Talk:Cronyism/Archive 1

Archive 1

RE: Kennedy and McNamara

The McNamara page says Kennedy appointed McNamara upon recommendation from someone else. How can that be considered cronyism still? Can anyone offer verification for this information? If not perhaps it should be removed.139.171.198.3 (talk) 19:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

New version

I've cleaned up the section on examples, but feel there needs to be more info on the Toronto example. What happened here? Currently there is no context, but merely what reads like a wild accusation. Some proof please. Harro5 06:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• Also, there needs to be discussion of cases outside of America. What about Saddam appointing his sons to powerful positions, or the constant claims about African governments being corrupt? I even know of cases in Australia involving our PM John Howard. This has the potential to be a first-rate and expansive article. Harro5 07:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Re George Galloway

Using the allegations against UK member of Parliament, George Galloway, as an example of cronyism is flawed on several counts:

• Semantically wrong. It is the appointer, rather than the appointed who is guilty of cronyism. The allegation is that Saddam gifted Galloway, hence it would be Saddam who was guilty of cronyism.

• Wrong offence. The allegation is that Galloway received income illegally in violation of UN resolutions. That would be bribery or corruption but not cronyism.

• Unsubstantiated. The allegations have been answered by Galloway in a US congressional hearing. His accusers have not produced any evidence to support their claims nor have they continued to pursue their case.

I would recommend deleting the reference to Galloway entirely. If you want a recent UK example, consider the Hinduja Affair (http://www.rediff.com/us/2001/jul/17uk3.htm). This is substantiated, in that several government ministers resigned, and is well-documented.Oscar Bravo 13:28, 9 December 2005

--> The whole of the para 4 under "cases of..."is irrelevant. The Galloway reference is irrelevant, as is the Kofi Annan, surely that would be better placed in a nepotism article. Is this just a case of a frustrated Republican?

The neutrality

I do not see any neutrality issues on this page. Cronyism is biased in and of its self. there for, to say that it is biased is an oxymoron. there can be no merits for cronyism, so its not biased to say it is meritless. Roxanne Edits 22:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about all examples being inherently biased, but - surprise, surprise - there seems to be a bias towards focusing on US politics. I also think the very nature of how the examples are presented needs to be rewritten. There's enough material for an article about Allegations of cronyism in the George W. Bush administration, but it doesn't all need to be discussed here. Narco 21:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Blair and Brown guilty of Cronyism?

Would the two be guilty of Cronyism in their Blair-Brown deal, or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.102.7 (talk) 23:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Would like to delete but there may be value

The first sentence in the section "Etymology" is garbled. I can't work out what is meant. If somebody gets it, please can they put it right? Otherwise, bin it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theeurocrat (talk • contribs) 18:54, 25 October 2012 (UTC)