Great Work, If You Can Get It
July 15, 2006 10:05 AM   Subscribe

Great Work, If You Can Get It
President Bush employs a Director for Lessons Learned with an annual salary of $146,000, a Director of Fact Checking ($46,500) and two ethics advisors ($114,688 and $100,547). The National Journal has a comprehensive list of who makes what in the White House.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) runs through a few “lessons” the White House apparently missed.
posted by ericb (44 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
 
Id like the job of Director of kicking-people-in-the-ass-if-they-make-stuid-mistakes.
Might have to get some new boots though
posted by edgeways at 10:34 AM on July 15, 2006


So these ethics advisors, are they on vacation more often than Bush?
posted by Tuwa at 10:34 AM on July 15, 2006


What Bush really needs is a Director of Pig Research, because he seemed inordinately obsessed with those all-important porcine issues at his recent appearances in Germany.
posted by blucevalo at 10:37 AM on July 15, 2006


Maybe the White House could consolidate these positions into a Director of Irony.

Awesome.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:47 AM on July 15, 2006


Um, TFA says the Director of Lessons Learned gets $107K, not $146K.

If anything they should pay their Director of Fact Checking more than 46K. They might uncover more of their mistakes...
posted by kfury at 10:54 AM on July 15, 2006


I'm torn between applauding the idea of putting someone in charge of Lessons Learned and saying WTF?!!

Those people are on the goverment pay scale. [FYI]
posted by zennie at 10:56 AM on July 15, 2006


"Id like the job of Director of kicking-people-in-the-ass-if-they-make-stuid-mistakes"

lol
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:58 AM on July 15, 2006


butt hurt much?
posted by quonsar at 11:03 AM on July 15, 2006


Um, TFA says the Director of Lessons Learned gets $107K, not $146K.

My mistake in fashioning the FPP. Indeed the 'Director of Lessons Learned' has an annual salary of $106,641.
posted by ericb at 11:03 AM on July 15, 2006


I think a great many Americans are too medicated to grasp just how seriously out whack this criminal administration is, however clearly the facts are presented. Those handy little pills that smooth out the highs and lows homogenize reality into a gray scale blur.
posted by chance at 11:09 AM on July 15, 2006


Who is Bush's Director of Fecal Collection and Analysis?
posted by moonbird at 11:13 AM on July 15, 2006


two ethics advisors ($114,688 and $100,547)

So they get paid $100K+ a year to do what, sit around and watch TV all day and eat potato chips?
posted by Mikey-San at 11:25 AM on July 15, 2006


I will gladly assume the position of White House Ethics Advisor for a mere $50,000 annually, an offer which this budget-conscious administration ought to appreciate.

All I'd need is a big red rubber stamp that says "NO, YOU IMBECILE."
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:31 AM on July 15, 2006


You'd better stock up on rubber stamps, then.
posted by Mikey-San at 11:33 AM on July 15, 2006


I am actually amazed at how little some of these people make. You write the speeches for the leader of the free world, and you make $42,300 per annum? I would feel pretty ripped off. I guess that's why they all write memoirs later...
posted by dagny at 12:05 PM on July 15, 2006


I like that the director for fact checking makes a zero lower than those other guys.

I mean it's obvious we don't need to resort to something as mundane as facts to convince the american people of something.
posted by lumpenprole at 12:38 PM on July 15, 2006


I am actually amazed at how little some of these people make. You write the speeches for the leader of the free world, and you make $42,300 per annum? I would feel pretty ripped off. I guess that's why they all write memoirs later...
posted by dagny


I think that's a good deal, considering what else you get by association. I speak the glow of knowing you are serving your country, of course. Plus, having "Speech Writer, Office of the President of the United States" on your resume won't be a bad thing when negotiating your next contract.
posted by zennie at 1:00 PM on July 15, 2006


While no fan of the administration, and suitably outraged at this bizarre (and seemingly ineffective) position, do take a close look at the person who delivered this speech. Rahm Emanuel is a cutthroat politician who honed his skills at the foot of Chicago's Mayor Daley and received additional polish from Bill Clinton.

If ever there were a pot calling the kettle black . . .
posted by aladfar at 1:12 PM on July 15, 2006


I am actually amazed at how little some of these people make. You write the speeches for the leader of the free world, and you make $42,300 per annum?

Most of these people are wealthy enough to be able to take four years off before returning to their million-dollar consultancy gigs in corporate communciations.
posted by frogan at 1:23 PM on July 15, 2006


I imagine the ethics advisors have a lot harder job than people assume - it's hard work trying to justify everything the administration does.
posted by porpoise at 1:32 PM on July 15, 2006


How much do you think he pays the guy who supplies him with beer?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 2:01 PM on July 15, 2006


I make more than the Director of Fact Checking! Also, I bet my Dad could totally beat his Dad up!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 2:02 PM on July 15, 2006


As much as I dislike Bush, I have to say that overpaid appointees with sometimes goofy titles is nothing unique to Bush. I'm sure that there were plenty of dubious positions in Rahm's Clinton Administration too. In fact this happens at every level of government. In essence, it's a case of "to the victor go the spoils."

Rahm Emmanuel is just going for a sound bite. As entertaining as this stuff may be, it serves no real purpose in the grand scheme of things IMHO.
posted by bim at 2:48 PM on July 15, 2006


frogan writes "Most of these people are wealthy enough to be able to take four years off before returning to their million-dollar consultancy gigs in corporate communciations."

That's the problem though. It would be better if these positions were career jobs not just resume padding and steps to influence peddling.
posted by Mitheral at 2:58 PM on July 15, 2006


$46k is not a lot of money, relatively speaking. And relative to the indignation of the article, it really doesn't belong in there. Fact checking is a good thing, right?
posted by sidereal at 3:41 PM on July 15, 2006


Those people are on the goverment pay scale. [FYI]

Wait, Director Of Lessons Learned is a standard government position? Hoo boy. Talked about a bunch of do-nothing, overpaid slackers. Sounds like my kind of job! Where do I sign up?
posted by smallerdemon at 3:51 PM on July 15, 2006


Here's a possibility: "Director of Lessons Learned" may be a title created while Stuart Baker, who may be the Assistant Secretary for Policy for the Department of Homeland Security, was "on loan" (see italics note) to the White House. This may or may not be the same Stuart Baker listed on the staff page (Appendix D) of the White House report called The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. The term "lessons learned" also seems to be a Homeland Security program buzz phrase. Makes sense, except that it's Stuart G. Baker in the report, and Stuart A. Baker listed on the Homeland Security site. But IF the above theory is correct, does this mean he was paid $106,641 additionally, or would the number listed by the White House be combined?
posted by zennie at 4:23 PM on July 15, 2006


Director of Fact Checking? Hasn't that position been vacant for the past 5 1/2 years?
posted by Neiltupper at 4:25 PM on July 15, 2006


How absurd. Why bother appointing another advisory position that will just be ignored?
posted by voltairemodern at 5:38 PM on July 15, 2006


I'm holding out for a position as Minister of Misinformation. :>
posted by bim at 5:58 PM on July 15, 2006


How much does the Director for Procurement of Irresistably Smooth Bald Men make? Man, that guy is earning every cent.
posted by maryh at 6:27 PM on July 15, 2006


What kind of lessons can be learned when they don't do anything wrong? His job must be cake!
posted by graventy at 6:43 PM on July 15, 2006


Maybe we'd be in better shape (and not in iraq) if the director of fact checking was paid more than the director of lessons learned.
posted by necessitas at 7:41 PM on July 15, 2006


Seriously, though. Isn't a Director for Lessons Learned just a Historian?
posted by necessitas at 7:45 PM on July 15, 2006


No, necessitas. A historian would tell you why sticking your dick in a blender hurt. A Director for Lessons Learned tells you why it means you need to stay the course.
posted by Tuwa at 8:02 PM on July 15, 2006


I sort of wonder what the "correspondence analysts" were called before "analyst" became a catchall title.
posted by milkrate at 9:23 PM on July 15, 2006


What kind of lessons can be learned when they don't do anything wrong?

Exactly. As we learned this past week, Bush is always right.

Steven Bradbury, head of the Justice Department’s office of legal counsel: “The President is always right.” [video].
posted by ericb at 9:58 PM on July 15, 2006


I'm holding out for a position as Minister of Misinformation

Paging Baghdad Bob.
posted by ericb at 10:02 PM on July 15, 2006


As we learned this past week, Bush is always right.

And more importantly, we also learned that he really likes pig. Yummy, yummy pig.
posted by homunculus at 10:12 PM on July 15, 2006


LOL. Baghdad Bob will be my role model!
posted by bim at 4:29 AM on July 16, 2006


I guess frugality wasn't a lesson ever learnt at the White House, then.
posted by imperium at 8:09 AM on July 16, 2006




I would love to be Director of Fact Checking. I'd be all "Hey man, check these facts! The eagle has an estimated wingspan of 18 feet. 18 FEET. If all the chinamen in the world joined hands, they'd girdle the world 3 times. 3 TIMES. You can't beat that with a stick!"

And then the ghost of Peter Cook would kill me with his spectral revenge.
posted by Sparx at 2:21 PM on July 16, 2006 [1 favorite]


"The White House is not required by law to make public any complete accounting of staff or individual salaries."

Hmm, those words have lost all meaning.
posted by moonshine at 4:32 PM on July 16, 2006


« Older Ready for $5/gal gas prices?   |   It's hot. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments