A Case Study In Setting Policy
Published by BG on Friday, August 24, 2007 at 12:32 PM.Glenn Greenwald - How our seedy, corrupt Washington establishment operates - Salon
Christina Davidson at IraqSlogger... reported yesterday morning that "Republican lobbyists with close ties to the Bush administration are aiding and supporting the efforts of an Iraqi opposition leader who is calling for the ouster of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki."
Here's how it works:
1) Depose ruthless dictator
2) Sow the seeds of democracy
3) Celebrate the Iraqi vote as an American victory
4) Grow immediately disenchanted with the choice of the Iraqi people
5) Allow opposition leader to employ Republican lobbyists to change conventional wisdom in hopes of deposing his leader
6) Profit?
Look, lobbying happens. Legislators can't be experts in everything, and it's obvious that ideas both good and bad get pushed through our channels simply by having good PR strategies behind them. But it's especially galling that our system is being used by an Iraqi government official to effectively depose his own democratically-elected leader.
It's working too. Conventional wisdom is being formed around the "
Frankly, whether this newfangled political allegiance with Allawi is a good or bad idea is beyond the point. What is striking is how little it matters to the media how this story came around. Let me put it to you this way... Imagine, if you would, a Bush administration that spends its last few months in office trying to dial up the rhetoric against Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. Hillary Clinton takes office in January 2009, and all of a sudden the op-eds in The Washington Post and the talking heads on TV start focusing on the good things Chavez does for his people. Two weeks into this PR push, we hear that Chavez has employed a Democratic Party-connected lobbying firm to engage in a PR push.
I ask you then, What Would Bill O'Reilly Do?
Knee-Jerk Reactionary Far-Left-Wing Media my ass.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Wisconsin government hard at work
Published by StB on Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 9:00 AM.
With the various issues going on in the state of Wisconsin- drought in some areas, flooding in others, a fight over the budget and raising taxes, the racial tensions in Milwaukee- it is good to see the politicians get down and dirty on the real problems facing its beer drinking and cheese eating citizens.
A new gift card law.
Yep. One of the most pressing needs in Wisconsin is to regulate the sale of gift cards. All in the best interest of the consumer, of course. The state has tried to grab this cash in the past. Somehow they figure if the owner of the card does not use it, the money should be theirs, not the business who sold it. One bill under review calls for full disclosure of expiration dates and fees. But that ain't good enough.
Well, they do get what they pay for. If I give a friend a gift card, I have paid for a gift. Whether they use the card or not is up to them. It is not the fault of the business if the card is not used. They spend the time and money producing and distributing the cards. If they go unused, they are entitled to keep the cash.
This same politician has made other comments in the past about companies taking advantage of consumer because the cards are not used. That may be one of the most ridiculous things ever said. Isn't it the responsibility of the recipient to use the card? Sure some people put no thought into the gift buying process and may buy them a card for a store they would never shop. But that does not mean the government needs to step in and make a law preventing bad gift giving.
One thing to add. I was shocked to see this statement:
A Democrat calling for personal responsibility. Finally, someone is seeing the light.
A new gift card law.
Yep. One of the most pressing needs in Wisconsin is to regulate the sale of gift cards. All in the best interest of the consumer, of course. The state has tried to grab this cash in the past. Somehow they figure if the owner of the card does not use it, the money should be theirs, not the business who sold it. One bill under review calls for full disclosure of expiration dates and fees. But that ain't good enough.
"Because it does nothing, they love it," Rep. Peggy Krusick (D-Milwaukee) said
of the disclosure bill. Krusick drafted the bill banning expiration dates and
service fees. She said the bill is needed because Wisconsin consumers lose $11
million a year because of expiration dates, according to the state Department of
Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection."People ought to get what they pay for," Krusick said.
Well, they do get what they pay for. If I give a friend a gift card, I have paid for a gift. Whether they use the card or not is up to them. It is not the fault of the business if the card is not used. They spend the time and money producing and distributing the cards. If they go unused, they are entitled to keep the cash.
This same politician has made other comments in the past about companies taking advantage of consumer because the cards are not used. That may be one of the most ridiculous things ever said. Isn't it the responsibility of the recipient to use the card? Sure some people put no thought into the gift buying process and may buy them a card for a store they would never shop. But that does not mean the government needs to step in and make a law preventing bad gift giving.
One thing to add. I was shocked to see this statement:
But Sen. Jeff Plale (D-South Milwaukee) said the disclosure bill is better
because unused cards create costs and bookkeeping difficulties for businesses.
"There has to be a certain amount of personal responsibility that goes along
with this," he said.
A Democrat calling for personal responsibility. Finally, someone is seeing the light.
