, 2005
How can anyone still be ignoring the blatant, blatant corruption, graft, and falsehood?
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:20 AM on October 5, 2005
Look at what the differences are between those who stay (Texas, College Republicans, ties to corporate lawyers, fundraisers, "fixers", PNAC, AIPAC, Texas, etc.) and those who go, like Ridge, Powell, Christie Todd-Whitman, O'Niell, etc. Maybe loyalty is a synonym for bought silence?
posted by rzklkng at 7:22 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 7:22 AM on October 5, 2005
Can you name me anyone other than Harriet Miers that is unqualified for their post?"
Michael Brown ring a bell?
posted by magullo at 7:24 AM on October 5, 2005
Michael Brown ring a bell?
posted by magullo at 7:24 AM on October 5, 2005
And for the rest of your post, it is largely hysterical speculation. There is no evidence at all of this story about Miers and the Air National Guard. It is mere conjecture.
And you seriously want to suggest that John Roberts isn't qualified for his post? How are we to take you seriously when you make such an asinine comment? Alberto Gonzalez was a partner in a prestigious law firm, a respected member of the Texas Supreme Court, and Chief White House Counsel. Those seem sufficient qualifications for an Attorney General.
Your whole post is a mish-mash of wildly speculative allegations, partisan complaints, and buzzword invoking mashed together in a silly attempt at suggesting that people who are otherwise qualified are in fact unqualified merely because you don't like their politics.
posted by dios at 7:24 AM on October 5, 2005
And you seriously want to suggest that John Roberts isn't qualified for his post? How are we to take you seriously when you make such an asinine comment? Alberto Gonzalez was a partner in a prestigious law firm, a respected member of the Texas Supreme Court, and Chief White House Counsel. Those seem sufficient qualifications for an Attorney General.
Your whole post is a mish-mash of wildly speculative allegations, partisan complaints, and buzzword invoking mashed together in a silly attempt at suggesting that people who are otherwise qualified are in fact unqualified merely because you don't like their politics.
posted by dios at 7:24 AM on October 5, 2005
dios, how about Spelling, Brown, Allbaugh, Julie Myers, Michael Chertoff, Hal Stratton...etc., etc.
It's unfortunate that your blind partisanship and adherence to party politics keeps you from objectively weighing grave matters of national security. Thinking like yours puts us all at risks...
posted by rzklkng at 7:28 AM on October 5, 2005
It's unfortunate that your blind partisanship and adherence to party politics keeps you from objectively weighing grave matters of national security. Thinking like yours puts us all at risks...
posted by rzklkng at 7:28 AM on October 5, 2005
so, FEMA and SCOTUS are, like, small potatoes, dios? even assuming that they are the only two shameful choices -- they aren't -- isn't that bad enough for your standards dios?
posted by matteo at 7:29 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by matteo at 7:29 AM on October 5, 2005
dios, it's hard to know where to begin. My favorite was his first ambassador to Spain, who didn't speak Spanish.
posted by allen.spaulding at 7:31 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by allen.spaulding at 7:31 AM on October 5, 2005
I can't recall names, off hand, but I seem to recall a number of apointees in the administration are convicted felons. Was it Poindexter? Libbey?
posted by Goofyy at 7:33 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by Goofyy at 7:33 AM on October 5, 2005
And just as bad as the unqualified people who have made it into the administration, are the people who have been forced out for telling unpleasant truths to the public.
posted by bashos_frog at 7:34 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by bashos_frog at 7:34 AM on October 5, 2005
Oh yeah, as I recall, Congress couldn't seem to agree on Bolton, and Porter Goss himself didn't think he was qualified.
posted by rzklkng at 7:35 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 7:35 AM on October 5, 2005
And Rothko, we all know it's not about changing his mind (dios), but enlightening every one else. He's just a comic foil.
posted by rzklkng at 7:36 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 7:36 AM on October 5, 2005
An FDA veteran trained in animal husbandry who spent much of his career in the agency's Center for Veterinary Medicine, Alderson quickly became the subject of active and largely negative comment on the Internet and elsewhere.
The Office of Women's Health serves as a liaison with women's health groups and as an advocate on women's issues; critics said that a man with a primarily veterinary background could not properly fill the role.
That one might not be as permanent or as blatant as, say, Brown, but it's one more example of people being picked for positions that are 'over their heads' based on ideological traits rather than qualifications.
The early days of Iraq's reconstruction included large armies of eager, wet-behind-the-ears Cato Institute types as well. I'll have to dig up a few of the articles that came out at the time.
posted by verb at 7:40 AM on October 5, 2005
Don't play the etc. game. Name each one.
Now lets look at the qualifications of each of them:
Spelling had a background in education policy for quite a long time. I'm not sure what special qualifications beyond that you require for her post.
I'll give you Brown, who apparently lied about this resume. Allbaugh, I don't know his, but I imagine he has some qualifications (or as much as someone in his office would normally have).
Julie Myers? To be honest I have never heard of the person, so I looked it up. She is the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement at the Department of Commerce. Now, perhaps you think there is a certain amount of qualifications necessary for that job beyond what her's are, and I'd love to hear your argument for them. But as a former U.S. Attorney and holding a position in the Treasury department, those sound like qualifications.
Michael Chertoff. Please. His qualifications are unquestionable. He has been a respected U.S. Attorney in both Republican and Democratic White Houses.
Hal Stratton, another one I had to look up. He is Chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, whatever that is. Again, what qualifications is suppose to have? He was the Attorney General of New Mexico and his resume looks impressive enough.
I can't believe you are throwing out these names as proof that Bush consistently appoints unqualified people. And Miers isn't unqualified in general. She is just not as emminently qualified as a Supreme Court Justice should be.
But go back to Gonzalez and Roberts, two you specifically named. Are you seriously going to suggest they are qualified for their positions?
posted by dios at 7:40 AM on October 5, 2005
Now lets look at the qualifications of each of them:
Spelling had a background in education policy for quite a long time. I'm not sure what special qualifications beyond that you require for her post.
I'll give you Brown, who apparently lied about this resume. Allbaugh, I don't know his, but I imagine he has some qualifications (or as much as someone in his office would normally have).
Julie Myers? To be honest I have never heard of the person, so I looked it up. She is the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement at the Department of Commerce. Now, perhaps you think there is a certain amount of qualifications necessary for that job beyond what her's are, and I'd love to hear your argument for them. But as a former U.S. Attorney and holding a position in the Treasury department, those sound like qualifications.
Michael Chertoff. Please. His qualifications are unquestionable. He has been a respected U.S. Attorney in both Republican and Democratic White Houses.
Hal Stratton, another one I had to look up. He is Chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, whatever that is. Again, what qualifications is suppose to have? He was the Attorney General of New Mexico and his resume looks impressive enough.
I can't believe you are throwing out these names as proof that Bush consistently appoints unqualified people. And Miers isn't unqualified in general. She is just not as emminently qualified as a Supreme Court Justice should be.
But go back to Gonzalez and Roberts, two you specifically named. Are you seriously going to suggest they are qualified for their positions?
posted by dios at 7:40 AM on October 5, 2005
even assuming that they are the only two shameful choices
Assuming that, then the person ought not lead off in his post with the following nonsense:
"The choices of the Bush team are most confusing, what with the amount of unqualified individuals nominated (and confirmed). "
posted by dios at 7:42 AM on October 5, 2005
Assuming that, then the person ought not lead off in his post with the following nonsense:
"The choices of the Bush team are most confusing, what with the amount of unqualified individuals nominated (and confirmed). "
posted by dios at 7:42 AM on October 5, 2005
Look, every administration appoints people to the national posts who are from their party. Like it or not, the concept of spoils is consistent throughout all Presidential administrations. Bill Clinton appointed a lot of people to posts with qualifications similar to Bush's appointees. It is the nature of our federal administration. Ambassadorships have always been considered "cush" jobs. There are so many federal posts, many of which have almost laughably limited roles in our government. They are always filled by people who in the circle of the White House.
If the complaint is about Brown at FEMA, then make the thread about that. If the complaint is about Miers not being as exceptionally qualified as we should demand, then please make that post, I'll agree with it.
But don't overstate your point by bringing in a bunch of silly argument about how some Assistant Undersecretary isn't qualified for whatever the hell her post is and then try to overstate your case by saying that Bush consistently apoints unqualified people to their positions.
posted by dios at 7:47 AM on October 5, 2005
If the complaint is about Brown at FEMA, then make the thread about that. If the complaint is about Miers not being as exceptionally qualified as we should demand, then please make that post, I'll agree with it.
But don't overstate your point by bringing in a bunch of silly argument about how some Assistant Undersecretary isn't qualified for whatever the hell her post is and then try to overstate your case by saying that Bush consistently apoints unqualified people to their positions.
posted by dios at 7:47 AM on October 5, 2005
Dios, have you ever been introspective enough to realize that you and your kind ALWAYS say "I've never heard of..." when confronted with information that's outside of your paradigm? Didja ever think that MAYBE, just maybe you weren't getting a full picture from your sources?
As far as Chertoff, what does a LAWER and CONGRESSPERSON know of Homeland Security? Spelling has POLITICAL experience in education, yet no education experience. That's not ODD to you?
I'm not going to give you the satisfaction of splitting hairs over the meaning of unqualified - by intent and definition, that means not suitable for the position, either due to conflicts of interest or lack of experience.
posted by rzklkng at 7:52 AM on October 5, 2005
As far as Chertoff, what does a LAWER and CONGRESSPERSON know of Homeland Security? Spelling has POLITICAL experience in education, yet no education experience. That's not ODD to you?
I'm not going to give you the satisfaction of splitting hairs over the meaning of unqualified - by intent and definition, that means not suitable for the position, either due to conflicts of interest or lack of experience.
posted by rzklkng at 7:52 AM on October 5, 2005
Michael Chertoff. Please. His qualifications are unquestionable. He has been a respected U.S. Attorney in both Republican and Democratic White Houses.
Why exactly does that qualify him to be the head of Homeland Security? Do U.S. Attorneys routinely hold counter-terrorist tactical exercises or something in their off-hours? Do they plan widescale emergency management strategies on their way to the courthouse?
posted by bashos_frog at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
Why exactly does that qualify him to be the head of Homeland Security? Do U.S. Attorneys routinely hold counter-terrorist tactical exercises or something in their off-hours? Do they plan widescale emergency management strategies on their way to the courthouse?
posted by bashos_frog at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
Bill Clinton appointed a lot of people to posts with qualifications similar to Bush's appointees.
Could you give some examples of Clinton appointees that have responsibility:qualification ratios similar to Miers or Brown?
posted by I Love Tacos at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
Could you give some examples of Clinton appointees that have responsibility:qualification ratios similar to Miers or Brown?
posted by I Love Tacos at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
Look, every administration... Put that card away, we're talking about THIS administration, you know, the one restoring dignity to the White House.
posted by rzklkng at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 7:53 AM on October 5, 2005
Wow Clinton got mentioned already? Countdown to Godwin in 5...4...3...2...
posted by rzklkng at 7:56 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 7:56 AM on October 5, 2005
Dios,
I'm not sure that the primary point of this thread is to necessarily illuminate underqualification. I think that the diagrams are supposed to illustrate corporate influence and cronyism. Any instances of underqualification are a side-effect and, as far as this discussion goes, more of a subtext.
posted by Jon-o at 7:57 AM on October 5, 2005
I'm not sure that the primary point of this thread is to necessarily illuminate underqualification. I think that the diagrams are supposed to illustrate corporate influence and cronyism. Any instances of underqualification are a side-effect and, as far as this discussion goes, more of a subtext.
posted by Jon-o at 7:57 AM on October 5, 2005
Actually, all of Bush's unqualified picks are Clinton's fault.
(because everything is Clinton's fault, naturally)
posted by bashos_frog at 7:58 AM on October 5, 2005
(because everything is Clinton's fault, naturally)
posted by bashos_frog at 7:58 AM on October 5, 2005
There's no telling anything to anyone who is still on board with the administration at this point. They will call black white, they already call wrong right. It takes a great deal of effort to continually justify their adopted viewpoint to themselves, using the longest, most convoluted, vague hand-wavy reasoning. And they'll think they're being logical.
I'm just glad most people have not abandoned their common sense and still think of fire when they see smoke.
How can you breach someone's internally consistent fantasy world, which anyone can construct and live in as long as they please? They fundamentally can't see the "jumps" in their own logic. When you build mental bridges over the gaps, you eventually forget the gaps are even there. It usually takes some unprecedented and shocking event to make them deeply reconsider their worldview. Plato's allegory of the cave illustrates this pretty well.
The problem is even worse when they have a support group, like a cult or some other pathological social structure. To some extent, our entire culture is our own fantasy support group, but the tendency for small sub-structures to partially seal themselves off from the greater mental landscape and involute is undeniable. Members of such groups consider their own habits of thought to be the norm, and intrusions on the fantasy are ironically criticized for their illogic. The arbitrary and paraconsistent nature of human rhetoric (and therefore logic) is completely ignored, because such self-reflective considerations, when taken seriously, nearly always lead one to a higher-level viewpoint, which must destroy the illusion.
Sorry this comment kind of devolved into a rant.
I'm brainwashed by my cult-ure into taking this stuff far too seriously.
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:58 AM on October 5, 2005
I'm just glad most people have not abandoned their common sense and still think of fire when they see smoke.
How can you breach someone's internally consistent fantasy world, which anyone can construct and live in as long as they please? They fundamentally can't see the "jumps" in their own logic. When you build mental bridges over the gaps, you eventually forget the gaps are even there. It usually takes some unprecedented and shocking event to make them deeply reconsider their worldview. Plato's allegory of the cave illustrates this pretty well.
The problem is even worse when they have a support group, like a cult or some other pathological social structure. To some extent, our entire culture is our own fantasy support group, but the tendency for small sub-structures to partially seal themselves off from the greater mental landscape and involute is undeniable. Members of such groups consider their own habits of thought to be the norm, and intrusions on the fantasy are ironically criticized for their illogic. The arbitrary and paraconsistent nature of human rhetoric (and therefore logic) is completely ignored, because such self-reflective considerations, when taken seriously, nearly always lead one to a higher-level viewpoint, which must destroy the illusion.
Sorry this comment kind of devolved into a rant.
I'm brainwashed by my cult-ure into taking this stuff far too seriously.
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:58 AM on October 5, 2005
EE: Source page and direct link (you'll prolly have to cut and paste).
posted by rzklkng at 8:00 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by rzklkng at 8:00 AM on October 5, 2005
I don't know if Bush consistently appoints people who are unqualified, but he appoints friends who refuse to disagree with him, right or wrong, at whatever cost to the country.
One example that is worse, in my mind, was the appointment of Tom Ridge to run DHS. The competent, right-of-center former governor of Pennsylvania was hired to essentially create a cabinet position that would help the Bush administration abuse terrorism for political purposes. We all know about the ridiculous color alert scheme, nonsensical Fox News alert changes and the duct tape. DHS money was handed out inconsistently, if at all, and then mostly as political payola to areas that would help with photo ops or the 2004 Bush/Cheney campaign. Certainly, funding was never handed out to New York City in any amount consistent with the region as a terrorist target. Would I say Ridge was incompetent? No, but I would say his talents were grossly misused with potentially serious consequences to the lives of millions of Americans.
It's sad to see capable people put into positions of impotence so that the President can abuse them for political ends. It's worse when those positions can (and do, as FEMA showed) affect the well-being of millions of people.
posted by Rothko at 8:01 AM on October 5, 2005
One example that is worse, in my mind, was the appointment of Tom Ridge to run DHS. The competent, right-of-center former governor of Pennsylvania was hired to essentially create a cabinet position that would help the Bush administration abuse terrorism for political purposes. We all know about the ridiculous color alert scheme, nonsensical Fox News alert changes and the duct tape. DHS money was handed out inconsistently, if at all, and then mostly as political payola to areas that would help with photo ops or the 2004 Bush/Cheney campaign. Certainly, funding was never handed out to New York City in any amount consistent with the region as a terrorist target. Would I say Ridge was incompetent? No, but I would say his talents were grossly misused with potentially serious consequences to the lives of millions of Americans.
It's sad to see capable people put into positions of impotence so that the President can abuse them for political ends. It's worse when those positions can (and do, as FEMA showed) affect the well-being of millions of people.
posted by Rothko at 8:01 AM on October 5, 2005
I too would like to see a list of largely unqualified Clinton appointees.
posted by srboisvert at 8:03 AM on October 5, 2005
"what with the amount of unqualified individuals nominated (and confirmed)"
Well, there you have it..nominated and confirmed. Confirmed by Democrats and Republicans in many cases so I'm not sure who your slinging mud at.
Look, I've been more than willing to call Bush on his idiocy more than a few times but the Mefi community, at large, is filled with so much of this dreck, you have to sift through endless hate-filled rants to actually find someone that makes a convincing position for the left. I rarely hear anyone here say, "this is what dems believe, and this is why Bush is wrong". Dios is correct; if you have a particular point, make it please.
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:04 AM on October 5, 2005
Well, there you have it..nominated and confirmed. Confirmed by Democrats and Republicans in many cases so I'm not sure who your slinging mud at.
Look, I've been more than willing to call Bush on his idiocy more than a few times but the Mefi community, at large, is filled with so much of this dreck, you have to sift through endless hate-filled rants to actually find someone that makes a convincing position for the left. I rarely hear anyone here say, "this is what dems believe, and this is why Bush is wrong". Dios is correct; if you have a particular point, make it please.
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:04 AM on October 5, 2005
From the "some" diagram: Separated at birth: Ahmed Chalabi & Richard Dreyfuss.
posted by Xurando at 8:04 AM on October 5, 2005
posted by Xurando at 8:04 AM on October 5, 2005
« Older Pandemic Flu Awareness Week | noveaux Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by rzklkng at 6:49 AM on October 5, 2005