Joe Nacchio, American Motherfucking Hero
Dr. Slammy offered up some thoughts the other day on Joe Nacchio, the prison-bound former CEO of Qwest. For the good doctor, the case is both public and personal. For my part, I don’t know Joe, but do take some satisfaction in the knowledge that he’s going to Hell. And yes, I do have insider knowledge on that subject.
The most fascinating thing about Sam’s post, though, was what happened in the comment thread. I call your attention to comments #3, 6 and 23, in particular, whereupon we’re asked to believe that Joe Nachhio is not a criminal, but is instead, as Slammy put it in comment #5, “Thomas Motherfucking Jefferson.”
I knew Thomas Motherfucking Jefferson, and Joe, sir, is no Thomas Motherfucking Jefferson.
It has been observed before that you Americans suffer from an extraordinary case of Either/Or-itis. That is, everything is black or white. You can’t have it both ways, you know. You’re either with us or against us. There are two (and only two) sides to every story. And so on. It’s as though there were no such thing as gray. As if there’s no such thing as a both/and situation. As if when two people are arguing, one of them must be right and the other must be wrong.
Of course, there’s not really a disease called Either/Or-itis. I made that up. Based on the level of “thinking” that sometimes finds its way into the comment threads around here from people who really should have studied harder in school, I figured I better make that clear before somebody turns the DSM inside-out and then trots back proudly, like a spaniel with a turd in its mouth, to announce that “A-HA! THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS EITHER/OR-ITIS. YOU’VE BEEN PWNED!!!!! ZOMG!!!!!” No, the real term – the actual Latin, medical term, is “stupid.” Sorry for the confusion.
So, on the question of the Nacchio case, let me offer the following observations. I will try to use short words and simple sentence structures so that the laggards can follow along.
1: Yes, Nacchio was right in refusing to cooperate with Bush’s illegal wiretapping program. Yes, Qwest was the only major telco to tell BushCo to fuck off, and yes, they were legally and morally correct to do so. Whether Joe did this because he’s America’s only true champion of liberty or because he wanted to cover his ass we’ll never know, and frankly it doesn’t matter. With a guy like Nacchio, you take the fact that he got one right for the divine blessing that it is and don’t ask a lot of questions about motivation. Right for the wrong reasons still beats the hell out of wrong for any reason.
2: Was Nacchio’s investigation and prosecution the result of Bush/Rove payback? Perhaps. I mean, it’s not like the Crips who formerly ran the White House don’t have a track record, and it’s very easy to believe that Nacchio was the subject of selective enforcement. And yes, selective enforcement is a bad thing because the law ceases being a tool for the defense of the people and becomes a weapon serving the despotic whims of the powerful. That cannot and should not and must not be tolerated.
However, here is where our chimp-with-broadband friends do the thing that people often do when their education has carried them a certain distance down the path toward wisdom, then dumped them by the road a few miles short of town. The common phrase, I believe, is “know just enough to be dangerous.” Put simply, these folks have taken bits of evidence and drawn all the wrong conclusions from them because they’re incapable of critical thought.
Here’s what I mean.
3: Those defending Nacchio do not say, because they can’t, that he is innocent of the charges brought against him. There is no credible argument, anywhere that I have read, that Joe didn’t do that of which he was accused and convicted. So those valorizing him must be arguing … what? That it’s okay to rape the lives of countless thousands so long as you stand up to a corrupt administration? That if you’re right on one issue you’re therefore automatically right on all issues? That human beings are black or white, good or evil, saints or sinners, and nothing in-between?
The equation, here in Either-Or-land (sorry, made that up, too), goes like this. Nacchio was on the other side from Bush. Bush is evil. So Nacchio is, by definition, an angel. Hmmm. Let’s test that theory, shall we? How did Osama bin Laden and Bush feel about each other? So this means bin Laden is an angel, a patriot, a true hero for freedom! Right? Right?
4: If only one of the guilty was convicted, that doesn’t mean he/she should be let go. It means that the rest of the guilty should be rounded up and convicted, too. This is the most baffling part of the whole cluster-thunk. Imagine that there are five serial killers terrorizing the city. The local PD targets, captures and convicts Killer #1 because one of his victims was the police chief’s daughter, and for some odd reason he took it personally. But they don’t go after the other four.
What our friends in the comment thread are essentially arguing is that we should let Killer #1 go because the city’s selective pursuit of him makes him either innocent or a hero. Or both.
No, fuckwits, wrong conclusion. The correct answer is b) now that you have Killer #1 locked up, go get Killers #2-5.
We know thinking is hard, but we ask that you at least try. If you think you’re thinking, but you aren’t sure, here’s a quick test you can take right there where you sit.
Q: A man commits a variety of frauds, in the process destroying the pensions of thousands of innocent workers. Is this man:
(a) a true patriot
(b) a criminal
If you answered (a), it’s back to the books for you.
In the meantime, we have laws against driving while drinking but not commenting while stupid. So at least you won’t have to share a cell with your buddy Joe…
Joe Nacchio was absolutely not guilty of Insider Trading. He was a scapegoat. Every trade he made was publicly announced, approved by the Qwest Board, Approved by Qwest General Counsel and made within the legal trading period for Company Employees.
No one, I repeat no one, has ever been able to say what the Inside information he had when these trades were made.
He is the victim of an arrogant and egotistical judge (Edward Nottingham of the Diamond Cabaret Nottingham’s) and a Government gone out of control and totally not interested in justice.
This is nothing but a hight tech lynching and a travesty of the American Judicial System.
Keep ’em coming, Matthew. We always love hearing from people with “truth” in their e-mail addresses.
Please define “insider trading.”….and don’t google or wiki your answer.
he was the CEO – looks like he had inside information
The contract that was to be discussed early in the year between Naccio, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, and Condi Rice was one in which the government was scared that there would be a “pearl harbor” type attack on the internet itself. they approached naccio because us west had already been the builder of the previous two secured networks for the government, this would be the third. Shortly after their meeting, Naccio was approached by the NSA. So was AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint. The difference? Naccio said “I don’t think so, see I’ve ACTUALLY read the constitution, sorry charlie…”
They didn’t like this as you can hopefully imagine? (If you even try the “give the previous administration the benefit of the doubt you’ll get laughed at btw…)
Strangely, even though USWEST had built 2 proven secured networks previously for different government departments, suddenly the deal was off.
Your entire premise for you’re case against this man was that he knew what the numbers would be by years end 8 months in advance, and somehow “secretly” traded a bunch of stock. LOL It couldn’t have been based on the general knowledge that LAN line profits were on the down and never coming back, coupled with the knowledge that the government was pissed at him…. is this really insider trading?
What you you have had him do? Come on national television and proclaim, “i was part of a government contract signing and because I wouldn’t sell out my people and betray my country, the contract fell through…… so thats where our current forecast is as of today, we’ll let you know of any new developments.”
I mean COME ON! The judge wouldn’t even let him enter the contract’s into evidence without taking the stand. Now answer me this, if you were the CEO of a large telecom company, which is HIGHLY regulated by the government, and you were called into the office of the POTUS one day….. given special security clearance, told that you’re CFO couldn’t come because of lack of “special security clearance,” and sworn to secrecy. Warned that if you ever talked about the details of the plan or worse took the stand in a trial, it would be the end of you…. what would you do? Would you take 5 years for your family and country? look a little deeper you idiot. you’re probably just mad you lost money in the stock. I have an idea, don’t buy stock. Wall Street has owned stupid America for exactly 75 years and counting. And you people just keep believing in it. WOW.
Pingback: Scholars and Rogues » Qwest/CenturyTel merger: do you, Triceratops, take this Brontosaurus to be your lawfully wedded wife?
Pingback: Qwest/CenturyTel merger: do you, Triceratops, take this Brontosaurus to be your lawfully wedded wife? « Lullaby Pit