 |
| |
|
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000
time: 07:30
|
|
As it happens, the best-articulated outrage over this came from -- of all people -- conservative columnist George Will, who puts the Williams payment in an even-more-outrageous context. I've bolded my favorite parts:
quote:
No Ad Left Behind
By George F. Will
Thursday, January 13, 2005; Page A21
In communist East Berlin, one sign of the government's swollen self-regard was the cluttering of public spaces with propaganda banners by which the government praised itself for providing socialism. In Washington today, the Education Department building is an advertisement for its occupants.
Eight entrances are framed by make-believe little red schoolhouses labeled "No Child Left Behind." High on the building's front are two other advertisements for that 2002 law: Large banners hector passersby to visit www.nochildleftbehind.gov.
This building-as-billboard is the workplace of those eager beavers who had this brainstorm: Let's pay a million taxpayer dollars to a public relations firm to manufacture enthusiasm for the No Child Left Behind Act, including a $241,000 payment to columnist and television talk-show host Armstrong Williams for his praise of the legislation. The eager beavers are long on energy but short on judgment.
Just 10 years ago Washington trembled because many Republicans who had won in the cymbal-crash elections of 1994 had vowed to abolish the Education Department. Education, they said, is a quintessentially state and local responsibility. But soon Republicans in Congress and a Republican president were deepening Washington's reach into education. In 1996 Republican appropriators gave the department a 15.7 percent increase in discretionary spending. And No Child Left Behind increased federal education spending more than any increase requested by President Bill Clinton, who was the teachers unions' poodle. Some of that money went to Williams.
When conservatives break with their principles, they seem to become casual about breaking the law, too. Last year the then-General Accounting Office accused the Department of Health and Human Services of illegal spending when it distributed fake "news" videos that were used by 40 local stations around the country. In them the many benefits of the new Medicare prescription drug entitlement were "reported" by a fake reporter whose actual status -- an employee of an HHS subcontractor -- was not revealed. The English version of these "video news releases" concluded, "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting."
This scofflaw enterprise was an appropriate coda to the lawless making of this law. Republican leaders traduced House procedures by holding open the vote for three hours, giving them time to pressure sensibly reluctant legislators. And the Justice Department says the Bush administration broke no law when the Medicare program's chief actuary was told he would be fired if he gave Congress his estimate that the program's 10-year cost would be about a third more than the $400 billion the administration claimed.
The GAO has frequently had occasion to insist that taxpayers' money cannot be used when the "obvious purpose is 'self-aggrandizement' or 'puffery.' " Last week it had another occasion, chastising the Office of National Drug Control Policy for also disseminating fake news videos.
It is difficult to calculate how many billions of dollars the government spends on indefensible, if not illegal, self-promotion. Democrats, too, have violated the spirit, and perhaps the letter, of various laws that contain language such as "no part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by the Congress" and appropriated funds may not be used "in a general propaganda effort designed to aid a political party or candidates." But conservatives should be less aggressive than Democrats in using taxpayers' money to try to mold taxpayers' minds.
It is impossible to draw, with statutory language, a bright line between legitimate informing and illegitimate propagandizing by government. What is indispensable is common sense, and that is atrophying as this lawyer-ridden nation sinks deeper into the delusion that sensible behavior can be comprehensively codified.
Obviously government leaders must try to lead by persuading the public. But government by the consent of the governed should not mean government by consent produced by government propaganda. Unfortunately, as government's pretensions grow, so does its sense that its glorious ends justify even the tackiest means.
Eight decades ago, in a Washington not progressive enough to think that it could or should superintend primary and secondary education, the president set a tone that today's government -- a Leviathan with attention-deficit disorder -- could usefully emulate. "Mr. Coolidge's genius for inactivity," wrote columnist Walter Lippmann, "is developed to a very high point. It is far from being indolent inactivity. It is a grim, determined, alert inactivity." After the debacles of hired and faked journalists, we need a contagion of Coolidgeism, beginning in the Education Department, if it is educable. |
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2005Jan12.html (requires registration)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:30
|
|
NYE quote:
You're saying that SA had had absolutely nothing to do with the WTC? IOW, why the hell do you care what justification loons use to blow stuff and people up? |
Because Tim McVeigh blew that building up because of injustices he saw...injustices millions saw or learned about. He wasn't a loon, he was mad as hell at the government. Gee, is there a lesson or "moral" to the story?  Why yes, and the Feds learned it very quickly because they had another stand-off with the Montana Freemen (more "loons" pissed off at the government, but they really were loony) and they bent over backwards to end it peacefully.
quote:
Forgive me, but it sounds as if you are making excuses somewhat like an apologist would. |
Let me guess, you think OBL attacked us because "we're free"? How does one learn why someone is trying to kill them if they wont listen? Now, read this very closely - where did I justify McVeigh's response to Waco and Ruby Ridge?
quote:
There may be some cause that underlies the motive, but the execution is all wrong. Right? |
Well thanks for asking after effectively calling me a traitor.
Millions of people were outraged at the Feds for what happened at Waco and Ruby Ridge, is it any surprise someone was really outraged? That tells me there's a problem, and that problem is law enforcement became extremely heavy handed under Reagan and the zeal to wage a drug war. You see, I want to know why someone is trying to kill me because that just ain't a normal emotion (except maybe here at Poly ). And if its because my government has spent the last few decades pissing Muslims off, then maybe my government should stop pissing them off.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-01-2005 04:48
|