Skip to comments.Personnel Is Policy. Dennis Wagner's article about the anti-firearm zealot Dennis K. Burke.
Posted on 01/29/2012 9:01:45 AM PST by Nachum
Readers will recall my survey of Dennis Burke's career, Personnel Is Policy," Part One and Part Two. I concluded Part Two with this:
Why did the administration pick Burke for the job of overseeing Fast and Furious? What was it about him that made them think he could be trusted with such a sensitive position? His anti-gun politics? His competence in executing the agendas of his superiors? His powerful friends? Why do they sustain him now, even in his disgrace when they are publicly trying to blame the whole thing on him? We will one day find out.
But one thing is certain, in politics -- even dirty, murderous politics -- as well as business there is this eternal truth: Personnel is Policy.
Now comes Arizona Republic reporter Dennis Wagner to bring the story of Burke to a larger audience: Burke of Fast and Furious had anti-gun history. He even quotes yours truly, with a quibble:
But there are critics, especially among staunch Second Amendment advocates, who paint Burke as a liberal apparatchik who was willing to let criminals move weapons to Mexican cartels if it would help justify new firearms restrictions.
"It's no coincidence that Dennis Burke, a longtime anti-gun policy person, was made U.S. Attorney in mid-2009 ... the same month (sic) that Fast and Furious begins," said Mike Vanderboegh, a gun-rights blogger. "They picked precisely the right guy to run a clandestine program." (The operation began a month after Burke's appointment was confirmed.)
Not sure about Wagner's quibble here. I made no mistake about the timing of the onset of Fast and Furious and Burke's appointment, nor their inextricable linkage. I am told that one depended upon the other and whether F&F began when the
(Excerpt) Read more at sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com ...
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
“Personnel is Policy” says a lot to me. It would be interesting to know how many boards of how many corporations certain persons occupy.
I knew a fellow years ago that was a VP of a specific company, and sat on the board of 62 other companies involved in the conglomerate he was employed. One of those companies is a huge International nuclear engineering company.
I looked for his name in a search pre Google say 12 years ago, but found nothing about him. I looked up the corporation, his name, etc., but found nothing. I am not going to try again today as he’s probably dead by now, and he wasn’t an extraordinary sort of guy, just one “H” of a “yes man”, a “Personnel is Policy” man.
My point: Wondering in the Corporate climate of today how many of these “Personnel is Policy” types can be found sitting on as many corporations as my acquaintance of the seventies was.
I’m especially curious as IIRC I believe I read about many such “Personnel is Policy” types being influenced into corporate positions they didn’t earn by former President Clinton.
Being on dial up, and apparently as the XP system I currently have isn’t supported anymore, and slower than “H” I don’t get involved currently in searching out these things, so ask anybody with experience if they could take a peek around, and see if they can come up with a list of names that seem to pop up associated with multiple major corporations be they International as was my acquaintance, or otherwise. Would be interesting to see who they are, and try to understand where they fit in the overall scheme of things.
No one questions the linkage between these people. No one questions the ideology unless you are completely devoid of good judgment based on facts. This must end at the white house. This can only end at the white house, and we will never prove it unless someone breaks ranks and that is very unlikely considering the amount of vetting and time passage which has placed them in power. Unless you believe in accidents of that magnitude. I do not.
Something underlies this which is of greater importance and significance than simple rough and tumble politics and rough and tumble policy. It is driven and protected as are the people who engage in it's process and progress.
Close your eyes and you can feel it. Remove emotion and you can plot it, follow it, identify it and those involved. They now have achieved intersecting fields of fire in a combined operations environment, hostile to the freedoms and liberties and well as the ownership of the people.
They have decided that they are in charge and no longer have to ask our permission to do anything they want. They are convinced that their "ownership" of the story, prevents any resistance and any threat to their power which is illegitimate, make no mistake. Make no mistake that they know this and don't care.
January 29, 2012 5:51 AM
Mmm Uha Yep,
Sen. Grassley, in an October statement, said: “Mr. Burke is to be commended, to some extent, for being the only person to resign and take responsibility for the failed operation. Of course, I do not believe he should feel obligated to be the only fall guy.”
Curiously, the supporters and detractors agree on one point: They say Burke became a scapegoat to protect higher officials in the Justice Department or White House. Dave Workman, a gun-rights blogger, described Burke as “the chief sacrificial lamb.”
List of names may take someone a while to compile.
You might find interconnecting corporations with shared board members an eye boggling enough distraction.