Mercury Rising 鳯女

Politics, life, and other things that matter

Archive for the ‘political purges’ Category

An inspiration to Mssrs. Boehner, McConnell, Norquist, and Ailes

Posted by Charles II on November 25, 2012

John Lichfield, The Independent:

Seldom in any democratic country can such fraternal hatred, such bloody-minded determination to eviscerate nominal colleagues, have been exposed within one political party.

Forget John Major’s war with the Tory Eurosceptic “bastards” in the 1990s. Forget Republican primary attack ‘ads’ in the United States. For eight days, leading members of the French centre-right have been ripping one another apart live on radio and TV or exchanging insults and accusations by Twitter.

François Fillon, the gently-spoken man who was prime minister until six months ago, has accused his leadership rival Jean-Francois Copé of turning France’s largest political party into a “mafia”. Mr Copé has accused Mr Fillon and his supporters of “ massive, pre-meditated fraud” in an internal election for party president which ended in a near dead-heat last weekend.

Posted in international, political purges | Comments Off

Maybe Joe Arpaio should break up this Kochfight

Posted by Charles II on March 2, 2012

Via Avedon.

Matt Pearce, LAT:

…Charles and David Koch are taking to the courts to solve an ownership dispute involving the Cato Institute.

The president of the institute, a longtime pillar of free-market thinking in Washington — calls the move an attempt “to transform Cato from an independent, nonpartisan research organization into a political entity” with a “partisan agenda.”…

…the Kochs’ lawsuit …plunges into an internal battle over who owns 25% of the institute’s shares. The Kochs hold 50% of the shares and possibly stand to hold more if they win the suit.

The current Cato Institute was founded in, ironically enough, San Francisco in 1977, and the original began three years earlier as a Kansas nonprofit named the Charles Koch Foundation Inc.

It was recently chaired by William Niskanen, who retired in 2008 and died in October; his 25% ownership share transferred to his wife, which the Koch brothers believe under shareholders’ agreements must be sold back to the institute.

According to its latest tax filing for 2010, the Cato Institute’s four shareholders each had 25% stakes in the $52 million, 200-employee nonprofit organization.

Shares? Huh? Matt Yglesias says:

Something that was confusing me about the lawsuit between the Koch Brothers and the Cato Institute that Dave Weigel’s excellent backgrounder didn’t really explain was how is it that a 501(c)3 nonprofit like the Cato Institute has “shares” for people to be arguing over in the first place? After all, one of the rules of the game is that nobody owns nonprofits. The answer seems to be that Cato is formally organized as a membership institution that just happens to have a very small number of members. A more standard form of 501(c) organization seen in most DC think tanks is that you have no members and the board is a self-perpetuating governance body. But if you think of the “shares” at issue in the Koch/Cato lawsuit as memberships, then you can see why the legal issue arises about whether the late William Niskanen’s shares can be inhereted by his wife.

Dave Weigel, WaPo:

Eight years later [in 1985], as it relocated to Washington, a new agreement was drawn up that split the ownership of the think tank four ways: Crane, Koch, George Pearson, and William Niskanen. Each had 16 shares of the Cato Institute, $1 per share. But in 1991, as his brother David joined Cato and grabbed his own 16 shares, Charles Koch walked away.

Crane kept building Cato. Contact was severed; in a 2010 interview, Crane told me that he never quite understood why Koch bolted.

In the past, Charles Koch and his allies have criticized Cato for lacking real, provable results. Since then, David has found tremendous success with Americans for Prosperity, which in the Tea Party era evolved into one of the most powerful conservative organizations in electoral politics. (It has spent seven figures so far this year on TV ads against Barack Obama.) Draw your conclusions.

Jane Mayer, The New Yorker:

As I wrote in my New Yorker piece about the Kochs, “Though David remains on the board at Cato, Charles Koch has fallen out with Crane. Associates suggested to me that Crane had been insufficiently respectful of Charles‘s management philosophy, which he distilled into a book called “The Science of Success,’ and trademarked under the name Market-Based Management, or M.B.M.… A top Cato Institute official told me that Charles ‘thinks he’s a genius. He’s the emperor, and he’s convinced he’s wearing clothes.’ ”

Forbes has obtained the court documents here.

Posted in koch brothers, libertoonians, political purges | Comments Off

Brainserfs

Posted by Charles II on May 16, 2011

One of the saddest sights of all is academics whose work is compromised by ideological funding. The last line of defense in preventing the coal and oil company global warming denialists from overwhelming the debate has been independent peer review. But when corporate whores (with apologies to all honest sex workers) are injected into universities, then they are the ones doing the peer review. It’s like injecting cancer cells into a healthy body.

Lee Fang of Think Progress has an important piece describing how the Kochs have managed to use their money, and the destitution of academia to create just this situation. Here’s a list of the Koch brainserfs:

George Mason University
West Virginia University
Brown University’s Political Science and Economics departments
The Economics Department at Florida State University
Troy University’s Center for Political Economy
Utah State University’s Huntsman School for Business
Beloit College’s Student Research Program

Posted in our tax dollars at work, political purges, working the refs | Comments Off

I Can Haz Rule Of Law?

Posted by Phoenix Woman on January 22, 2009

Just Us

Per LHP at FDL, signs point to “yes”:

David Iglesias, one of the US Attorneys who were fired for actually trying to do their jobs in a fair, non partisan manner, has just been tapped by the Obama administration to prosecute Gitmo detainees. This is an inspired choice. Not just for the “up yours” message it sends to the loyal Bushies — though that adds some fun to the mix — but because his unique skill set positions him to handle all the permutations of prosecutions to come in these cases.

Go read the rest of Looseheadprop’s story. Rule of Law: It’s the new black! (And black is the new president.)

Posted in Barack Obama, Constitution, doing the right thing, DoJ, dope slaps for Dubya, Good Things, habeas corpus, Justice Department, Obama Administration, political prisoners, political purges, President Obama, rights, Rule of Law, US attorney firings, US Attorney scandal | Comments Off

A Political Purge of the Foreign Service?

Posted by MEC on June 25, 2007

William Fisher reports in Truthout that

The Bush administration is seeking to recruit foreigners to fill 16 critical jobs at the massive new American Embassy in Baghdad while close to 50 experienced American Foreign Service Officers remain in legal limbo at the State Department in Washington.
  

[…]
 

The pool of up to 50 in limbo consists of seasoned Foreign Service Officers who have had their security clearances suspended by State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS). [An organization known as Concerned Foreign Service Officers] says DS frequently suspends security clearances based on bogus allegations, without due process, and often takes years to complete its investigations. During that time, experienced diplomats cannot serve abroad and are given make-work assignments in Washington.
 

[…]
 

According to CFSO, “None of the Officers in question is accused of any crime, nor any act against the interests of the United States. Almost all of them are accused of technical violations of a security regulation; the vast majority having to do with a decades-out-of-date cold-war-era contact-reporting policy that even the Department itself has acknowledged is contradictory and obsolete.”
 

[…]
 

In a related development, the Bush administration is urging Congress to give the State Department authority to place diplomats with suspended security clearances on “leave without pay” (LWOP) – thus effectively ending most of their careers.

What was your first thought about why these experienced Foreign Service officers are being removed from their regular positions because of trivial violations of obscure rules? Mine was that this campaign of suspensions sounds very much like the bogus reasons the “insufficiently loyal” U.S. Attorneys were purged from the Department of Justice. I’d like to know more about the suspended officers — and about the new hires who are doing the jobs these experienced people could be doing.

Posted in abuse of power, BushCo malfeasance, Iraq war, political purges, State Department | 2 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: