Support NeoGAF

[Nerevar]

Any Kerry Supporters On The Line? The Bush Administration punishes some Democrat backers

Any Kerry Supporters On The Line?
The Bush Administration punishes some Democrat backers
By VIVECA NOVAK AND JOHN DICKERSON

Sunday, Apr. 24, 2005
The Inter-American Telecommunication Commission meets three times a year in various cities across the Americas to discuss such dry but important issues as telecommunications standards and spectrum regulations. But for this week's meeting in Guatemala City, politics has barged onto the agenda. At least four of the two dozen or so U.S. delegates selected for the meeting, sources tell TIME, have been bumped by the White House because they supported John Kerry's 2004 campaign.

The State Department has traditionally put together a list of industry representatives for these meetings, and anyone in the U.S. telecom industry who had the requisite expertise and wanted to go was generally given a slot, say past participants. Only after the start of Bush's second term did a political litmus test emerge, industry sources say.

The White House admits as much: "We wanted people who would represent the Administration positively, and--call us nutty--it seemed like those who wanted to kick this Administration out of town last November would have some difficulty doing that," says White House spokesman Trent Duffy. Those barred from the trip include employees of Qualcomm and Nokia, two of the largest telecom firms operating in the U.S., as well as Ibiquity, a digital-radio-technology company in Columbia, Md. One nixed participant, who has been to many of these telecom meetings and who wants to remain anonymous, gave just $250 to the Democratic Party. Says Nokia vice president Bill Plummer: "We do not view sending experts to international meetings on telecom issues to be a partisan matter. We would welcome clarification from the White House."

From the May. 02, 2005 issue of TIME magazine

I can't believe the brazen corruption being demonstrated here. This is an industry group dedicated to developing standards, not a Republican meeting convention. It's sending a terrible message to industry - you either support the administration in power or you'll be forcibly removed from the market by government standards organization. How is this happening with no repurcussions?

 

[Incognito]

Call us nutty, but fascism is A-OK!!

:lol

 

[acoustix]

Not at all surprising. I would say this is the straw that broke the camels back, but the back has long been broken.

I give the Bush administration an F-

 

[Dan]

Well, I bet this comes up in my telecommunication law and policy class tomorrow. Hell, I think I'll bring it up.

It's pretty ridiculous though. I'm not sure how relevant American politics are to developing international standards, not to mention removing these guys without actual evidence that their support for Kerry has affected the administration's desired policy. This is just a 'because we can' scenario.

 

[DarthWoo]

Not at all surprising. I would say this is the straw that broke the camels back, but the back has long been broken.

I give the Bush administration an F-

Back in my high school, they actually had a Z grade if you did even worse than something like 40-50% I think. Unlike the 0.0 of the F on your GPA, the Z was a -1.0. I think that might be more appropriate.

 

[AntoneM]

:lol :lol

wait, it's really not funny :depression

 

[ShadowRed]

Remember when Bill Clinton fired some people from the white house travel office, the media went ape shit over it. George does the same and not a word metioned. Liberal media my ass.

 

[Jdw40223]

Wow! That's it? This is called throwing stuff up against the wall hoping something sticks.
The heart and soul of this battle where the activists live there is abject depression and burnout. They have been losing and this is more of it. They got booted out... so what? it business, only the strong survive.

 

[Nerevar]

Wow! That's it? This is called throwing stuff up against the wall hoping something sticks.
The heart and soul of this battle where the activists live there is abject depression and burnout. They have been losing and this is more of it. They got booted out... so what? it business, only the strong survive.

:lol

stop the country, I want to get off.

 

[demon]

it business, only the strong survive.

What in the fuck are you talking about?

 

[Jdw40223]

At least four of the two dozen or so U.S. delegates selected for the meeting, sources tell TIME, have been bumped by the White House because they supported John Kerry's 2004 campaign.

topic: Whippty freakin doooooooooooo... haha This wasnt worth a post. C'mon.. really? i can post a million of dem articles alike. This is just a microcosm for the demi's problems.

 

[Boogie]

Wow! That's it? This is called throwing stuff up against the wall hoping something sticks.
The heart and soul of this battle where the activists live there is abject depression and burnout. They have been losing and this is more of it. They got booted out... so what? it business, only the strong survive.

Can we get a new Right-Wing spinster? This one's broken. :lol

 

[DJ Sl4m]

:lol

DIS-owned

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

Remember when Bill Clinton fired some people from the white house travel office, the media went ape shit over it. George does the same and not a word metioned. Liberal media my ass.

Warlord envy; many presidents have it.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Wow! That's it? This is called throwing stuff up against the wall hoping something sticks.
The heart and soul of this battle where the activists live there is abject depression and burnout. They have been losing and this is more of it. They got booted out... so what? it business, only the strong survive.

:lol :lol :lol
Joke character?

 

[WedgeX]

topic: Whippty freakin doooooooooooo... haha This wasnt worth a post. C'mon.. really? i can post a million of dem articles alike. This is just a microcosm for the demi's problems.

Just a question (and one that's not rhetorical)...how many times have past Dem admins specifically taken Republicans off of commissions that set international industry standards?

 

[Nerevar]

topic: Whippty freakin doooooooooooo... haha This wasnt worth a post. C'mon.. really? i can post a million of dem articles alike. This is just a microcosm for the demi's problems.

I'd really like to see you put your money where your mouth is, because I have a sinking suspicion your just making this up ... or you're a joke character.

 

[AntoneM]

topic: Whippty freakin doooooooooooo... haha This wasnt worth a post. C'mon.. really? i can post a million of dem articles alike. This is just a microcosm for the demi's problems.

post 'em, all 1 million of them. Wait you were using damage control weren't you? Making unsubstantiated claims to make the opposition look bad. That's #3 in the Republican campaign book isn't it?

 

[Boogie]

topic: Whippty freakin doooooooooooo... haha This wasnt worth a post. C'mon.. really? i can post a million of dem articles alike. This is just a microcosm for the demi's problems.

Actually, this sounds like an opportunity for one of GAF's patented "You have 24 hours to back that claim up or YOUR ASS IS GRASS" challenges

 

[Hitokage]

Why bother.

 

[Jdw40223]

post 'em, all 1 million of them. Wait you were using damage control weren't you? Making unsubstantiated claims to make the opposition look bad. That's #3 in the Republican campaign book isn't it?

:lol :lol
I guess so. Not sure... i was just going off emotions, ya know irrational behavior, im tryin to be more 'liberal' in my ways. See im open minded.

 

[acoustix]

:lol :lol
I guess so. Not sure... i was just going off emotions, ya know irrational behavior, im tryin to be more 'liberal' in my ways. See im open minded.

Strangle yourself with dental floss.

 

[demon]

:lol :lol
I guess so. Not sure... i was just going off emotions, ya know irrational behavior, im tryin to be more 'liberal' in my ways. See im open minded.

On the one hand you bash liberals in that post, but on the other hand you admit your claims were full of shit. So I guess you're even, now, and can back out of this thread and act as though nothing happened before you're really made to look like the ignorant jackass that you are.

 

[Jdw40223]

Im not backing out of shit. I thought his sacasm was funny. Let's be sensible, not inflamitory. I think the article wasn't that potent to post. IMO the telecom industry doesn't define Bush or Conservatives. These are general ideologies. Your party may think one way, but who says you should only think like your party? i jsut wonder however, how many "libs" - for lack of better broad generalization, REALLY DO hate the government/country/god/everything just b/c it's against the idealogies of Bush/REpubs.

 

[Hitokage]

Im not backing out of shit. I thought his sacasm was funny. Let's be sensible, not inflamitory. I think the article wasn't that potent to post. IMO the telecom industry doesn't define Bush or Conservatives. These are general ideologies. Your party may think one way, but who says you should only think like your party? i jsut wonder however, how many "libs" - for lack of better broad generalization, REALLY DO hate the government/country/god/everything just b/c it's against the idealogies of Bush/REpubs.

Bush is for babies, and you know what? I punch every one I see.

 

[Jdw40223]

Bush is for babies, and you know what? I punch every one I see.

You would.. b/c you act out emotional, very irrational. we aren't a good decsion maker now are we??

if you liked the first article:
OMG!! this just in http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050421/us_nm/autos_deaths_dc_1

Where's the outrage?!? That's 42,800 dead people, all preventable!

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

 

[Mercury Fred]

Let's be sensible, not inflamitory.

:lol
Pot, kettle, etc.

Of course, coming from the mind that brought us this sensible, non-[sic]"inflamitory" post, I'm not sure I should be surprised.

And why then do they proceed to stick "fake dicks" aka Dildos into each others vaginas and asses? hahaaha that is actually hilarious. Dykes are funny. next time i see one i will LOL in the butchface.

http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=42504&page=3&pp=50

 

[Incognito]

You would.. b/c you act out emotional, very irrational. we aren't a good decsion maker now are we??

if you liked the first article:
OMG!! this just in http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050421/us_nm/autos_deaths_dc_1

Where's the outrage?!? That's 42,800 dead people, all preventable!

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

What the fuck?
:lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[DCharlie]

These people... you know... just hate our freedom!

Who will liberate the US?

 

[acoustix]

You would.. b/c you act out emotional, very irrational. we aren't a good decsion maker now are we??

if you liked the first article:
OMG!! this just in http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050421/us_nm/autos_deaths_dc_1

Where's the outrage?!? That's 42,800 dead people, all preventable!

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

WHAT ON GODS GREEN EARTH DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING??

END YOURSELF!

 

[Nerevar]

You would.. b/c you act out emotional, very irrational. we aren't a good decsion maker now are we??

if you liked the first article:
OMG!! this just in http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050421/us_nm/autos_deaths_dc_1

Where's the outrage?!? That's 42,800 dead people, all preventable!

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

WHAT
THE
FUCK

 

[Jdw40223]

:lol
Pot, kettle, etc.

Of course, coming from the mind that brought us this sensible, non-[sic]"inflamitory" post, I'm not sure I should be surprised.

http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=42504&page=3&pp=50

Im glad im important enough to research... but that's a true statment. I stand behind it.


another 'lib' article: (only 999,998 to go)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/csm/20050419/ts_csm/ademsx

. . . Democrats aren't gaining from the other side's losses. Polls show the GOP congressional leadership is less popular than the president - but the Democratic leadership fares still worse. And even among rank-and-file Democrats, only 56% approve of their own congressional leadership, according to the Pew Research Center. Among Republicans, the analogous number is 76%.

It should come as no surprise, of course, given the massive split and disparate views of the democrats' out-of-touch left wing (those who nominated John Kerry)

 

[Nerevar]

Im glad im important enough to research... but that's a true statment. I stand behind it.


another 'lib' article: (only 999,998 to go)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/csm/20050419/ts_csm/ademsx

. . . Democrats aren't gaining from the other side's losses. Polls show the GOP congressional leadership is less popular than the president - but the Democratic leadership fares still worse. And even among rank-and-file Democrats, only 56% approve of their own congressional leadership, according to the Pew Research Center. Among Republicans, the analogous number is 76%.

It should come as no surprise, of course, given the massive split and disparate views of the democrats' out-of-touch left wing (those who nominated John Kerry)

Dude, what in the hell are you talking about? How does this apply to the topic at all? Are you insane?

 

[Hitokage]

It should come as no surprise, of course, given the massive split and disparate views of the democrats' out-of-touch left wing (those who nominated John Kerry)

....

 

[Dan]

So uh, exactly how are these articles you're posting the equivalents of the original poster's linked article? I don't think automotive deaths and poll figures have anything to do with Bush removing people from office for reasons that have nothing to do with job performance.

 

[WedgeX]

:lol What the hell is going on today?

I still want an answer to this (I'm pretty damn curious):

Just a question (and one that's not rhetorical)...how many times have past Dem admins specifically taken Republicans off of commissions that set international industry standards?

 

[Mercury Fred]

Just a question (and one that's not rhetorical)...how many times have past Dem admins specifically taken Republicans off of commissions that set international industry standards?

I, too, am waiting for an answer to this.

 

[Boogie]

ENGLISH, motherfucker. Do you speak it?

:lol

 

[sc0la]

Just popping in to express my lolerskates.

Its like Ripclawe with ADD but less articulate and more grossly tangential (if that is possible)

 

[SA-X]

You would.. b/c you act out emotional, very irrational. we aren't a good decsion maker now are we??

if you liked the first article:
OMG!! this just in http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050421/us_nm/autos_deaths_dc_1

Where's the outrage?!? That's 42,800 dead people, all preventable!

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

ERROR: DIVIDE BY ZERO
*head explodes*

 

[AntoneM]

--edit--

doh! just read that "Americans are smarter than the were in November" thread or whatever it's called. I retract my statements, they were made by emotion which is not rational.

 

[demon]

hey, just cause you disagree with the guy doesn't make him a bad person, ffs, Jdw40223 can at least laugh at himself

No, no, we can laugh at him too. Watch...


HAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


See? It's all good.

 

[Dilbert]

Surely ALL Americans who worry about fatalities, and particularly those who espouse the "culture of life," will demand, absolutely DEMAND, lower speed limits and mandated, expensive safety measures to reduce these deaths to zero!

Because SUV rollover deaths jumped 7% to 2,821, we should start by banning SUVs, right?

If it would save 42,800 lives per year, we could all live with 30 mph speed-governed cars that sell for $40,000 (due in part to mandated safety measures). Right?

The government is killing us with its lax safety measures!! Who can we boycott? Protest? How about at least some righteous indignation?

STOP THE MADNESS!

 

[Shinobi]

:lol Funny thread this...

BTW, I argued a few months ago that the Bush administration displays traits of fascism. This is just one more example.

 

[sonicfan]

I can't believe the brazen corruption being demonstrated here. This is an industry group dedicated to developing standards, not a Republican meeting convention. It's sending a terrible message to industry - you either support the administration in power or you'll be forcibly removed from the market by government standards organization. How is this happening with no repurcussions?

Corruption? No, politics, welcome to its wonderful world.

Was it corruption when Clinton fired every US Attorney at the Justice Department in 1993 when he came to office and replaced them with his hand picked cronies? It had never been done before, but he had the right to do it.

Clinton almost never put somebody on a "team" that was not playing for his side. Bush is just figuring out that gee, maybe people who didn't support me, won't support the policies that I do.

 

[Nerevar]

Corruption? No, politics, welcome to its wonderful world.

Was it corruption when Clinton fired every US Attorney at the Justice Department in 1993 when he came to office and replaced them with his hand picked cronies? It had never been done before, but he had the right to do it.

Clinton almost never put somebody on a "team" that was not playing for his side. Bush is just figuring out that gee, maybe people who didn't support me, won't support the policies that I do.

there's a difference between reworking the bureaucracy because of politics and forcing opponenets out of standards organizations because of political alignment. The two are completely unrelated. It's worrying because people in the bureaucracy expect to have to answer to the government for their jobs, but people in the telecom industry don't. If you can't see the difference between those two cases than there's something fundamentally wrong with people's perceptions of the reach of the government's power.

 

[DarienA]

Is there a website that counts down how much time Bush has left in office?

EDIT: :lol I found a few

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushclock.htm

http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/bush_countdown.html

http://www.georgewgirls.com/

http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/17.html

 

[sonicfan]

there's a difference between reworking the bureaucracy because of politics and forcing opponenets out of standards organizations because of political alignment. The two are completely unrelated. It's worrying because people in the bureaucracy expect to have to answer to the government for their jobs, but people in the telecom industry don't. If you can't see the difference between those two cases than there's something fundamentally wrong with people's perceptions of the reach of the government's power.

Are you saying US Attorney's are "bureaucracy"? They are the people who look into corruption. They did not expect to have to answer to the White House's Chief Council office. Never in the history of the country had these people had to serve at the whim of the President, although technically they did, but no president had ever replaced the entire staff. Its like letting the fox pick which chickens get to guard thw chickenhouse.


Now sitting on some dry standards body, that is really basically a boondogle, not of high importance in the grand scheme of things. Calling only letting people who agree with you sit on this "corruption" is mind blowing.

 

[Nerevar]

Are you saying US Attorney's are "bureaucracy"? They are the people who look into corruption. They did not expect to have to answer to the White House's Chief Council office. Never in the history of the country had these people had to serve at the whim of the President, although technically they did, but no president had ever replaced the entire staff. Its like letting the fox pick which chickens get to guard thw chickenhouse.

In case you weren't aware, the US Attorney's office is part of the justice department, and therefore, part of the United States bureaucracy. The President is at the head of this bureacratic organization and is, therefore, well within his rights to pick who serves. Is that justifiable? No, not really, it should be the best man for the job - but the realities of Washington bureaucratic positions isn't really all that cut and dry. Allowing the President the right to manage the bureaucracy isn't inherently wrong though because the President himself is still accountable to Congress - by that thing we have called impeachment (which, might I remind you, was used on Clinton). That is supposed to be the President's "watchdog" group, not the US Attorney's office. That's how it set out in the Constitution.

Now sitting on some dry standards body, that is really basically a boondogle, not of high importance in the grand scheme of things. Calling only letting people who agree with you sit on this "corruption" is mind blowing.

Admittedly, the title is a little misleading (in order to get people into the thread). However, it does set a dangerous precedent. What would you say if Sony wasn't allowed to sit on the DVD forum by the Japanese government because they supported the opposition prime minister? How about the US government excluding representatives from Disney or Fox because they supported Kerry? Clearly, these international standards bodies have a lot of power and a lot of importance to the industry as a whole, and it sends a clear message to the industry that if you support the opposition you will be excluded from developing the standards that affect your entire business.

 

[Mandark]

sonicfan: If I recall correctly, the break from precedent wasn't the replacement of U.S. attorneys by a new administration, but the abruptness of the change, which was usually carried out more gradually. Here's an old National Review article that mentions it. I'm pretty sure that Carter and Reagan got their own set of attorneys as well.

I don't know if I would call this corruption, but it's certainly taking partisan loyalty to a weird extreme, even for this adminsitration. Why is it so important to have only Republicans discussing these issues?

My guess is that this is like the K Street thing, where the White House doesn't really care as much about the results of this individual conference as they do about sending a message: If you bet on the other team, we're going to make life hard for you.