Skip to comments.
HUD secretary's blunt warning (It's Bush's way or the highway)
Dallas Business Journal ^
| 5/5/05
| May 5, 2006
Posted on 05/09/2006 10:44:34 AM PDT by Rebelbase
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Did HUD search and did not find this posted.
Jackson continued: "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."
Said by one of Bush's cabinet it's cronyism to the nth degree and despicable.
1
posted on
05/09/2006 10:44:37 AM PDT
by
Rebelbase
To: Rebelbase
I don't believe this article .....and I wouldn't give someone a contract that hated my boss either. Just call me a loyal person. :)
2
posted on
05/09/2006 10:47:40 AM PDT
by
Paige
("Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." --George Washington)
To: Rebelbase
He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something ... he said, 'I have a problem with your president.'
How about loosing the contract by the unnecessary and unprofessional comments as stated above. Not only was a comment like this unnecessary in the context, but it is an interesting reflection of the person if he feels the need to say this in the context.
Would you hire someone who comes to an interview and they choose to make the topic an unrelated rant about the President? I don't care if it were Clinton or Bush, I wouldn't hire someone with that little judgment.
3
posted on
05/09/2006 10:48:41 AM PDT
by
mnehring
(http://abaraxas.blogspot.com/)
To: Rebelbase
Ask yourself...did Bill Clinton give contracts to his enemies?
I don't think so.
4
posted on
05/09/2006 10:49:17 AM PDT
by
Dog
( One of the original members of The Thread Hijackers™.)
To: Rebelbase
Rejecting the application of a moron with horrible interpersonal skills is hardly "cronyism."
5
posted on
05/09/2006 10:49:26 AM PDT
by
wideawake
To: Rebelbase
This article is someone attempting to quote Jackson, NOT Jackson being quoted directly. It is a very misleading attempt to smear the administration, just like many others. Don't believe a word of it.
6
posted on
05/09/2006 10:49:57 AM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Rebelbase
At last, someone in the Bush administration uses his head for something other than a hatrack, and you find it "despicable?"
Do you perhaps think the Clinton admin was any different???
Or do you think that we should reward our enemies and slap down our friends?
7
posted on
05/09/2006 10:50:17 AM PDT
by
Redbob
To: Rebelbase
He shouldn't have SAID it, but if anyone is surprised by this actually HAPPENING--every day, in every administration or private business OR government office--they aren't too hip to reality.
It should be investigated because he said it. But it happens, always has, and always will.
Yet what's most amusing about this piece is the context of the revelation. Government contracts should be awarded on merit alone, but where was this "revelation" made? At a speech sponsored by a national minority real estate consortium.
8
posted on
05/09/2006 10:53:04 AM PDT
by
Darkwolf377
("I only respond to posts with reasoned opinions and facts, ignore irrational ones")
To: Dog; Pukin Dog
To publicly state one didn't get a contract because they don't support the President is heinous.
Bush is President of ALL Americans, not just those who voted for him.
9
posted on
05/09/2006 10:55:47 AM PDT
by
Rebelbase
To: mnehrling
How about loosing the contract by the unnecessary and unprofessional comments as stated above.Although the article isn't all the clear, I don't think there was ever a contract to lose. Selecting the contractor is only the first step in process. There is no contract until the the written agreement is actually signed by both parties. In fact, almost every Federal contract that I have ever reviewed contains a clause that says something like "this contract shall not be binding upon either party until signed by the contracting officer for the governing agency."
To: Dog
What really pisses me off is the fact that dirtbag cabinet secretaries of
any Party are doling out taxpayer money in the first place.
I guess the moral of the story is that if you deal in stolen goods you're going to end up acting like a thief.
L
11
posted on
05/09/2006 10:56:42 AM PDT
by
Lurker
(You can't bargain with a rabid dog.)
To: Paige
"Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president
Just award work to whoever can do the best job for the best price and not even ask who they like or don't like.
12
posted on
05/09/2006 10:57:14 AM PDT
by
P-40
(http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
To: Dog
Ask yourself...did Bill Clinton give contracts to his enemies? Ask yourself...was Bill Clinton a two-bit grifter and do we expect better from President Bush and his administration?
I admit that the person wanting the contract was an idiot for even bringing it up, but if he was the best and cheapest for the job his political opinion shouldn't have caused his contract to be canceled.
13
posted on
05/09/2006 10:57:47 AM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Never ask a Kennedy if he'll have another drink. It's nobody's business how much he's had already.)
To: Rebelbase
14
posted on
05/09/2006 10:59:07 AM PDT
by
Recovering_Democrat
((I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of Dependence on Government!))
To: Rebelbase
I simply do not believe it happened. If it did, Bush would have fired the guy upon hearing about it. FReepers have plenty of reason by now to not believe newspaper articles.
15
posted on
05/09/2006 10:59:38 AM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Rebelbase
16
posted on
05/09/2006 11:00:08 AM PDT
by
TankerKC
(¿José puede usted ver?)
To: Rebelbase
Good if it really happened. It wasn't meant to be an open OP/ED bitch session. For someones jockeying for contracts you don't knock anyone because you never know the real connections, just sell based on cost, how good you are and the services you provide.
17
posted on
05/09/2006 11:00:08 AM PDT
by
tobyhill
(The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
To: Redbob
First, I'm just going to pretend for a second that this story is true.
"...and you find it "despicable?"
Awarding contracts based on politics rather than qualifications is the definition of cronyism, and that is despicable not to mention politically stupid. If you personally don't find cronyism despicable fine, but don't be insulted when you are accused of it.
"Do you perhaps think the Clinton admin was any different???"
No, cronyism this is nothing new, but that does not make it good policy.
"Or do you think that we should reward our enemies and slap down our friends?"
HUD is not the president. The president is an elected official, HUD is a government agency, not sure how you got confused on that point.
18
posted on
05/09/2006 11:00:52 AM PDT
by
ndt
To: mnehrling
Bingo, keep politics out of it.
Why would you even say such a thing??????
19
posted on
05/09/2006 11:02:13 AM PDT
by
Lx
(Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
To: Rebelbase
Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a source cited for the quote. Was it caught on tape? Did someone jot it down? Is there corroboration to the original claim that these words were actually spoken?
Facts. We need facts.
20
posted on
05/09/2006 11:03:46 AM PDT
by
alnick
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson