WHYY The High Salaries?

By Steven Wells
Add Comment Add Comment | Comments: 9 | Posted Mar. 1, 2009

Share this Story:


Because that's what the market demands. Although if there really were any such thing a free market meritocracy, every single one of these useless, voodoo-spouting, incompetent Republican fuck-ups would be sleeping under a bridge and sucking cock for food money.

We are living through odd times. The Bush Administration fucked up every single aspect of domestic and foreign policy so badly that they might well have started the U.S. on the slippery slope to becoming a second-rate power. And yet--like the ridiculously large salary club--members and supporters of the former regime are utterly without shame.

My favorite recent example is from Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card who criticized the Obama Administration's somewhat looser dress code: "I'm disappointed to see the casual, laissez faire, short sleeves, no shirt and tie, no jacket, kind of locker room experience that seems to be taking place in this White House and the Oval Office."

Dude, that's like staying in a really nice hotel, totally shitting the bed, smearing that shit all over the walls and grinding it into the carpet--and then complaining that the guy who comes to clean up isn't wearing the right sort of jacket.

But being Republican means never having to say sorry. Because no matter how tragically wrong your demented, quasi-Maoist polices proved to be, you can always claim this just proves that the policies weren't sufficiently demented or quasi-Maoist enough. And had they been, say, twice as demented and four times as quasi-Maoist, we would now be living in a veritable heaven-on-earth, praise Jesus. Yep, the problem with George W. Bush, you see, was that he just wasn't bat-shit crazy insane right-wing bonkers-in-the-head fucking mental enough. If only we'd had more tax cuts for the rich, more de-regulation and more unnecessary wars, everything would be tickety-boo. (Or you could just take the Rush Limbaugh route and blame poor black people.)

This is of course classic junkie behaviour. The solution to all the problems caused by excessive use of heroin, crack cocaine, booze and Rush Limbaugh-style painkillers (pretty much the same painkillers I'm taking at the moment)? More of the same. In ever-bigger doses. Injected straight into the fucking eyeballs with a shit-smeared and rusty needle.

"More of the same" is also the mantra of the totally out-of-touch ideologue. Which is why today's Republican party remind me so much of the Western Maoists who were so active in the '60s and '70s--dogmatic, totally convinced of their utter and unquestionable correctness despite all the contradictory historical evidence (Mao being a fat, psychopathic ruling class bastard--the Rush Limbaugh of the Yangtze). Which is why, I suppose, Republicans spend so much time trying to get bridges and airports named after their Great Dead Leader, Commisar Vladimir Ilyich Reagan.

Living in the U.S. today is like being in Moscow after the collapse of state-capitalism. (Yes, I was there). People are still pinching themselves, almost as if they can't believe that things have really changed. And when Obama does something profoundly sensible--like tell fat cat CEOs that no they can't use taxpayer money to buy each other ponies and gold inlaid calf-skin fisting harnesses--supporters of the old regime rear upon their creaky, wart-encrusted  hind legs and shriek that this a blasphemy against the One True Creed. Except of course that the One True Creed in this instance is unregulated free market capitalism. Which, of course, makes Obama a communist.

But it's the Republicans who are acting like old school Stalinists, perpetuating a rigid ideology (Tax cuts=good! Stopping incompetent right-wing fuckwits from fucking the world economy six ways to Sunday=bad!), and attempting to build a Mao- and Stalin-like "cult of personality" around the dead leader--the worst-ever president of the United States, whose disastrous domestic and foreign policies got us into this mess in the first place.

For more on the distinctly Mao-like Cult of Reagan, check out Daily News  columnist Will Bunch's book, Tear Down This Myth.
 
I first heard about it on my local NPR station. What a marvelous service WHYY provides. You know, thinking about it, I get an awful lot of my information about the world from WHYY. Perhaps I should become a member.

Oh wait.

They pay their top paper shuffler THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION FUCKING DOLLARS A YEAR. So perhaps I won't.

Prev| Page: 1 2
Add to favoritesAdd to Favorites PrintPrint Send to friendSend to Friend

COMMENTS

Comments 1 - 9 of 9
Report Violation

1. T. Printer said... on Feb 8, 2009 at 08:39PM

“Nice language. It was us Dems in the 1990's that started all this Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac crap. Remember, "Everyone has a right to own a home"? I stand proud as the ONLY Moderate Democrat I knew that said that that was a bad idea.”

Report Violation

2. Hilary Smith said... on Feb 8, 2009 at 10:39PM

“T. Printer: Actually, the Community Reinvestment Act was great policy. When the banksters started lowering lending standards because they needed more people to lend to so they could turn around and sell more loans to third parties who would then turn those loans into mortgage backed securities, that's when our trouble started. The reward of making the loan became divorced from the risk. That's why all of this is happening. Of course it's intellectually simple to process when you can just as easily blame this mess on poor black people. The good news is that Americans are starting to see that Rush Limbaugh Inc. is and will continue to be a destructive force for working-class people.”

Report Violation

3. MRJ said... on Feb 9, 2009 at 07:13AM

“Your article is hilarious! I will share it with others, as it's a good read. I'm hoping that we'll soon get beyond people being paid gobs of money for being "at the top", and then also being rewarded for doing a terrible job. I don't recall getting a raise on the off year when I didn't perform up to snuff. We're all in this together, whether or not we wish to believe this. Blaming isn't going to get us anywhere, and I'm happy to see the President working at just getting the job done. We must all get to work and move forward. Present and future history will show what's what and who's who. We know that there are many who'd like to sabotage the current administration and say 'change didn't happen...change didn't work', so that the country can return to the old way of doing things. If we focus on the change already being here and also being one of the pieces in this puzzle of change, we can be on the path to greater Good. Thanks for your interesting, humorous article.”

Report Violation

4. John Sharp said... on Feb 10, 2009 at 10:01AM

“The head of a national news network is pain under a million a year? I imagine if WHYY cared about having a quality CEO, they sort of need to pay something. It is a high ranking position, and WHYY is not a charity. I think there is a false connection in the logic here. You know, HBO heads make 10's of millions of dollars and have the nerve to charge you for the programming. Rather than subscribe, WHYY pimps itself f out for a few days and asks for funds (from the willing). Ok, your not willing, but I think its probably disingenuous to act as though its some act of morality to not contribute. This seems like a clear case of tragedy. the very thing that makes NPR and WHYY great is the same thing that will, no doubt, bring it down in the end. It markets to liberals. Liberals will always find a way to protest anything, even other liberals. Idiot.”

Report Violation

5. the Steven Wells said... on Feb 10, 2009 at 10:25AM

“Serf.”

Report Violation

6. Kate said... on Feb 12, 2009 at 08:18PM

“I agree with John. Steven, maybe it's just your painkillers fueling this rant, but you're a bit off base. First of all, according to MSNBC, the CEO of Merrill Lynch was compensated $46.4 million in 2007 ($700,000 salary, $18.5 mil bonus, plus stock and benefits). Meanwhile, Bono's net worth appears to be about $200 million. You're really going to put Mazzarro in the same category? Don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not a member of the "large salary club." I too was enraged by the ridiculous salaries and bonuses that financial/banking executives took home after their struggling companies were bailed out by taxpayers money. (I wish my own small business had such a luxury!) But that's a completely different article. If you want to make the point that Mazzarro makes too much money, then fine, but do some research and compare him to people in similar roles (non-profit leaders), not random high rollers with salaries hundreds of times more than what he makes.”

Report Violation

7. DJ said... on Feb 13, 2009 at 01:37PM

“wow look at this dude's salary”

Report Violation

8. former91fmfan said... on Feb 15, 2009 at 06:29PM

“Get some things straight here: Mr. Marazzo is NOT the leader of the free world and he is not the head of any national news organization. He is the overpaid head of a mediocre TV and radio station that also happens to be in the fourth largest TV market. He runs a company with under 200 employees and has a budget in the range of $25 mil. For comparison, the former head of NPR (a national news agency) Kevin Klose made $465,994 in 2007. The CEO of WGBH, Boston brought home $286k in 2006 and that was with controlling a budget of $195 mil. WNET, NY head honcho William F. Baker only took $312k in 2006 with revenues of $157 Mil. These are the facts. Go to charitynavigator.org and see for yourself. I don't see where Mr. Marrazzo justifies the obscene salary.”

Report Violation

9. Neil said... on Jul 10, 2013 at 06:31AM

“I agree with you regarding the salaries. The political potshots are liberal bias garbage similar to the leanings of PBS and the reason I don't contribute.”

ADD COMMENT

Rate:
(HTML and URLs prohibited)