Comments on: Bill Lynn Will Probably Be Confirmed Now, Cravenly

By: Brad W

Brad W — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 02:39:57 +0000

I just watched two hours of c-span where Senators blasted this Nomination because while Lynn worked in Government back in the 90's he was directly connected to fraud and misuse of taxpayer funds in the DOD. This guy is not the only one who can do the job! For crying out loud I could do the job! The thing we want here is truth and integrity in our Government and we are not getting that at any turn! It is time to STAND UP AND BE NOTICED AND STOP THE MADDNESS!!!! GET THIS BUM OUT OF THERE!

By: Brad W

Brad W — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:39:57 +0000

By: Former lobbyist could still do business with Raytheon from Pentagon

Former lobbyist could still do business with Raytheon from Pentagon — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:10:35 +0000

[...] doorway ban. And with Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin’s (D-Mich.) announcement which he is dropping his hold upon Lynn’s nomination, a trail is right away transparent for Lynn’s [...]

By: hockeynerd

hockeynerd — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:10:42 +0000

absolutely agree. bad idea by Levin

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:53:00 +0000

Jeff, It seems to me that you ought to lighten up a bit………

By: dahreese

dahreese — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:04:02 +0000

“The Senate Armed Services Committee will continue to insist that Mr. Lynn comply with a strict set of ethics rules that we apply to all nominees, including the requirement to recuse himself, for a period of one year, from any decisions involving his prior employer, unless specifically authorized to participate by an appropriate ethics official. “

Why just one year? After all, this is the kind of political/financial connectivity stuff that created the deregulation(s) of Wall Street in the first place. And it smells of Dick Cheneyism; you may not be on the board, but your friends will benefit from their contact with you.

By: Jeff Weinberger

Jeff Weinberger — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:08:21 +0000

I'm very comforted by the fact that we how have a half-wit dominatrix joining the discussion. Can you see Russia from your dungeon?

By: Jeff Weinberger

Jeff Weinberger — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:03:40 +0000

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds,” is the exact quote from Emerson, in “Self-Reliance”, who was not referring to matters of ethical principle when he wrote it. Obama's policy statement regarding lobbyists entering his administration and vice versa was based on a sound ethical principle and it is abhorrent at worst, and shortsighted at best, that days after he enunciated it to the world it was cavalierly being shoved aside. If he was going to allow exceptions to this rule, he should have stated such, and what the criteria might be for allowing such exceptions. Criteria like 1) he's the best candidate for the job and/or 2) he must recuse himself from all matters related to his former private sector relationships, might have been deemed acceptable or might not. But that's not how the deal went down.

By: Larry Senechal

Larry Senechal — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:32:06 +0000

Part of the problem with DoD and their egregious weapons acquisition process is that the driver is less what is really needed to meet America's defense needs but more what Defense contractors and their Congressional supporters think they need. The mind set is continually reinforced by ever revolving door of employment of senior retired military to DOD Defense contractors and on the reverse side,ss s appointment of Senior Defense Executives to key DoD leadership positions. Mr. Lynn's appointment is only the latest example, and SADLY on President Obama's watch. It's just more of the same

By: Bernard HP Gilroy

Bernard HP Gilroy — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:21:53 +0000

Can they not use Mr. Lynn in a different part of the administration?

If the idea is to give Bill Lynn a job, sure. If the idea is to fill the spot at DoD with the best person to execute it, maybe not so much. Any rule is going to need flexibility in its implementation. The test of Obama will be: How many waivers are granted? And will all the waivers be announced publicly and subject to external scrutiny?

I'm comfortable with him making a small (four?) number of waivers, because I can believe that, 3 or 4 times, the best guy turns out to be in contradiction with the policy.