Democrats Try to Rein In Fees on Consulting
(Interviews) and records show that the five (John Kerry) strategists and their firms ultimately took in nearly $9 million, the richest payday for any Democratic media consultants up to then and roughly what the Bush campaign paid its consultants for a more extensive ad campaign. Mr. Shrum and his two partners, Tad Devine and Mike Donilon, walked away with $5 million of the total.
(With) more money than ever on the line this time around, resentment has been building, donors and other operatives say, at how, win or lose, presidential elections have become gold mines for the small and often swaggering band of media consultants who dominate modern campaigns.
As a result, the Democratic presidential hopefuls are seeking to impose more controls on the consultants. In doing so, they are moving more into line with their Republican counterparts, who by and large have kept tighter rein on how they handle their media teams, which shape the candidates
What is really strange is this, people question why the voters are cynical, not just skeptical, of politicians? They are talking of all parties. It has often been said, when they die, they don’t bury them, they just screw them into the ground. Many old-timers at one time told an old riddle. “What are the 4 things you need to be a good politician? Answer, you need to be charged, indicted, convicted and then pardoned.” Every time something like this comes out, it remind us of this on ALL sides, parties and branches. This is the reason for the respect level, well, we need to look up to see bottom.
Grumpy
Heh,
Io lucre delenda est?
AW1 Tim, if you’re talking about the question, “Is this all about filthy money?” The answer is a definite YES! By the way, how do we begin to put a CASH value on the lives we have lost on this Global War on Terror? Then how do we put a CASH value on the young lives destroyed by the war? The irony is we have people like “Soldiers Angels” or “Project Valour-IT”. These people and many other groups and corporations are making the sacrifice for our vets and wounded troops. These are the people who are putting CASH back into the account for the wounded troops and their families. The true unsung heroes of this Global War on Terror are the families. God Speed
Grumpy
Lex, in your original post, you gave an interesting insight into your thinking. Personally speaking, my linguistic skills have seriously eroded. This is especially true of the archaic or ancient languages. The ancient languages are precise with no tolerance for error. Some of these Latin proverbs are like a coin with two sides. You need to know both sides of the coin, before you start. With this particular proverb, the assumption is the speaker knows the truth. For this discussion, we will call this side or any variation of it, “A.” This is not an error or mistake, but a knowing choice. On the other side of the coin, we have, “B.” Therefore, “B” becomes the liar’s knowing choice.
LEX, I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY! YOU DID FRAME YOU POST WITH THAT LATIN PROVERB.
As always,
Grumpy
It’s no big deal, Grump. The thrust of my point, such as it was, is that Democratic politicians seem ever so keen to provide an adoring public with ever more numerous and larger aid programs for, well – just about everything.
In order to fund these handouts first a wise elite must take from the people an increasing share of the money they have earned in the form of taxes. A billion here, a billion there. Pretty soon we’re talking real money.
Politicians work hard for the money they raise for elections. It is literally their life blood, just as your paycheck is to you. It just struck me as slightly ironic that these self-same politicians are now trying to reduce the “taxes” they spend on elite media consultants whom they hope will put them in a position to raise taxes on everyone else.
Or, rather, raise taxes on “the wealthy.” Because if it’s wrong for pols to pay too much to an elite group of opinion makers, is it not also wrong for us to give an increasing share of our income to the government in the hopes that the government will, having first filtered that money through the bureaucracy, give some of it back to us?
Falsum in uno…