Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Republican Party outsources fund raising to India

Politics Fund raising Outsourcing Republicans 2004

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Palisades

Palisades

    Northern Lights

  • Islander
  • 7,753 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:08 PM

How India funds Bush's campaign: Asia Times

Bush campaign ran from Noida call centre: Hindustan Times

Not that it really surprises me, especially since it's the Republican Party we're talking about.
"When the Fed is the bartender everybody drinks until they fall down." —Paul McCulley

"In truth, 'too big to fail' is not the worst thing we should fear – our financial institutions are now on their way to becoming 'too big to save'." —Simon Johnson

FKA:
TWP / An Affirming Flame / Solar Wind / Palisade

#2 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:17 PM

That's consistent with what Bush says, though. Aside from the unfortunate steel tarrifs, Bush has been pretty strong on free trade. Outsourcing is perfectly consistent with his political platform. It's Kerry that's using protectionist rhetoric, albeit with a pretty strong free trade voting record. I'd be surprised if Kerry practices what he preaches and has his call center in the States, but I suppose it's possible....
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. § 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#3 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:28 PM

It is consistent with a philosophy that everyone's entitled to invest his/her money where it's most efficient and foreign countries are welcome to participate in our economy, but GEWD GAWD, given the emotions surrounding this kind of thing in current politics, why would he just set himself up for attacks like this? He might as well make a speech about how much he hates poor people and ni##s and Jews because the Bible says to.

#4 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:34 PM

Delvo, on May 22 2004, 12:26 PM, said:

but GEWD GAWD, given the emotions surrounding this kind of thing in current politics, why would he just set himself up for attacks like this? He might as well make a speech about how much he hates poor people and ni##s and Jews because the Bible says to.
Kinda doesn't say much for his intelligence does it.   :angel:
Posted Image

#5 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:41 PM

Considering the way the fnding structure works Bush probably wasn't even told anything about it as advisors and lower echelon people simply contracted out to whoever was cheapest and then informed the president that the task was done. Contrary to some opinions candidates don't have complete control over every aspect of thier campaigns and that goes for Kerry, Bush, Clinton, anyone. Thier is simply no way one human being could manage the level of rescouce allocation and management details that go into such thing, which is why such large nubers of assistants and helpers are needed to actually handle the details like in any large undertaking.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#6 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 02:58 PM

So it's all because of people like Rov?

#7 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 03:17 PM

Delvo, on May 22 2004, 12:56 PM, said:

So it's all because of people like Rov?
:lol:. Sadly, yes. There are entirely too many people like myself running about, and the closer you get to DC, the truer it is. ;).
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. § 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#8 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 03:20 PM

more people like Rov?!?!?!

it boggles the mind.

#9 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 03:42 PM

tennyson, on May 22 2004, 11:39 AM, said:

Considering the way the fnding structure works Bush probably wasn't even told anything about it as advisors and lower echelon people simply contracted out to whoever was cheapest and then informed the president that the task was done. Contrary to some opinions candidates don't have complete control over every aspect of thier campaigns and that goes for Kerry, Bush, Clinton, anyone. Thier is simply no way one human being could manage the level of rescouce allocation and management details that go into such thing, which is why such large nubers of assistants and helpers are needed to actually handle the details like in any large undertaking.

^ I happen to agree with this.  

Most leaders delegate and get either a progress report or a 'Done Deal' acknowledgment.  I'm not concerned with the nature of power and how it is delegated.  Everyone does it, it's the nature of power and the mark of real leadership to do it effectively.  It is the *effectively* part that bothers me when I hear stories like this.

I take exception to those in power who aren't clear with juniors (those delegated to) regarding the manner and means of accomplishing a goal.  It smacks of poor leadership.  And this is my concern no matter what side of the aisle it happens on.  A leader has to make sure that those he delegates to are acting as 'he' would, were he the one doing it himself.  This is effective delegation, and the mark of a good leader.  Just as poor delegation is ineffective, and a mark of poor leadership.

While the outsourcing probably as the cheapest bid on the job, it is just another issue to use to attack Bush.  While the economics of it is consistent with Bush's politics, the potential political quagmire may not be worth it.  How much money from the campaign coffers will be used to combat negative PR on this?  And it could have all been avoided by simply keeping the reelection solitications at home.

It just has to beg the question, what were they thinking?  Not Bush, his advisors, or whoever made the decision... Why hand a loaded gun to your opponent?  The economy is on its way back, but jobs are still an issue.  If I were a Republican (I am not, neither am I a Democrat), I'd wonder why jobs weren't being created for American Republicans at home--the PR value is a vote getter. It might be cost-efficient, but there is more to look at than cost in money and reelection resources, there is the cost in PR--bad PR.

And with the election now seemingly neck and neck, why take the chance of being perceived as taking jobs away from home?  All these little things can add up on election day, and a leader would (or should) know that.  A leader that doesn't delegate with clear intention and instruction bothers me.  While one man could not and cannot keep his eye on each and every detail--it is exactly because he cannot that he has to make good choices in those he delegates to.  He has to be clear and concise in the instructions so that stuff like this doesn't come back and bite him in the ass.

Leadership that doesn't demonstrate a grasp of this and instead uses the "I didn't know this was going on" routine tends to make me very uncomfortable with the actual ability to lead.

Just my 2 cents...

~ Cait

Edited by Caitriona, 22 May 2004 - 05:42 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#10 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:00 PM

Quote

Leadership that doesn't demonstrate a grasp of this and instead uses the "I didn't know this was going on" routine tends to make me very uncomfortable with the actual ability to lead.

And *both* campaigns are guilty as sin on this one.  I'd love to be in charge of Kerry's campaign.   :devil:
Posted Image

#11 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:15 PM

Una Salus Lillius, on May 22 2004, 12:58 PM, said:

Quote

Leadership that doesn't demonstrate a grasp of this and instead uses the "I didn't know this was going on" routine tends to make me very uncomfortable with the actual ability to lead.

And *both* campaigns are guilty as sin on this one.  I'd love to be in charge of Kerry's campaign.   :devil:
Exactly!

All political party-line rhetoric aside, the quality of leadership shown by the candidates has plummeted to an all time low imo.  No one seems to take responsibility for the decisions they make (the people they hire and delegate to) and as a consequence we have leadership that passes the buck instead of it 'stopping' where it should.

I'm dismayed, not only in the leadership, but, in an electorate that accepts these kinds of excuses from its leaders and 'possible' leaders.  I'm not comforted as I sit at home knowing that Bush has so little control over what his juniors are doing.  It shows that he has no control over his administration.  I am not one of the people who thinks that Bush sits up at night making each and every tiny decision and it is "all his fault"--because it isn't.  

But he is responsible for those he hires to do a job.  That is the nature of the buck stopping at his door.  He delegates the power, he is responsible for how that powers is used or abused by those he delegated to.  It is as simple as that, and a leader knows this.

That said, I'm not any more comforted by the thought of Kerry doing the same thing only with different 'pet' projects.  No, I'm not impressed at all.

~ Cait

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#12 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:28 PM

The one saving grace of this outsourcing thing is that CEO’s are now being replaced with foreign workers. If I remember correctly the new head of Coke a Cola, is an Australian, and He’s not the only one. I am surprised that the members of the entertainment industry are so forgiving of outsourcing.

They have my job and are coming to get yours, and don’t you dare look to me for help when your child is sick and you can’t afford the medication. But then the Cancer may kill me before I get the chance to go back to work, and have to flip burgers 16 hours a day. New jobs may very well be coming on line, but they are in no way keeping up, with the growth in population, the number of jobs being sent over seas, and the needs of our quasi-legal immigrants.

Sparky::
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#13 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:40 PM

According to the first article the fundraising using the India based company was underway before it was even clear that "outsourcing" was going to be a campaign issue at all and such fundraising had stopped about a month ago. According to the timeline provided in the article there would have been no way to determine that this would be something that the other side could use to attack the campaign when it was started because it wasn't even an issue yet. How it could have been used to hurt the campaign wouldn't have even been something entering the mind of whoever did it, since the only issue that would have existed when the service was ordered was how much it would cost. Then it became a campaign issue and even if Bush or his next level of advisors was actively looking for it the job had already been contracted and the damage had been done since it was now a campaign issue.


This is just how everybody does it and it is the next of complex hierarchial organizations that end in one person at the top. It is impossible to effectively micromanage such a massive undertaking and still produce anything like results.

Edited by tennyson, 22 May 2004 - 05:26 PM.

"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#14 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:48 PM

^^^ The off shore-ing of jobs has been an issue since the mid 1970’s.
Sparky::
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#15 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 05:11 PM

I agreed that all delegation happens in this manner.  I merely elaborated on it, expressing my own opinion regarding the responsibilities of delegation and effective delegation.  My concern is that of 'effective' delegation, not about delegation per se, the manner in which it happens or the necessity for it.  

~ Cait

Edited by Caitriona, 22 May 2004 - 05:40 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#16 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 05:17 PM

There have been many things that have been activist issues for decades but don't become campaign issues. There was no reason why outsourcing would have been a campaign issue now than it would have been in any other campaign anymore than any other of a host of issues like gay marriage, gas prices or any other long running issue would happen to be the issues that this campaign focuses on. The individual campaigns may have thier own particular issues to focus on but thier is an inherent uncertainty to any process that involves so many actors that renders a deterministic outcome all but impossible. In other words, what will be the actual campaign issues are in a significant minority of cases at least anyone's guess.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#17 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 06:03 PM

Jobs and the BS about, letting the manufacturing jobs go off shore, while we keep the So-called high tech jobs was an issue, in the Clinton presidential campaign. Anyone with any sense following the Dot Com failure knew, jobs where going to be a even bigger issue this time around. Given that the Internet was to be the job engine to make up for the lost manufacturing job or so Clinton, and Gore, said.

I am real glad that to you jobs are an “activist issue,” as to millions of Americans like me,  jobs are “a bread and butter issue.”

Sparky::

Edited by emsparks, 22 May 2004 - 06:06 PM.

Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.

#18 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 22 May 2004 - 06:39 PM

Every issue that has more than one supporter is an activist issue. It is not a dirty word for me as it is for some others. Changing anything requires organization and action, which cannot happen unless people decide to form that organization.
But things can be considered to be major issues by polticians and society and yet not become campaign issues. Thier are numerous serious things floating around such as the debt that haven't  had serious play as a campaign issue this time around.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#19 emsparks

emsparks
  • Forever Missed
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 23 May 2004 - 05:33 AM

Tennyson:
Don’t take this personally, there is a backlash building in this country. We are in the midst of the first of many national strikes over the continued loss of American jobs, and yet what do we get from the politicians on both sides, instead of honest help feeding our families, we get semantics.

The reason that both political parties are working so hard to keep the real job situation in this country a non-issue, is that the bulk of funding, again for both political parties, comes from the business community, and the quasi-upper class. Two groups that benefit greatly from copious amounts of illegal, unregulated, nonunion labor, labor that under threat of deportation they can treat just about any way they want to. An illegal worker may get a paycheck, but mostly they are paid in untraceable cash to avoid the tax paper work, what they don’t get is a minimum wage, vacations, holidays and sick leave. If an illegal worker doesn’t work they don’t get paid no matter how long they been with that employer. There are many, many Americans that also work under those conditions, however they must be paid the minimum wage, and can’t be threatened with deportation. The plight of the illegal worker in this country is economic slavery in its most horrific institutional form, facilitated by the crushing poverty of their homelands.

As of late when ever there is any movement towards social justice in this country, the reactionary minority starts screaming “bible” this and “activist” that. The bible does speak against homosexuality, but it also speaks about stoning to death those that don’t keep the Sabbath, by working on it.  The bible also condones slavery; multiple heterosexual wives, and let us not forget concubines. It is important to note that the bible also out laws making your hired hands, and your slaves work on the Sabbath.

Those Massachusetts, judges are merely doing their job, judging the constitutionality of a law, as they interpret it. But now they are “Activists.” However President Bush and the entire congress is selectively enforcing the immigration laws, opening the question of just who is playing fast and lose with the law. Keep pushing the jobs over seas and there is going to be social unrest, as the SBC dispute clearly indicates. The SBC strike is the tip of the iceberg, it would serve us all, if the Congress, and the President didn’t steer the ship of state into it. Welcome to the USS Titanic Mk2, the unsinkable ship of state, please remember to bring your own lifeboats.

Sparky::
Sparky::

Think!
Question Authority, Authoritatively.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Politics, Fund raising, Outsourcing, Republicans, 2004

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users