Category: Ethics in Government

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics

These two items from the Center for Media and Democracy may leave a real strong “eeeewww!” taste in your mouth. At least they did for me:

1. The US Food and Drug Administration let an industry front group do its new consumer-information website–and the front group calls the effort “EthicAd”

2. A supposed poll was actually designed to spread very negative lies within the Jewish community about Obama, according to Politico.com. You’d think McCain, having been targeted by similar disgusting tactics in the 2000 election, would have killed this effort by the “Republican Jewish Coalition.”

Aren’t we better than this? Yuck!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Social and Economic Justice

Apparently there’s a serious proposal on the table to limit public access to Pennsylvania Avenue on Inauguration Day, and sell space to the highest bidders as corporate sponsors. This is what I wrote on the comment page:

The First Amendment is part of what makes America great. Taking away the right to assemble at the Presidential inauguration is a bad idea, and selling off to the highest bidder is just plain un-American. This is part of our heritage–to watch, and perhaps to p0eacefully protest.

As a business owner, a writer, and a concerned citizen, I urge you to maintain Pennsylvania Avenue for all citizens who wish to see the inaugural.

Deadline for comments is Monday. Make yourself heard.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Media Ethics, Politics, Web 2.0/Social Media

A certain popular website, that I will not name or link to, posted a bunch of Sarah Palin’s government-related e-mails posted through private, non-government, non-archived accounts.

This is, to put it mildly, not according to Hoyle, and especially because there was even a conversation about how to keep prying eyes away from these posts by using “private” email.

Of course, as Palin found out, e-mail is never really private. It’s not a secure medium. It’s also not particularly reliable. and you shouldn’t expect to have any privacy.

However…while Palin had absolutely no right to conduct state business over non-government e-mail–and certainly no right to delete the emails and the account and thus destroy evidence of possible wrongdoing in the Troopergate scandal, I have just as big an ethical bone to pick with the site that unmasked her.: it listed the emails of her correspondents, in big print, and in hackable form.

I’m sorry, but it is not anybody’s right to have the personal e-mails of her kids and others who corresponded with Sarah Palin. These people will have to go through a lot of time and trouble to change their addresses, notify correspondents, etc.

Palin was wrong. But so was this website.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics

So Obama used the phrase “lipstick on a pig.” He’s used it before and so has McCain, according to this morning’s NPR news report. In fact, they both used it long before Palin was on the scene.
It’s old and tired and clichéd, and Obama can do better. But if McCain’s people think this is an attack on Sarah Palin, let it be noted that this infers that McCain’s people, and not Obama, are the ones who think Palin is a pig.

Yet the same camp that wants to pretend Obama called Palin a pig has no shame about a really horrible distortion in a McCain-approved ad–that tries to paint Obama as teaching sex to kindergarteners because he supported a measure to help children distinguish between proper and improper touching–a measure that can actually reduce pederasty and help bring pedophiles to justice.

And that is truly vile. Oh yeah, wasn’t McCain the “maverick” who stood for ethics?

Karl Rove may be proud. But I am disgusted.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Media Ethics, Social and Economic Justice

These people have no shame! The Central Intelligence Agency actually had a table on the exhibition floor of Unity ’08, the conference for journalists of color organized jointly by (in alphabetical order) the Asian-American Journalists Association, the National Association of Black Journalists, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and the Native-American Journalists Association!

As the article points out, this is not an appropriate place for journalists to work. Here are two of the people interviewed on the segment:

JOE DAVIDSON: I don’t think that the CIA should recruit at conventions for journalists. I think that CIA members have pretended to be journalists in years past. They might still be doing it, I don’t know, but they certainly have done it previously. And I think that the knowledge that CIA agents have used journalism as a cover puts legitimate journalists in danger.

It’s certainly known that in other countries, journalists will report to their governments. That certainly is not the case, or certainly generally has not been the case, for American journalists. But we don’t want that perception. I think there really has to be a long distance between the role of a spy, even someone who does research in Langley, Virginia, and a journalist.

and

DENNIS MOYNIHAN: You know, in a climate where journalists are being laid of en masse by the media corporations, I think it’s unfortunate that an agency like the CIA can prey upon people. I mean, what are they going to be doing? Of course, they’re talking about open source intelligence gathering.

Well, that’s exactly how they gather names of alleged socialists or labor sympathizers in Indonesia, by forming lists. They’re going to be reading other reporters’ work and identifying subjects of interest to the U.S. security apparatus. I don’t think it’s good work for a journalist. There’s just a massive abuse of data collection that’s happening by the United States, principally.

The ACLU released a press report, a press release about waterboarding and CIA’s involvement in authorizing and coaching waterboarding. You know, why isn’t this guy being asked about it? I think some journalists here actually have confronted this recruiter, but this is one of the most controversial agencies functioning on the planet today, and it’s shocking that here, with between five and ten thousand journalists, and the guy isn’t getting grilled continually.

Several other attenders also comment. Go read or listen to the whole segment.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, media-general, Peace and War

It’s all over the blogosphere–but not in the mainstream news: Cheney’s office considered sending in heavily armed Navy Seals on boats disguised as Iranian craft to create an artificial incident so the US could go to war against Iran, according to Seymour Hersh. The project was rejected, as Americans killing Americans didn’t sound appealing. But that they even considered it makes you wonder–this goes beyond even the deceptions used to get us into Iraq.

And why is the msm so silent on this?

Hersh is one of the most distinguished investigative journalists of our time–the person who broke the My Lai massacre story during the Vietnam war, more than 30 years ago, and who has broken several stories about various nefarious deeds in the Bush administration.

If this allegation is true (as I suspect it is), it is without question grounds for impeachment and probably criminal prosecution. But where’s the investigation?

In the first five pages of Google results for hersh hormuz seals, there is exactly one bit of coverage of Hersh’s very serious allegation in the mainstream media, from WQXT, St. Augustine, Florida. There was a story on today’s Democracy Now, which is where I heard about it–but that’s not the mainstream media.

Today, my local paper had an article about Britney Spears’ father continuing legal oversight over her finances. Why is this news, while a plot to take an illegal action and disguise it as the work of a hostile government in order to enter a war goes unmentioned?

I don’t give a flying f about Brittney–but I sure do care about actions on the part of our government that lead to lives lost, decrease the effectiveness of our diplomacy, channel the resources of the US government into all the wrong places, etc.

Video clip and transcript of Hersh’s interview at the Campus Progress journalism conference. Here’s a quick bit:

HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.

Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can’t have Americans killing Americans. That’s the kind of — that’s the level of stuff we’re talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government

Philly.com (online edition of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News) reports that the mayor of Atlantic City was sentenced to three years probation for veterans-benefits fraud.

What I find most interesting is that the city government as an overall entity seems to have a problem with ethics:

Levy resigned in October from the mayoralty of the beachside resort city, concluding a year in which three City Council members were convicted on corruption charges, another was arrested for driving drunk in a city vehicle and a fifth was indicted for his part in an attempt to blackmail a sixth councilman.

Hmmm…could it be that legalized gambling fosters a climate where money counts more than virtue? Gambling has been Atlantic City’s major industry for decades.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics

Remember when Bush Ran in 2000, saying he’d be “a uniter, not a divider”? Hint: it was well before he started saying anyone who isn’t with us is against us.

Yet from Day One, this illegal administration has run the most partisan White House in my memory–and yes, I remember Johnson and Nixon. The latest partisan scandal (among too many to count, including the firing of US Attorneys, the persecution of Alabama’s Democratic governor, the packing of the supreme court and the entire federal judicial system with ideologues, the outing of Valerie Plame to get even with Joe Wilson, and about a hundred other examples) is the report that prospective hires at the Justice Department were screened for political conformity.

This made the mainstream news (I saw it in my local paper)–but I didn’t find a mainstream source quickly. Here’s the story as it appeared on Huffington Post.

Here’s a little excerpt:

As early as 2002, career Justice employees complained to department officials that Bush administration political appointees had largely taken over the hiring process for summer interns and so-called Honors Program jobs for newly graduated law students. For years, job applicants had been judged on their grades, the quality of their law schools, their legal clerkships and other experiences.

But in 2002, many applicants who identified themselves as Democrats or were members of liberal-leaning organizations were rejected while GOP loyalists with fewer legal skills were hired, the report found. Of 911 students who applied for full-time Honors jobs that year, 100 were identified as liberal–and 80 were rejected. By comparison, 46 were identified as conservative, and only four didn’t get a job offer.

The real mystery is why the Democrats haven’t been in open rebellion. Any Democrat who tried 1/10 of Bush’s shenanigans would have been impeached long ago.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Peace and War, Politics

I’ve been calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney for five or six years now. OK, so I’m not a Democratic Party bigwig, and they don’t have to listen to me. But Ramsey Clark was Attorney General under LBJ, and he’s been sounding the call at least as long as I have.

Why should these men be impeached?
A very abbreviated list:

  • A long litany of unconstitutional acts that have made us a “rogue state”: illegal wars, torture of prisoners, attacks on civil liberties, etc.
  • Massive corruption and favoritism, not to mention attacks on perceived “enemies” (shades of Richard Nixon)
  • Attacking the patriotism of those who disagree with them
  • Holding themselves, their private contractors,a nd their offshore prisons above the law
  • Interfering with elections
  • Firing US Attorneys who chose not to divert resources into their pet (and baseless) fight on non-existent voter fraud among Democrats and minorities
  • Either gross incompetence, gross malfeasance, or both in the response to Katrina

    • Again, this is only the tip of the iceberg. The current gang of ruffians gets my vote for the worst administration in U.S. history. Even Warren Harding did a better job.

    So therefore I take great pleasure in reading in today’s Cleveland Plain Dealer that Congressman Dennis Kucinich, perhaps Congress’ most honorable member, has finally introduced an impeachment resolution–35 counts of it! A reader comment notes it took 3 hours to read the whole thing.

    Of course, the Judiciary Committee has done nothing with his resolution last year to impeach Cheney, and will likely do nothing with this one unless Bush is foolish enough to actually try to start a war with Iran. I still don’t understand why the Dems have had no guts on this, even after they won a majority in Congress in 2006. What have they been waiting for?

    I am not going to defend in any way Bill Clinton’s lying under oath about his inability to keep his pants zipped
    –but if that was grounds for impeachment, the far larger crimes of Bush and Cheney should have been on the table a long time ago.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, media-general, Peace and War

    More on the scandal I wrote about Sunday regarding the Pentagon’s shills infiltrating the media in the run-up to the Iraq war.

    This from Jim Lehrer’s Online News Report. Lehrer’s guest was John Stauber, founder/executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy and author of Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq and other books:

    What happened here was a psy-ops campaign, an incredible government propaganda campaign whereby Donald Rumsfeld and Torie Clark, the head of public relations for the Pentagon, designed a program to recruit 75, at least 75 former military officers, as your report said, most of them now lobbyists or consultants to military contractors, and insert them, beginning in 2002, before the attack on Iraq was even launched, into the major networks to manage the messages, to be surrogates.

    And that’s the words that are actually used, “message multipliers” for the secretary of defense and for the Pentagon. This program continues right up to now.

    JUDY WOODRUFF: And is the essence of this that what they did was — what the Pentagon did was illegal?

    JOHN STAUBER: Yes, what they did was illegal. Now, the Pentagon might contest that, but we’ve had various laws on the books in our country going back to the 1920s. It is illegal for the U.S. government to propagandize citizens in this way.

    In my opinion, this war could have never been sold if it were not for this sophisticated propaganda campaign. And what we need is congressional investigation of not just this Pentagon military analyst program, but all the rest of the deception and propaganda that came out of the Bush administration and out of the Pentagon that allowed them to sell and manage this war.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail