Posted on 01/08/2005 10:15:41 AM PST by carolinacrazy
Actually it went to Williams' firm to make ads, not to him personally as a commentator.
And yes, he should have disclosed more often then he did (and he did disclose, just not consistantly and that was sloppy and that was it).
This is nothing.
How much did Paul Begala and James Carville make from the Democrats (and or their Democratic Supporting bosses at CNN) this last election cycle? These people should be very careful about opening this particular can of worms.
"ironic" -- very interesting!
I'm not talking about "justification." I'm talking about the different way the Democrats are treated. If we're going to go after Williams, why do we let the others take a walk on this kind of thing? But we do, not just the 'rats, but Republicans too. Republicans are far too fond of eating their own.
I'm missing your point. Are you saying someone would have wanted to bury or hide this? There is no evidence of this, just the opposite.
This is just nitpicking, and the Republicans are joining in. Wish I could have seen the same outrage for the dems when they did it.
This Armstrong Williams story will be all over the 'Sunday Morning Bullsh*t Lefty Shows' just as Tim 'Potatohead' Russert's saliva on Hillary's wide-load butt back in February (I believe) in their very sick lovefest of that particular morning!
RODNEY PAIGE, ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, AND THE "PAY TO PANDER" SCANDAL
By Michelle Malkin · January 07, 2005 07:40 PM
It stinks. From USA Today:
Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.
The campaign, part of an effort to promote No Child Left Behind (NCLB), required commentator Armstrong Williams "to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts," and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004.
Williams said Thursday he understands that critics could find the arrangement unethical, but "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in..."
Jonah Goldberg weighed in early here.
I'll add this: Rod Paige should be fired. Those who came up with this disgusting scheme should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Any other pundits who accepted money from the Bush administration, whether from the Education Department or any other bureaucracy, should come forward now and disclose. And then they should immediately return the money.
Grow some principles, for God's sake.
Update: Armstrong Williams revealed on The O'Reilly Factor tonight that Tribune Media Services has dropped his syndicated column.
Now, it's time for someone in the Bush administration to suffer consequences.
Update II: Joe Gandelman has the best round-up and analysis on this issue. And Captain Ed cuts to the chase:
I find it very difficult to believe that an experienced journalist or commentator, one who has to make his living off of his independence, could honestly see his way clear to accepting what amounts to a quarter-million-dollar bribe to support a government policy. I don't care what administration we're talking about -- that plain stinks, and any reasonable person knows it. Williams' wishy-washy statements about how he can understand "why some people think it's unethical" and that "it's fair" for people to think he sold out are forms of denial.
Williams, in short, is a journalistic whore. He's finished as a commentator. He claims that he will self-syndicate -- but who will buy his commentary now?
Like any instance of prostitution, of course, the action involves more than one wrongdoer. If Williams is a whore, the Education Department is his john. Who got the bright idea to spend a quarter of a million dollars of taxpayer money to bribe one journalist?
Good question. Cough up some names, Mr. Paige. We're waiting.
Update III: Still more bloggers react:
LaShawn Barber, "Armstrong Williams: The Wrong Side"
The Moderate Voice: "White House Paid A Commentator To Argue Its Case"
Matthew Yglesias: "WHAT'S A LITTLE BRIBERY BETWEEN FRIENDS?"
www.michellemalkin.com
Or giving talking points ot Susan Estrich...
Perhaps because he would say it as poorly as you wrote this question
;-)
My point is, someone in the administration should have been aware that this was going on - so the claim of the poster that somehow having a PR firm between the White House and the payments to Williams does not absolve the White House of some responsibility - and, if somehow they were NOT aware, then they were being negligent in auditing what the PR firm was doing.
Wrong is Wrong, no matter which side made the mistake. To me this was Money NOT well spent. The Administration or whoever was in-charge of this situation should be investigated. As one said earlier, at least Republicans admnit their mistakes. I sincerely hope that we come clean and try not to sugar coat this issue.Someone needs to be held accountable for this ridiculousness. And let's not get into pointing fingers the PUBLIC doesn't care whcih side it is, they do care about mis-appropriating Their/My Money !
So our conservative ethical standards should be measured by that sawed-off yardstick?
The Dems don't care about not having any ethics. I would hope we are better than that, and police our own, unlike the Dems.
The Department of Education handled this. Yes, they are part of the Bush administration, but if you are seeking to tar Bush directly with this molehill I'm not agreeing.
Responsibility for what, exactly? There can be a debate on whether tax money should be spent in this matter, but that does not mean something wrong was done and there was no attempt to bury or hide anything. The only problem for Williams is his failure to fully disclose at all times and that is being blown all out of proportion at this time.
I refuse to join the hype parade, and that does not mean I condone anything that should have been done differently.
We'll see what actions the Bush Admin takes in the Education Department to address this transgression. But I still believe that either they knew about it and did nothing, or were not exercising sufficient oversight over the PR firm to know what was going on. Neither speaks well for the Education Department, and at the end of the day Bush is the president who appointed Ron Paige to his cabinet position.
Horsehockey. Major corporations audit their vendors over much lower amounts of money that that. Someone in the Education Department had to have been in charge of that PR relationship and either knew about the payments or was not doing their job in reviewing the PR plan that would have included such a payment.
Republicans admit mistakes but it is wrong to draw false equivalencies and call a minor transgression equally as bad as a major transgression.
The drama queens need to get a grip. How not surprising to see Michelle Malkin, for example, take that tack, posted up above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.