Wolfowitz F's Up, AgainFollow

Linky



Wolfy goes from member of the Project for the New American Century, into Dep. Secretary of Defence, One of the Chief architects of the Iraq War (He was the guy who sold the War with WMDs), to President of the World Bank.

His track record is "spotty" to say the least.

However, if he loses this job, Bush might as well start put him in charge of negotiating with Libya. I figure since he's banging one, he's more qualified for that than any of his previous jobs.

My friend's parents both worked for the World Bank and they were a *********** family, too.

Or was it the IMF? Something like that.

Same diff.

Yet another Bush political appointee that manages to f'uck up.

The guy is a slime balls and one of the chief orchestrators of the misinformation that lead to the invasion in Iraq. I can only hope bad things continue to happen to him.

Sure. But let's put this in perspective. The guy hired and overpaid some woman he was apparently banging on the side. Oh no! In the grand scheme of things, that's pretty minor. It's also unclear if the woman in question was actually qualified to do the job she was being paid to do (unclear if she wasn't that is).

Not saying nepotism is great, but it's not that uncommon, and there are far worse examples of it. Like say Senator Dianne Feinstein sitting on a military appropriations commitee while her husband held controlling interests in two of the companies up for bids (which she would approve). We're talking about over a billion dollars in contracts assigned to her husband's companies while she was in that position (she resigned from the post, but not her position as Senator when questioned about it).

Oddly, that story didn't make CNN, or NBC, or CBS, or ABC... Strange isn't it?

Ok. But the Wolfowitz story *is* being covered by the major news sources. That's the point I was making Joph. Why the one story about a relatively minor account of nepotism gets huge media play, but another story about massively bigger (and presumably much more illegal) nepotism in awarding military contracts by a Dem Senator goes by without a whisper...

It's not about which news agencies carry the story Joph. For the most part they simply carry wire reports for things like this, only choosing to do their own reporting when something catches their eye. The question is what factors cause one to be front page news, and the other to not appear at all?

Where's the uproar? See. I made a similar observation in the Imus thread. The public outcry and media coverage of scandals like this don't occur accidentally. At some point in our system, someone (or group of someone's) must make a decision as to what is "big news", and what isn't. My observation is that it seems like the distribution of what becomes "big news" is remarkably convenient if you happen to be a Democrat (or Liberal in general).

And the only possible reason is Liberal Media Bias!!!

Gotcha.

What's strange is how the "little stories" on the pubbie blogs never get to be anything more then little stories

Yeah that Lewinsky thing, no traction. That Dan Rather thing, nada. It's almost impossible for right wing bloggers to get any mainstream attention.

Gbaji Quote Generator:

"It really isn't a big deal"

"Besides, the Democrats did it too!"

"The liberal media didn't report the Democrats doing it, odd isn't it?hmm?heh?um?"

"Strange, isn't it?"


(I just noticed he used that last one twice in this thread alone)



Edited, Apr 14th 2007 7:16am by trickybeck