Taking our own to task
By krempasky Posted in Republicans — Comments (13) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Once again, lest we be accused of simply carrying water for the Administration, let me say that this report about the Education Dept. paying Armstrong Williams to promote "No Child Left Behind" stinks. It stinks bad.
When the Administration was selling its Prescription Drug Plan to the public in 2003, it paid to create television ads that appeared to be news broadcasts highlighting the positive aspects of the gajillion dollar boondoggle. The Administration was slapped by the General Accounting Office for propagandizing with taxpayer money.
Now, it appears that the Department of Education spent about $1 million with Ketchum (a massive PR firm) to drum up support for the President's signature education program. Part of that million (a healthy $240K) went to Armstrong Williams, a prominent black conservative pundit.
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.
Not only is this a smarmy use of tax dollars - it's ridiculously lazy public relations.
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."
Hey, is it just me or is a more resonable response, "Yes, I'd be glad to help. No, you need not pay me a quarter million to do it." I'm not sure if there's anyone left at Education who was responsible for this deal - but someone ought to be sacked for it.
« Burn the Witch — Comments (18) | The Battle Begins — Comments (1) »
Taking our own to task 13 Comments (0 topical, 13 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Heck, how about we fire Paige and shut down Education completely? It's the only way to be sure.
More than half seriously on that. I'm guessing that this is precisely the sort of government stupidity/waste that drives the fiscal conservatives nuts; I don't know if it was illegal, but it didn't have to be in order to be an official Bad Idea.
-M
According to the article I read, the White House is distancing itself from this, saying that the contract was the Education Department's business.
Thoughts?
Why personnel matters. The fact that political appointees probably sat around a conference table and approved a plan to use tax money to flak for a law that had already passed is amazingly disappointing. Did NO one say, "hmm...guys, you can't be serious!"
....the chance that the White House liaison at Ed didn't know about this is rather low.
If you have to pay commentators -- conservative commentators, no less -- to promote your idea, maybe that should be a clue that it was a bad idea to begin with.
If the administration is going to ride the edge of ethics to promote something, make it something good. Throw a quarter mil to somebody to push tort reform or social security reform.
Note to administration officials: I am available.
The Department of Education should have been closed two decades ago. Our government is forcing taxpayers to inculcate dismal streams of consiciousness.
This won't do.
. . .reimbursement is in order. On the other hand, noting from other sites that our friends on the left seem to suddenly object to bought and paid for "journalism" tends to provoke giggles.
Can you provide an example of one of your "friends on the left" who used to approve of "bought and paid for 'journalism'" but now does not?
Or of the apparently rampant examples of bought and paid for journalism on the left?
Or could you spend more than a sentence on the topic at hand before veering back to the no doubt, more comforting "but-the-democrats-are-worse" line of thinking.
It is hard to believe that this contract with Williams was a lawful expenditure of public funds.
Lawful or not, Williams ought to give the money back.
On the news last night he said he didn't have to and would not.
in light of this thread.
heard him on oreilly last night and I don't recall every word, but he seemed to say that he was subcontracted as he also owns distribution/network and hence the Paige ads were run on that.
I'm not saying he was right to do this, clearly it fails the smell test, but I'm not sure its quite as evil as everybody has made it out to be.
There simply isn't any defense of this to be mounted. One hopes it will be found somehow illegal -- and somehow reimbursed.
$240,000 is at least a small company's worth of body armor, right there.