Steve and Jen bring you this daily review of the news
Premium Advertiser

News Blog Sponsors

News Links

BBC World Service
The Guardian
Washington Post
Iraq Order of Battle
NY Times
LA Times
ABC News

Blogs We Like

Daily Kos
Digby's Blog
Operation Yellow Elephant
Iraq Casualty Count
Media Matters
Talking Points
Defense Tech
Intel Dump
Soldiers for the Truth
Margaret Cho
Juan Cole
Just a Bump in the Beltway
Baghdad Burning
Howard Stern
Michael Moore
James Wolcott
Cooking for Engineers
There is No Crisis
Whiskey Bar
Rude Pundit
Crooks and Liars
Amazin' Avenue
DC Media Girl
The Server Logs

Blogger Credits

Powered by Blogger

Archives by
Publication Date
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
Comments Credits
Comments by YACCS
Wednesday, May 10, 2006

How stupid can you be?

Sure, boss, only our people get contracts

Covering For A Cabinet Secretary?

by georgia10
Wed May 10, 2006 at 06:49:12 AM PDT

Alphonso Jackson, secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, revealed in an April 28th speech that he believed it was logical to deny federal contracts to contractors who did not support the President. Now that his outrageous speech has sparked calls for an investigation, HUD officials are spinning like crazy to save Jackson's job. Think Progress has the official response:

Dustee Tucker, a spokeswoman for Jackson, told the Dallas Business Journal Tuesday that Jackson's comments at his April 28 speech were purely "anecdotal."

"He was merely trying to explain to the audience how people in D.C., will say critical things about the secretary, will unfairly characterize the president and then turn around and ask you for money," Tucker said. "He did not actually meet with someone and turn down a contract. He's not part of the contracting process."

Oh, ok. So it was just an fake story about illegal conduct, nevermind that he did not tell the audience that he wasn't serious. That makes it all better, right? But if it was some wacky parable pulled out of thin air, how to explain away the specifics in HUD's initial reaction to the story?

"On May 3, Tucker told the Business Journal that the contract Jackson was referring to in Dallas was `an advertising contract with a minority publication,' though she could not provide the contract's value."

So not only was Jackson lying to the audience, but Tucker was in on the fairytale as well?

Jackson wants us to believe his confession was concocted, but denying federal contracts based on support of the President doesn't seem that out of character for him. After all, Jackson is a Bush Pioneer. He is a man who had no problem aggressively campaigning for the President while on the taxpayer dime.

And maybe I would be able to accept HUD's illogical denial of the story if the agency had not lied to protect Jackson in the past. In 2002, HUD employee Richard W. Mallory was fired by Jackson for trying to expose the misuse of $1.8 million of federal funds by the San Fransico Housing Authority. Mallory, by the way, replaced another fired whistleblower.

When Mallory was fired for exposing the corruption, he wrote a series of letters to Alberto Gonzales and the secretary of HUD. He detailed how Jackson had orchestrated the cover-up and told him to not to makes waves, since the then-mayor of San Francisco (Willie Brown) was Jackson's friend.

When the press filed FOIA requests to obtain those letters, HUD denied they existed. That is, until they were leaked to the press. HUD, by the way, never launched an investigation into the corruption Mallory had detailed.

So color me skeptical now of HUD's claim that Jackson just made up the elaborate story. The agency has a history of shielding Jackson and of misrepresenting information. And besides, its "anecdote" explanation just plain doesn't make sense.

You know how I keep repeating how black Republicans lack character?

Well, Jackson, was in essence, bragging before white people how he had illegally denied a black-owned company a contract for not supporting Bush.

Think about how odious that is.

He knows blacks don't support Bush. He also knows that's irrelevant to contracting. At least among white people.

What kind of character does he have to brag about this? Would you vote for such a man?

Like Clarence Thomas, he wanted to make points by showing how he could punish black people to please whites. Only thing, the audience was horrified by the example.

posted by Steve @ 12:19:00 PM

12:19:00 PM

The News Blog home page


Editorial Staff

Add to My AOL

Support The News Blog

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
News Blog Food Blog
Visit the News Blog Food Blog
The News Blog Shops
Operation Yellow Elephant
Enlist, Young Republicans