We all know about Michael Powell at the FCC. But there’s more: from the NY Times
Do you know what makes Mr. Perry ideal of this position? He’s been a lobbist for Lockheed Martin, specifically lobbying the Department he’ll be general counsel for now (if confirmed, “if”, yeah right). But Mr. Perry won’t be alone in working for the Bush administration. His wife, Cheney’s daughter Elizabeth, was appointed last month by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs, a postition she held in 2002-2003.
It’s a family affair…
It’s amazing to me that all of the best and brightest are kith and kin.
I live in the DC area these days, but I’m a Pittsburgh Pirates fan because of where I grew up. I might head over to see them when they’re in town to play the Nationals.
Do you know what stadium I’ll be going to? And how it got its name?
I don’t think it’s fair to Michael Powell to suggest that he just got the job because of his father. Obviously, being Colin Powell’s son helped, but it’s not like President Clinton just picked him out of nowhere. He had been an antitrust attorney at the Department of Justice, and before that, a fairly good attorney in private practice.
Me, dense? Try picking an analogy that works next time, MM. You know why the stadium was named after him, as you asked, and it isn’t because he was JFK’s brother.
It says a great deal that that’s the best example you can come up with, in this example of the eternal GOP partisan quest for self-excusing tu quoques.
Enjoy the game, and don’t forget to be thankful that a commitment to public service is not so rare that it can’t occur in more than one family member at a time.
For your further edification, [url=http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=K000114]here’s a quick summary[/ur] of his accomplishments even prior to becoming Attorney General:
What’s the guy you’re defending here done for us by comparison?
But “the charge [of nepotism] was made”, you say - by whom and why? You should know damn well how easy it is to “make a charge”, and how cowardly it is to point out that “a charge was made” the way you just did. Gonna tell us the Clintons were accused of serial murder and drug-running too? It means just as much. You surely aren’t going to tell us that this Perry fellow got the job because he’s the best qualified.
Well, I happen to agree that a commitment to public service can be found in more than one family member at a time. Amazingly enough, this happens on the Republican side of the aisle too.
Can anyone prove that these individuals got jobs solely through family connections, and that they aren’t qualified for them in some way? I think the nepotism charge might stick then.
A tu quoque? Some might see it that way. But please note that I didn’t exactly attack Kennedy nor defend the Republicans here. So I might be saying your side is just as bad, or I might be saying there’s no merit to any of this, really.
So the man has already been general counsel for a federal agency, and he has experience with the Homeland Security department, the Justice Department, and the legislative branch. Why, he has credentials almost as impressive as Robert Kennedy’s at a similarly young age.
Given this experience, can anyone explain why this isn’t a good nomination, apart from a family connection within the administration? Keep in mind that denouncing the nomination on this basis alone would call the Kennedy nomination into question as well.
I wonder under which administration it was in which he gained all this experience. He sure did a whole lot of work in such a short time. I’m really impressed. The man must be a workaholic, because there’s no way his employer could possibly over-hyped his involvement in all those issues.
Laying aside the mere coincidence that he’s married to Cheney’s daughter, do you not find it the least bit inappropriate that the man who lobbied the Homeland Security Department on behalf of a contractor is now that department’s General Counsel? There once was a time when ethics required professional to avoid the appearance of impropriety. It seems now that all is required is avoiding irrefutable proof of impropriety.
But he was first named to the FCC (as commissioner, not Chairman) in 1997, when his father was in private life as the chairman of America’s Promise. I think his resignation had more to do with the fact that he had served on the Commission for almost 8 years, and was tired of it, and had been unsuccessful in his major goal as Chairman, which was relaxing the ownership rules.
Kennedy gained most of his experience prior to AG in service to the DOJ in a Democratic administration and the legislative branch controlled throughout that time by Democrats. It should be recalled that his family were big political movers and shakers in the Democratic Party at this time.
Murmur murmur, grumble grumble.
Well, you didn’t ask about this in your OP specifically, did you? You addressed the nepotism angle and made some other snide remarks, but now it looks like you’re shifting the goalposts since the nepotism tack is falling a bit flat.
Is it your contention that this appointment is unethical or illegal? If so, please present some evidence that a law or regulation is being broken.
Listen, chucklehead, you found it relevant to bring Kennedy’s government service into the discussion. It becomes necessary to point out at that point that he worked mostly for Democrats. He certainly did in the Justice Department from 1951-1952, which was at the tail end of the Truman Administration. From 1953 onward, he worked in the legislative branch where even the minority party gets staff appointments. After 1955, the Democrats had control of the Senate and Bobby Kennedy was given more responsibility.
There’s nothing wrong with this, mind you. Democrats typically work for Democrats, and Republicans for Republicans. But if you criticize the Perry appointment as a big nepotistic mess, then what on earth is the Kennedy appointment? Good government in action?