WNU Editor: Pentagon spokesman John Kirby has nothing. Their conclusions are based on what they think Russia may do.
This is a continuation from yesterday's confrontation between an AP reporter and State Department spokesman Ned Price (see video below).
Kirby was SWO qualified. Then he became a PAO. It is understandable. More or less the same money for an easier job. Same result in providing cash in the near and mid term future for the family for less risk.
ReplyDeleteI have seen a person, who was made a PAO and did not like it. He feared for his professional growth until he actually started the job and the brass appreciated his efforts. Then he loved it.
Kirby bugs me. IMO he is a go along get along type. He's determined TPTB and he has made his peace. He will say anything.
Sounds like you're describing 75% of the people the USG puts in front of a camera nowadays.
ReplyDeleteI have not liked Kirby. I read his bio. The SWO pin impresses me on first blush. A second reading though makes me wonder.
ReplyDeleteA person told me that he and his buds got sign-offs by buying instructors beers. True story. It was not for SWO. It was worse. Now that person was solid. I know him. But if he and his buds did it, what about others? Might some borderline people skate through?
I would have had to watch Kirby as a contributor giving his two cents over time to get a true measure of the man, but I am not impressed with what I have seen with Kirby as SPOX over the last year. Waterboy
My way of thinking is that a PAO should be TAD or something like that not a career. Working as a a PAO should be career enhancing for any MOS not a separate career or career ending.
They must really relish the conflict, otherwise all press spokesmen would be alcoholics. I can’t imagine the stress of getting grilled on camera and having to spin the story. Even true believers must have some doubts on what they are saying.
ReplyDeleteAlleging Russians of "dirty tricks" that's so funny when the US fabricating false information about weapons of mass destruction to invade Iraq, why no one mention the elephant in the room?
ReplyDelete