The Rationalizer
So this guy, Randy Cohen, writes an ethics column for the New York Times and Times Magazine. His syndicated column is called "The Ethicist."
He violated the Times ethics policy donating $585 to MoveOn.org in August 2004. He says he didn't think it violated the policy at the time (though he now concedes it does), because he thought of MoveOn as nonpartisan.
MoveOn in August 2004, was nonpartisan.
Well, here's the Wayback Machine version of MoveOn.org's web site on August 7, 2004. Let's see. It says we should vote against Bush ("vote for change"). It attacks Fox for alleged ties to the GOP. It claims Bush should not have been the President. It calls for the firing of Rumsfeld, and a censure of Bush. It heaps praise on Al Gore. And that's just the top six news items.
Either Cohen is lying about unethically giving money to an overtly PAC in 2004, or he is incompetent to not know it was overtly partisan, or he just forgot that he, in fact, unethically donated in August 2004 (i.e., the Scooter Libby defense).
Remember when Bill Bennett got busted by liberals for gambling, because they said he set himself up for such criticism by talking about "morals" so much (never mind that Bennett never attacked gambling as immoral)? This is, of course, far more egregious. A small amount of money, but a clear violation of ethics policy, and he attempts to justify it by lying about it being nonpartisan.
I don't want to beat up on Cohen. I am only mentioning it because it's worth noting that people like him simply can't be trusted (and yes, that goes for people of all ideologies).
This isn't about the "librul media," except in that we know that if this had been a conservative "ethics" columnist who was giving money to Swift Boat Vets For Truth in violation of his newspaper's ethics policy and then saying he thought it was nonpartisan, this would have been the #1 topic on Olbermann's show by now as an example of how conservatives/Republicans are so much worse than liberals/Democrats.
He violated the Times ethics policy donating $585 to MoveOn.org in August 2004. He says he didn't think it violated the policy at the time (though he now concedes it does), because he thought of MoveOn as nonpartisan.
MoveOn in August 2004, was nonpartisan.
Well, here's the Wayback Machine version of MoveOn.org's web site on August 7, 2004. Let's see. It says we should vote against Bush ("vote for change"). It attacks Fox for alleged ties to the GOP. It claims Bush should not have been the President. It calls for the firing of Rumsfeld, and a censure of Bush. It heaps praise on Al Gore. And that's just the top six news items.
Either Cohen is lying about unethically giving money to an overtly PAC in 2004, or he is incompetent to not know it was overtly partisan, or he just forgot that he, in fact, unethically donated in August 2004 (i.e., the Scooter Libby defense).
Remember when Bill Bennett got busted by liberals for gambling, because they said he set himself up for such criticism by talking about "morals" so much (never mind that Bennett never attacked gambling as immoral)? This is, of course, far more egregious. A small amount of money, but a clear violation of ethics policy, and he attempts to justify it by lying about it being nonpartisan.
I don't want to beat up on Cohen. I am only mentioning it because it's worth noting that people like him simply can't be trusted (and yes, that goes for people of all ideologies).
This isn't about the "librul media," except in that we know that if this had been a conservative "ethics" columnist who was giving money to Swift Boat Vets For Truth in violation of his newspaper's ethics policy and then saying he thought it was nonpartisan, this would have been the #1 topic on Olbermann's show by now as an example of how conservatives/Republicans are so much worse than liberals/Democrats.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment