Posted by Donny Ferguson at LP blog. Reposted to IPR by Paulie.
Commerce Secretary nominee Judd Gregg, a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, has withdrawn his name from consideration for the post.
Citing the Obama administration’s proposal to take the Census (which determines House representation) out of the hands of the Commerce Department and give it to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, as well as the out-of-control costs of Barack Obama’s $1.1 trillion “stimulus plan” and $9.7 trillion total costs in proposed bailouts, increased spending and welfare transfers, Gregg informed the White House he was no longer interested in serving.
Gregg previously agreed to serve in the Obama administration and was awaiting Senate confirmation.
He is the latest in a string of Obama administration nominees to withdraw their names, though Gregg’s is the first not initiated by ethics or tax evasion problems. He is the second Commerce Secretary nominee to drop out.
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination in January after being named in a federal grand jury investigation looking into a $1.5 million taxpayer-funded contracts being awarded to a company after it donated $100,000 to Richardson’s efforts to register Hispanic and American Indian voters and pay for expenses at the Democratic National Convention in 2004.
suggesting not to report on such a current topic, silly and manipulative.
I think George’s objections were more to the way in which it was covered, more so than that it was covered at all, and possibly on overall choice of topics.
hmm, public internet, I think thats a fairly wide distribution, doesn’t get much wider.
Well, yes, it does. There are countless pages on the internet. Unless I go to each of them every day, I don’t see what is new on them. However, if a party or candidate faxes or emails its news releases to news organizations – for example, for us, to [email protected], and brings them to our attention rather than waiting for us to come to them, this is wider distribution than simply putting it on your webpage.
In some cases, campaign and party staff also call selected reporters to further increase their chances of being published. That’s usually not us, since we aren’t big enough for that, at least yet.
After all news orgs get lots and lots of press releases in their inbox every day, so even if you do go to the extra step of actually distributing your releases, rather than just publishing it on your webpage and waiting for the media to come to you, you may still wish to follow up with telephone calls, rather than waiting to be called.
I hope this helps.
BTW, since we are on the subject: Does anyone know what the LP is doing about distributing its news releases?
If its a blog post, I would call it that, rather than a ‘news release’ simply to be more concise and clear and provide as much information about its nature without confusion.
And, indeed, that is what it is called. You’ll note that the title here at IPR is Libertarian Party blog: Obama loses yet another Cabinet nominee. I included that in the title, just to avoid this type of confusion. If you follow the link back to LP.org, it goes to
http://www.lp.org/blogs/donny-ferguson/obama-loses-yet-another-cabinet-nominee
Notice the part after lp.org is /blogs
If you go directly to LP.org, half way down the front page you will see three red subheadings: Headlines, LP blog and LP Video. This is under the “LP blog”.
I hope that any remaining confusion has now been cleared up.
“Commerce Secretary nominee Judd Gregg, a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire, has withdrawn his name from consideration for the post.”
I already covered ‘news’ so lets go to ‘release’
as in ‘news release’
It it released?
again, dictionary.com: to allow to be known …exhibited
hmm, public internet, I think thats a fairly wide distribution, doesn’t get much wider.
But, frankly this wasn’t a discussion about the phrase ‘news release’.
If its a blog post, I would call it that, rather than a ‘news release’ simply to be more concise and clear and provide as much information about its nature without confusion.
George was very clear he simply didn’t like the content.
So let me get the discussion back on track. The withdrawal of the nomination, current, the former nominee’s opinions, his own.
suggesting not to report on such a current topic, silly and manipulative.
Frankly, its a news release because it is one.
Generally, I think of a news release from a party or political campaign as something they sound around to news outlets to hopefully be included in articles and broadcasts, and is usually marked as a news release or press release, with a “for further info…” contact box; not a post that is put up on the party’s blog on its website and marked as a blog post, without any efforts to further distribute.
I’m sure there are some pieces that blur that line, but I don’t think this is one.
Thanks for the clarification! My bad 🙂
George was probably just asking for help with the English language.
It’s a news release, because the word ‘news’ simply means ‘ a report of a recent event.’ credit: dictionary.com
Frankly, its a news release because it is one.
why do some libertarians seem to grab at straws to try and take LP credit for a conservative Republican congressman?
He is a past Libertarian presidential candidate (1988), remains a life member of the LP, has spoken at numerous Libertarian events – including fairly recently, as I understand it – and has endorsed Libertarians for president as recently as 2004, and possibly for other offices even more recently. So, “Republican” is only part of the picture.
E.D.,
Attacking Mr. Phillies’ credentials as a college physics professor takes away all credibility from your argument, and I am in no way connected with the LP. I don’t know what you do for a living beyond blogging, but it is hard to take you seriously.
Saying that, why do some libertarians seem to grab at straws to try and take LP credit for a conservative Republican congressman? I saw the same thing last fall where some people were claiming Sarah Palin as their own based on a few random speeches and local political posturing.
We derive those stances from common sense. That’s where we also get our rights from. fuck the god, even there really was one lol
ED:_Maybe because the Libertarian Party is a friggin’ RIGHT WING POLITICAL PARTY IN THE UNITED STATES, George.
Duuuuuuuuh. And they pay you to teach in College? Must be a fucking college of retards.
he teaches physics dumbass , Id like to see try and do his job or even pass one of his college exams then we’ll see who the retard is.
the LP is not a right -wing party , although some would like to see it as such. our principles and beliefs draw from the left and right.
if we were aa right wing party , where do we get our stance on the drug war , and homosexuality etc .
And maybe because Gregg has had some serious relations with the Libertarian Party in New Hampshire. Not 100%, but I seem to remember him being a keynote speaker to an LPNH State Convention in the 1990s.
And his voting record according to NTU, ACU, RLC, CAGW, and numerous others is among the MOST LIBERTARIAN in the entire US Senate.
But Mr. “College Professor” there seems to think this isn’t relevant news.
Maybe because the Libertarian Party is a friggin’ RIGHT WING POLITICAL PARTY IN THE UNITED STATES, George.
Duuuuuuuuh. And they pay you to teach in College? Must be a fucking college of retards.
I think it’s great news too. Gregg staying in the senate will leave it more divided, and JWT will make a better secretary than any of the other nominees.
Mik and Ross, agreed.
And this is a news release…
No, LP blog.
I think it’s great, in a way – Obama’s nominees are being held to a much higher standard than Bush’s nominees ever were.
This is significant in that someone who had agreed to serve withdrew over policy differences, not questionable ethics. The honeymoon may be over.
And this is a news release…why? REgurgitated news, and some right-wing sniping points at President Obama.