Or the AFL-CIO or the NEA and their connections with the DNC? Oh wait that's another thread that no one will start.
Even if there's some connection there, how many people has the National Endowment for the Arts killed? Or the AFL-CIO? Or rather, actions that were taken to benefit the NEA or AFL-CIO (to be more accurate) as is the case here.
But, you're right, no one wants to start that thread. It's not sexy.
Really though, are you equating the NEA with the Carlyle group? I'm sure there are billions upon billions hanging in the balance at the NEA headquarters.
That was a very good documentary. Quite insightful. It really did an excellent job of laying out potential ethics violations and potential for corruption.
But I don't think it was a piece that actually claimed there was corruption. It did little if anything to bring to light instances of actual corruption, but did a great job outlining some of the shadier practices that take place, and some questionable employment, and how these things have the potential of leading to corruption.
I'd call this one of the fairer pieces I've seen in a while.
The NEA I linked to is a group more similar to what Carlyle does and has also been associated with political figures. To what extent is mostly a matter of opinion I guess, so I won't make any sort of claims. But that's the group I assumed he was referring to...
I don't have the who's who bookmarked, nor do I care to get into it. He asked which NEA, and I posted a link to which one I thought was being mentioned. Nothing more.
I don't have the who's who bookmarked, nor do I care to get into it. He asked which NEA, and I posted a link to which one I thought was being mentioned. Nothing more.
If you have nothing to add to the thread then get out.
If you have nothing to add to the thread then get out.
I added to the thread. When asked "Which NEA", and given no response, I attempted to assist pensieve out with a link. Is that not contribution to a thread? Ah, I thought so. So shut the hell up.
I don't have the who's who bookmarked, nor do I care to get into it. He asked which NEA, and I posted a link to which one I thought was being mentioned. Nothing more.
Why would you need to bookmark it when it's right there on the site?
Here's what you said:
Quote:
The NEA I linked to is a group more similar to what Carlyle does and has also been associated with political figures. To what extent is mostly a matter of opinion I guess, so I won't make any sort of claims.
Why would you need to bookmark it when it's right there on the site?
Here's what you said:
Then what's this 'opinion' of yours?
I don't have an opinion on it, actually. Boy you guys sure like to get into fights don't you? Let me spell this out clearly for you:
When NEA was mentioned, and not linked to, I personally assumed it to be the NEA I linked to. Not because I believe there is some inherent Democratic corruption involving it, but because I've seen it referenced on more than one occasion as associating itself with political figures. And it is a company similar to Carlyle. So I drew the conclusion this was the NEA being talked about.
The opinion I speak of is the opinion people choose to form about how active politicians, past and present, have been in dealings associated with the NEA and what the extent of those dealings may mean.
The opinion I speak of is the opinion people choose to form about how active politicians, past and present, have been in dealings associated with the NEA and what the extent of those dealings may mean.
Well, maybe you should take the time to compare them, since when you do, you will realize they have little in common.
On March 3, 2001, just weeks after George W Bush's inauguration, the conservative Washington lobbying group Judicial Watch issued a press release. It said:
"(Washington, D.C.) Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes government abuse and corruption, called on former President George Herbert Walker Bush to resign immediately from the Carlyle Group, a private investment firm, while his son President George W. Bush is in office. Today's New York Times reported that the elder Bush is an "ambassador" for the $12 billion private investment firm and last year traveled to the Middle East on its behalf. The former president also helped the firm in South Korea.
"The New York Times reported that as compensation, the elder Bush is allowed to buy a stake in the Carlyle Group's investments, which include ownership in at least 164 companies throughout the world (thereby by giving the current president an indirect benefit). James Baker, the former Secretary of State who served as President George W. Bush's point man in Florida's election dispute, is a partner in the firm. The firm also gave George W. Bush help in the early 1990's when it placed him on one of its subsidiary's board of directors.
"This is simply inappropriate. Former President Bush should immediately resign from the Carlyle Group because it is an obvious conflict of interest. Any foreign government or foreign investor trying to curry favor with the current Bush Administration is sure to throw business to the Carlyle Group. And with the former President Bush promoting the firm's investments abroad, foreign nationals could understandably confuse the Carlyle Group's interests with the interests of the United States government," stated Larry Klayman, Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel.
"Questions are now bound to be raised if the recent Bush Administration change in policy towards Iraq has the fingerprints of the Carlyle Group, which is trying to gain investments from other Arab countries who [sic] would presumably benefit from the new policy," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton."
Comments
Originally posted by Verbal Assassin
You sir are a dumbass. All politicians are corrupt, the whole United States government is. Crawl in a hole moron democrat.
He was being sarcastic..
Want fries with that?
hehe.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Maybe you guys should do a little checking to see who's actually been in the employ of the Carlyle group.
As well as Haliburton/Brown&Root and Bechtel.
Or the AFL-CIO or the NEA and their connections with the DNC? Oh wait that's another thread that no one will start.
Originally posted by Scott
Or the AFL-CIO or the NEA and their connections with the DNC? Oh wait that's another thread that no one will start.
Even if there's some connection there, how many people has the National Endowment for the Arts killed? Or the AFL-CIO? Or rather, actions that were taken to benefit the NEA or AFL-CIO (to be more accurate) as is the case here.
But, you're right, no one wants to start that thread. It's not sexy.
Really though, are you equating the NEA with the Carlyle group? I'm sure there are billions upon billions hanging in the balance at the NEA headquarters.
"Scott, meet Strawman."
"Strawman, meet Scott."
You two should get along swimmingly.
Originally posted by Scott
Not that nea you dolt.
Umm, what NEA then?
But I don't think it was a piece that actually claimed there was corruption. It did little if anything to bring to light instances of actual corruption, but did a great job outlining some of the shadier practices that take place, and some questionable employment, and how these things have the potential of leading to corruption.
I'd call this one of the fairer pieces I've seen in a while.
Originally posted by pensieve
Umm, what NEA then?
This NEA.
Originally posted by rageous
This NEA.
Actually, it's the National Education Association.
But tell us about your NEA.
Originally posted by rageous
The NEA I linked to is a group more similar to what Carlyle does and has also been associated with political figures.
So, are you going to give us a who's who?
Originally posted by Scott
Or the AFL-CIO or the NEA and their connections with the DNC? Oh wait that's another thread that no one will start.
Then go start a thread about it you dolt.
Originally posted by rageous
I don't have the who's who bookmarked, nor do I care to get into it. He asked which NEA, and I posted a link to which one I thought was being mentioned. Nothing more.
If you have nothing to add to the thread then get out.
Originally posted by bunge
If you have nothing to add to the thread then get out.
I added to the thread. When asked "Which NEA", and given no response, I attempted to assist pensieve out with a link. Is that not contribution to a thread? Ah, I thought so. So shut the hell up.
Originally posted by rageous
I don't have the who's who bookmarked, nor do I care to get into it. He asked which NEA, and I posted a link to which one I thought was being mentioned. Nothing more.
Why would you need to bookmark it when it's right there on the site?
Here's what you said:
The NEA I linked to is a group more similar to what Carlyle does and has also been associated with political figures. To what extent is mostly a matter of opinion I guess, so I won't make any sort of claims.
Then what's this 'opinion' of yours?
Originally posted by giant
Why would you need to bookmark it when it's right there on the site?
Here's what you said:
Then what's this 'opinion' of yours?
I don't have an opinion on it, actually. Boy you guys sure like to get into fights don't you? Let me spell this out clearly for you:
When NEA was mentioned, and not linked to, I personally assumed it to be the NEA I linked to. Not because I believe there is some inherent Democratic corruption involving it, but because I've seen it referenced on more than one occasion as associating itself with political figures. And it is a company similar to Carlyle. So I drew the conclusion this was the NEA being talked about.
The opinion I speak of is the opinion people choose to form about how active politicians, past and present, have been in dealings associated with the NEA and what the extent of those dealings may mean.
Originally posted by rageous
The opinion I speak of is the opinion people choose to form about how active politicians, past and present, have been in dealings associated with the NEA and what the extent of those dealings may mean.
Well, maybe you should take the time to compare them, since when you do, you will realize they have little in common.
Originally posted by giant
Well, maybe you should take the time to compare them, since when you do, you will realize they have little in common.
I feel bad for rageous. He walked into a fight that Scott was trying to pick (unsuccessfully). So, Scott, how are the NEA and AFL-CIO like Carlyle?
How many people have NEA and AFL-CIO been responsible for killing? And how much did they make from it?
On March 3, 2001, just weeks after George W Bush's inauguration, the conservative Washington lobbying group Judicial Watch issued a press release. It said:
"(Washington, D.C.) Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes government abuse and corruption, called on former President George Herbert Walker Bush to resign immediately from the Carlyle Group, a private investment firm, while his son President George W. Bush is in office. Today's New York Times reported that the elder Bush is an "ambassador" for the $12 billion private investment firm and last year traveled to the Middle East on its behalf. The former president also helped the firm in South Korea.
"The New York Times reported that as compensation, the elder Bush is allowed to buy a stake in the Carlyle Group's investments, which include ownership in at least 164 companies throughout the world (thereby by giving the current president an indirect benefit). James Baker, the former Secretary of State who served as President George W. Bush's point man in Florida's election dispute, is a partner in the firm. The firm also gave George W. Bush help in the early 1990's when it placed him on one of its subsidiary's board of directors.
"This is simply inappropriate. Former President Bush should immediately resign from the Carlyle Group because it is an obvious conflict of interest. Any foreign government or foreign investor trying to curry favor with the current Bush Administration is sure to throw business to the Carlyle Group. And with the former President Bush promoting the firm's investments abroad, foreign nationals could understandably confuse the Carlyle Group's interests with the interests of the United States government," stated Larry Klayman, Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel.
"Questions are now bound to be raised if the recent Bush Administration change in policy towards Iraq has the fingerprints of the Carlyle Group, which is trying to gain investments from other Arab countries who [sic] would presumably benefit from the new policy," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton."
The Best Enemies Money Can Buy