First sentence: "The World Bank released its files in the case of President Paul Wolfowitz's ethics on Friday [April 13th], and what a revealing download it is. On the evidence in these 109 pages, it is clearer than ever that this flap is a political hit based on highly selective leaks to a willfully gullible press corps."
That's pretty strong. The WSJ is rapping the knuckles of the other national newspapers with a steel ruler.
The Wall Street Journal, Monday, April 16, 2007.
Joe Gwinn
Check this out
...
Before she was detailed over to the State Department, Riza was earning $132,660, according to the bank's payroll records obtained by the Governmental Accountability Project. Had the bank's board adhered to its ordinary rules, as Riza was shifted over to the State Department, she should have only been eligible for a raise of about $20,000. Instead she was given a raise of $47,340, whereupon her salary became $180,000. Then last year, she received yet another raise which brought her salary to $193,950. That salary increase not only meant that Riza earned more than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, but apparently made her the single highest paid State Department official.'''
In light of that, the Wall Street journal editorial seems a little disingenious. In fact, as a WSJ subscriber, I am beginning to wonder if it is worth it to pay them for being propagandized, so to speak.
iHave something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required