• commentary
  • TUESDAY JANUARY 13 2009 6:00 AM

Bush Guy Moves To Baby Town

One of the great things about Obama taking over is we get to watch corrupt, horrible government employees lose their jobs. Take the Pentagon. Last month, the Obama team announced 90 douchebags would not be coming back. They didn’t actually use the term “douchebags,” but let’s face it, that is an extremely appropriate description.

Despite keeping Defense Secretary Robert Gates in the Pentagon, President-elect Obama’s transition team informed 90 Bush appointees their services will not be needed after Inauguration Day.

Scott Gration, a senior official on Obama’s transition team, called and emailed several of President Bush’s Pentagon appointees about 10 days ago to inform them they were being dismissed.



A fucking email? Holy shit. How much of a complete and total asshole do you have to be to receive a termination email? I think dogs get better treatment. Of course, these people should actually be in jail, so they are getting off easy.

Now, if all was good in the world, we would be able to watch live on video as these people received the news of their future non-employment. But sometimes the world is cruel and we only get a bit of their public crying.
Special assistant to the Secretary of Defense, Jim O’Beirne, was none to pleased at the manner of notification.

Those calls and emails were followed up by an email from Jim O'Beirne, the special assistant to the secretary of defense for White House liaisons, who expressed exasperation that Gration informed the employees directly instead of letting O'Beirne's office know first.

"With regard to the process, I am unable to provide an explanation," O'Beirne wrote on Tuesday in the email, which was obtained by The Hill. "I played no part in it, and I will not speculate why matters were handled as they were."



I will. You’re a bunch of cunts. You ran a frightfully pathetic war and ruined our military. That’s just a guess.

But O'Beirne made it clear in the email that in some cases of dismissal, he thinks the employee's politics played a role in their being let go.



Um. Yeah. One man’s “politics” is another man’s insane “ideology.” O’Beirne explained it was their adherence to the Bush doctrine that played a part in their termination.

In the email, O'Beirne tried to assure the soon-to-be displaced employees that the decisions were based on "policy change in the Obama administration" and not based on performance.



Jimmy, those two things are not mutually exclusive.

However, he said, if employees "harbor residual doubts" then they can "content yourself with the likelihood that it was your outstanding performance as a Bush appointee that drew the opposition's attention to you."

"In that regard, you may take justifiable satisfaction that you were among the first to be chosen," O'Beirne wrote.



Can you give outstanding performances during the worst presidency in the history of our country? Is that possible? Doesn’t that mean your outstanding performance greatly contributed to the epic failure? I think it does. “Hey, I was the treasurer of Death Town,” doesn’t get you much with me. Going full speed doesn’t mean shit if you’re going the wrong way. You can pat yourself on the back for driving 170 miles an hour, but if you ended up in Fresno, it’s still a massive fail.

To see who these people are, we need only look at the now fired Jim O'Beirne. He’s one of the guys who helped turn Iraq into a complete and total fucking mess. Ever heard of the Coalition Provisional Authority? They were the guys who spent their time trying to implement a flat tax in Iraq, while a religious war took hold. They were trying to get the Baghdad Stock Market rolling, while suicide bombers blew up everything in sight.

If there is one book you should read to understand how poorly the war was run in the first year, it’s Imperial Life in the Emerald City. It is a shocking and brutal account of the extreme politicization of the Iraq War. And it was all done at the hands of guys like Jim O’Beirne. Here’s an excerpt from the book.

After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.

To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .



Yes, abortion. During interviews to determine whether people were qualified to rebuild Iraq. Abortion. Take a moment now to remember what Jimmy said in that email.

If employees “harbor residual doubts” then they can "content yourself with the likelihood that it was your outstanding performance as a Bush appointee that drew the opposition's attention to you."



This is the guy now complaining like a bitch about how he and others were fired. Welcome to the world of irony, Jimmy. If you asked a qualified government employee with experience in nation building, whether he was for or against Roe v. Wade and then excluded him based on his views on abortion, that was “outstanding performance.” This is exactly what Jim O'Beirne did. Experienced individual after experienced individual were excluded based on their political beliefs. The State Department was completely excluded from post war planning, because they did not adhere to the insane ideological plans of neo cons like Jim O'Beirne.

Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.

The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.



Today we should celebrate the pain and removal from government service of O’Beirne. He is a shining example of the worst our country has to offer.

To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought résumés from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills or postwar rebuilding experience.

Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's résumé and pronounced him "an ideal candidate." His chief qualification was that he had worked for the Republican Party in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.



That’s why Iraq turned into the epic disaster it is.

"I'm not here for the Iraqis," one staffer noted to a reporter over lunch. "I'm here for George Bush."



And now you're not anywhere. See how that works?

Imperial Life in the Emerald City should be required reading for every American.


FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.


 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
mydogfarted

mydogfarted

Oakland, NJ
June 2003

JAN 13, 2009 08:07 AM



In the email, O'Beirne tried to assure the soon-to-be displaced employees that the decisions were based on "policy change in the Obama administration" and not based on performance.



Happens in corporate America all the time - one company takes over another, cleans house and runs things their way. You don't see Bush's cabinet members complaining about being out of a job in a week, do you Mr. O'Butthole?

Hey, at least they called and e-mailed. Tesla Motors notified some of there employees they were being terminated via a blog posting.

formerviking

formerviking

Denver, PA
May 2006

JAN 13, 2009 08:12 AM

Think I'll just hang around & see if any conservative tries to defend this . This is the kind of thing that happens when you can't separate logic from blindly following someone / something .

Reaver

Reaver

I'm lost
August 2003

JAN 13, 2009 08:50 AM

Oh, man! Remember when Bush fired all of those Clinton appointees and there was a huge outcry?

Bam!

Now it's all good to dismiss someone because of politics right? How very amusing.

Westley

Westley

Vatican City
April 2004

JAN 13, 2009 09:02 AM

Reaver said:
Oh, man! Remember when Bush fired all of those Clinton appointees and there was a huge outcry?

Bam!

Now it's all good to dismiss someone because of politics right? How very amusing.


Oh man! Remember when you got Bush firing Clinton appointees confused with Bush firing Bush appointees in a half-assed attempt to play turnabout?

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JAN 13, 2009 09:25 AM

indeed. remember when the problem with the firings wasn't the fact that they were fired, but rather who ordered them fired, and why? remember when we had three branches of government?

Reaver said:
Now it's all good to dismiss someone because of politics right? How very amusing.


it's perfectly acceptable for an incoming president to dismiss someone from a presidentially-appointed position because of politics. what is not acceptable is to dismiss someone because of their ongoing investigation into your party's corruption. which is what happened, with Bush.

Bartlebee

Bartlebee

United Kingdom
February 2007

JAN 13, 2009 09:29 AM

However, he said, if employees "harbor residual doubts" then they can "content yourself with the likelihood that it was your outstanding performance as a Bush appointee that drew the opposition's attention to you."

"In that regard, you may take justifiable satisfaction that you were among the first to be chosen," O'Beirne wrote.



I bet some will be satisfied by that, "I loved Bushy so much they fired me over him" tongue

Stiles

Stiles

Oakland, CA
November 2002

JAN 13, 2009 09:40 AM

Reaver said:
Oh, man! Remember when Bush fired all of those Clinton appointees and there was a huge outcry?

Bam!

Now it's all good to dismiss someone because of politics right? How very amusing.



What huge outcry? Nice victim complex you have there.

Homme

Homme

Los Angeles, CA
January 2009

JAN 13, 2009 10:22 AM

Westley said:

Reaver said:
Oh, man! Remember when Bush fired all of those Clinton appointees and there was a huge outcry?

Bam!

Now it's all good to dismiss someone because of politics right? How very amusing.


Oh man! Remember when you got Bush firing Clinton appointees confused with Bush firing Bush appointees in a half-assed attempt to play turnabout?



Bravo, sir. Bravo!

ericwine

ericwine

Charlotte Hall, MD
January 2007

JAN 13, 2009 10:41 AM

I guess they forgot that it's routine for political appointees to be replaced with a change of administrations, especially when it's a change of party. Just because Bob Gates is staying for a year or two doesn't mean everyone else is. Gates is probably glad to be rid of most of them anyway.
Tempest in a teapot. (Though O'Beirne sounds like a candidate for AFR.)

Aael

Aael

USA
November 2006

JAN 13, 2009 11:20 AM

I honestly don't think they get the fact that political appointees are cleared out after every presidential run. It is part of the job when you take it. Everything O'beirne said seemed to be some justification like it was a actual firing not a changing of the guard

Katieesq

Katieesq

USA
June 2008

JAN 13, 2009 11:51 AM

^^^ But the transition team didn't even "clear out" appointees per se. Sure, 90 appointees were dismissed, but that was out of 250. Once again, Obama has shown a measured approach to governance that has characterized his entire political career and his presidential campaign. There is no story here.

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

JAN 13, 2009 06:46 PM

Katieesq said:
There is no story here.



Yes, and the clear and obvious distinction between the Bush midterm firings and the Clinton/Bush/Obama inaugural firings has been explained to conservative posters here (almost certainly including Reaver) ad nauseum. But still, this absurd comparison gets trotted out every single time someone makes reference to the firing of appointees of any kind, usually by the same people. Even curiouser, once the comparison is rebutted, that drive-by conservative is never heard from again on the subject (until another thread about it is started several months later.)

This leads me to believe that one or all of the following things are true:
1) They just don't care to understand the world outside of soundbytes and BUSH = GOOD and CLINTON = BAD,
2) They know that the comparison is nonsense, but just do it to get a rise out of people, or
3) They are so very steeped in the vapid morass of In-One-Ear-and-Out-the-Other Talk Show Wingnuttitude that the stupidity of the argument is forgotten entirely and they themselves need reminding of it.

Frankly none of the above would surprise me, and I seriously, seriously doubt that any other explanation could be plausible.

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

JAN 13, 2009 08:38 PM

Subrosa said:
Frankly none of the above would surprise me, and I seriously, seriously doubt that any other explanation could be plausible.



You forgot to end your post with "Bam!"

Hussein

Hussein

I'm lost
March 2004

JAN 13, 2009 08:39 PM

*cracks another beer*

abbazappa

abbazappa

Sacramento, CA
June 2006

JAN 13, 2009 09:59 PM

i don't have a problem with a changing of a guard since McCain would have done the same thing. I am sure that often the people being let go usually always make some snarky comment about it to help them deal with the fact they would leave. The only difference now is that its a lot easier to find out what the comments were and the Neoconservatives are not too popular right now (and rightfully so). Although I do with people would not act like being Conservative and Neoconservative mean the same thing.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next