Bush administration paid media to promote law

[Zepp]

Education Dept. paid commentator to promote law

By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY

Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.

The campaign, part of an effort to promote No Child Left Behind (NCLB), required commentator Armstrong Williams "to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts," and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004.

Williams said Thursday he understands that critics could find the arrangement unethical, but "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in."

The top Democrat on the House Education Committee, Rep. George Miller of California, called the contract "a very questionable use of taxpayers' money" that is "probably illegal." He said he will ask his Republican counterpart to join him in requesting an investigation.

Read Full Article Here

 

[Ping898]

This is nothing new. They did the same thing when Medicare bill was passed. They either pay known people to report on it or make fake TV spots with fake reporters to get new shows to play the spots.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

:rpo: Make a statement for or against a law or bill because you believe in it, not because you were bought off.

 

[7starmantis]

If any of us think this doesn't happen across partisen lines and in every addministration, we are mistaken.

7sm

 

[Sapper6]

If any of us think this doesn't happen across partisen lines and in every addministration, we are mistaken.

7sm

yeah no crap. where have you people been for the past 20 years. this is nothing new. just something else to be over-critical of? get over it, your boy lost the election. you'll get another chance in '08 :ultracool

 

[Cruentus]

yeah no crap. where have you people been for the past 20 years. this is nothing new. just something else to be over-critical of? get over it, your boy lost the election. you'll get another chance in '08 :ultracool

Well, dude, no we shouldn't "get over it." And, I am not talking about who got elected here. We should NOT "get over" the idea of what is called "packaged news stories;" we should be appalled. Yes, this has been going on since Reagan, but instead of saying "Clintion did it too" like a 5 year old would, or simply sloughing it off because it has been done before, we should be discussing what can be done to stop this now.

But I don't know, maybe I am just too idealistic. :idunno:

 

[michaeledward]

I am going to add this here ... because I am not sure it merits' a new thread of its own.


For the past 3 days, the President has been pushing for 'Tort Reform'; limiting legal action citizens can take.

Today's speech in Michigan focused specifically on Asbestos Abatement lawsuits. The President claims that these lawsuits may drive many small companies into bankruptcy.

Of course, even small particles of asbestos, if inhaled, can cause cancer. Manufacturers have known this for more than 50 years.

If you look to recent history, one of the last actions taken by Richard Cheney as CEO of Halliburton (now Vice President of the United States), was the acquisition of Dresser Industries. Dresser Industries is subject to asbestos liability from a former subsidiary, Harbison-Walker Refractories Company.

Point A - Point B - Point C .... follow closely now.

A - Halliburton is subject to extensive asbestos liability.
B - Dick Cheney subjected Halliburton to this burden.
C - Dick Cheney's friend is arguing for restrictions on asbestos Lawsuits.

What's the good of being President if you can't bail out your friends when they need you?

Mike

 

[Sapper6]

Well, dude, no we shouldn't "get over it." And, I am not talking about who got elected here. We should NOT "get over" the idea of what is called "packaged news stories;" we should be appalled. Yes, this has been going on since Reagan, but instead of saying "Clintion did it too" like a 5 year old would, or simply sloughing it off because it has been done before, we should be discussing what can be done to stop this now.

But I don't know, maybe I am just too idealistic. :idunno:

well, "dude", there's idealistic and there's reality. we can dream all day long about fixing every piece of negativity that dwells within our government. we must concede to the fact that there's just some things "we the people" will never solve. 'tis true we have the best form of government on the planet, but it's far from perfect, and never will be; regardless of how much "we" discuss the solution.

i never made mention to clinton so you lost me there.

living in reality is much more pleasant. there are far less let-downs to deal with.

 

[Zepp]

well, "dude", there's idealistic and there's reality. we can dream all day long about fixing every piece of negativity that dwells within our government. we must concede to the fact that there's just some things "we the people" will never solve. 'tis true we have the best form of government on the planet, but it's far from perfect, and never will be; regardless of how much "we" discuss the solution.

So, by your argument then, we should give up on ever trying to improve our government?

 

[FearlessFreep]

Well, I took the intentionas meaning "before we raise a high moral crime issue about what someone form 'the other side' has done, it should be realized that the same thing is probably done on both sides and that should temper the calls to storm the castle"

Not that things should not be fixed or attempted to fix, but the fixes are going to need to be much more fundamental than just yelling at and voting someone out whom you happen to disagree with.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

well, "dude", there's idealistic and there's reality. we can dream all day long about fixing every piece of negativity that dwells within our government. we must concede to the fact that there's just some things "we the people" will never solve. 'tis true we have the best form of government on the planet, but it's far from perfect, and never will be; regardless of how much "we" discuss the solution.

i never made mention to clinton so you lost me there.

living in reality is much more pleasant. there are far less let-downs to deal with.

If we have problems like this, which are pretty appalling, then maybe we aren't the best government on the planet. Or our citizens are too jaded and broke and struggling to do much about it.

Or whatever.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Well, I think that structurally, our system of governement is pretty good, but it's actually carried out "for the people, by the people and of the people" ad someone once said that we get the elected officials we deserve

I think right now we have a conundrum. On the one hand,as Tip O'Neil once said, "All politics is local" and you can see that where people run on the basis of, and get elected to, bringing federal money to their state or district; water projects or street projects or keeping bases from closing or whatever. People vote self-interest, and especially local self-interest. On the other hand, most power authorit is at the federal level. I think there is a conflict there. The only way to resolve it is a) get the authority (including taxation) pushed as local as possible and minimalize the federal government's power or b) get people to think more in terms of national (or larger) self-interest, even if possibly at a local cost. As it is, now, we have federal power driving local self-interest.*

As an aside, I think one big problem is that corporations are now legally considered 'people' in many ways, including political donations. One corporation can donate a million dollars in campaign money, or a *lot* of individuals can donate a hundred bucks each...which is easier? Some 'people' become more equal than others in backing their candidate.

*As a note, I think a) is more of a Republican philosophy and b) a Democratic one. I think wither would be good...better than we have now. At least, idealogically. As a practical matter, I think most politicians today, on both sides, are perfectly happy using local self-interest to give them federal power

-----

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again into bondage." - Alexander Fraser Tyler, "The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic", 1750

 

[Cruentus]

well, "dude", there's idealistic and there's reality. we can dream all day long about fixing every piece of negativity that dwells within our government. we must concede to the fact that there's just some things "we the people" will never solve. 'tis true we have the best form of government on the planet, but it's far from perfect, and never will be; regardless of how much "we" discuss the solution.

i never made mention to clinton so you lost me there.

living in reality is much more pleasant. there are far less let-downs to deal with.

It's sad when our "reality" is the equivelent to "Sure, it sucks to take it in the butt by rich dudes whenever they feel randy, but hey, can't do anything about it cause their so darned goned rich and all, so miah-swell take it with a smile."

Well, maybe some of us don't like being raped in the butt, and maybe some of us won't except some sort of pseudo-reality where butt raping is A-OK.

Or something like that....

 

[7starmantis]

I see your point Paul and I agree, but my post was simply to say lets not start pointing fingers at someone who is doing something that is pretty widely accepted in that place. The issue is not who did it, but that its being done. Now, I dont know why I'm defending "W", but there are much more fundamental issues to adress rather than jumping on each individual "fire" if you will. As a governament run by people who are inherently going to make mistakes, we can pretty much accept the fact that there will be mistakes made, we need to address deeper issue. In this case, we are jumping down the current administration when we should also be looking at who actually took the money and spoke about it.

JMHO,
7sm

 

[GAB]

Well, dude, no we shouldn't "get over it." And, I am not talking about who got elected here. We should NOT "get over" the idea of what is called "packaged news stories;" we should be appalled. Yes, this has been going on since Reagan, but instead of saying "Clintion did it too" like a 5 year old would, or simply sloughing it off because it has been done before, we should be discussing what can be done to stop this now.

But I don't know, maybe I am just too idealistic. :idunno:

Yes, I believe you have hit the nail on the head.

It has been going on long before Reagan...

But we are not going to change it, we can talk about it all we want.

Just like Training and talking about Martial arts, they both are good, only as long as you are doing both.

I train about 5 times a week at least 2 hours a day, that gives me time for other things and running off at the mouth.

Those that know me, know me, others get to hear me or see me, for good or bad that is the way it is.

Reputation and Character. Read G. Gordon Liddy and you will know what I mean.

Two different things, one you can do something about, the other you can't.

Regards, Gary

 

[Tgace]

Well, whats the intent of the post? Look at what POLITICIANS are and have been doing for a long time. -or- Look at what BUSH is doing? If some partisian politicians are going to use this as some sort of hammer to use on Bush than it smacks of selective enforcement.

 

[GAB]

If we have problems like this, which are pretty appalling, then maybe we aren't the best government on the planet. Or our citizens are too jaded and broke and struggling to do much about it.

Or whatever.

Yes, Sad but true...

Just look at this board, so many afraid to say something because they don't want to get red ding...Or saying it to be politically correct...SAD!

Difference between Character and Reputaion.

Regards, Gary

 

[Zepp]

Well, whats the intent of the post? Look at what POLITICIANS are and have been doing for a long time. -or- Look at what BUSH is doing? If some partisian politicians are going to use this as some sort of hammer to use on Bush than it smacks of selective enforcement.

My intent in posting this was to simply to generate disscussion, and possibly even read suggested solutions toward stopping this practice.

Though I was never under any illusions that this administration is the first to pay off the media. I'm not that naive.

 

[Makalakumu]

Well, whats the intent of the post? Look at what POLITICIANS are and have been doing for a long time. -or- Look at what BUSH is doing? If some partisian politicians are going to use this as some sort of hammer to use on Bush than it smacks of selective enforcement.

I'm thinking that the above post illustrates an interesting political tool. The "Bush-Hater" label has been very usefull to the President. People who criticize him get it slapped on by their giant media conglomerate and are suddenly ignored by half the country. This insulates the President from criticism and the skullduggery continues...

 

[Ceicei]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Tribune Media Services will stop distributing columns written by conservative commentator Armstrong Williams because he received money to promote President Bush's education programs, the company said.

See rest of the article:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/08/bush.journalist/index.html