Senator Warner shows for Zuckerberg-Perry summit
The three American innovators.PHOTO BY FACEBOOK
On January 19, Pop musician Katy "I Kissed a Girl" Perry holds a promotional launch at the California headquarters of Facebook, and Virginia's newest U.S. Senator, Mark Warner, shows up for the photo-fest. Warner said (via Twitter) that he was there to support "innovation in America," but he's also been accused of "photobombing" the event. Warner often frames his business history as technology-based, but the lawyer-investor made his personal fortune by gaming the government's system of awarding cellular phone licenses.
13 comments
I only see one American innovator.
@ Judge's Ruling...
Your rhetoric is specious, for it is calculated to encourage a reader to infer that George Allen gave Mark Warner any consideration at all in 2008.
To be clear, Allen had enough problems in 2006 with his own yapping mouth and needed time to retool, rethink and reconsider.
Kindly show all of us some evidence that Allen even mulled a run against Mark Warner -- or shaddup.
My statement still stands: John Warner was the only serious candidate Mark Warner has actually run against. Ask any political scientist who follows Virginia elections and you will get the same response.
And Ingleside Vineyards bottles mediocre wine for mass consumption by people who do not know any better -- Mark Warner's core constituency.
@ Politico Cynic
You say that Mark Warner's " sole motivation in amassing wealth was to further his own political ambitions, which have an obsessive streak bordering on unhealthy."
Please extend this line of thought. I am curious. How do his "political ambitions" have an "obsessive streak" that borders on the "unhealthy." How, in fact, are Warner's "ambitions" different from those of any other national political figure (say, Mitt Romney, or Sarah Palin, or Gavin Newsome, or Hillary Clinton, or closer to home, George Allen or Eric Cantor)?
Would you agree that the "ambitions" that led Warner to the governor's office also resulted in a clean-up (if that's the proper way to describe it) of Jim Gilmore's budget fiasco , a well-managed state that is one of only about ten with a AAA credit rating, and a state system of education and a business climate (even the Wall Street Journal ranks it #7) that help to make it one of the states with the lowest unemployment rates in the country (granted, NoVa has a trove of government and defense-related jobs, as does Tidewater)?
@ democracy:
No need for a lesson in Latin, as I am fullly aware of ex post facto. Rather, the point is that Warner exploited privileged knowledge by virtue of his gig as a legislative assistant on Capitol Hill. I would like ot hear the senator's thoughts if asked how he feels that it is now illegal to do what he did in order to become wealthy.
I suspect he would wipe his hand across the back of his forehead and declare, "whew!"
It is only by taking advantage of insider information that the man is a millionaire. Period. He creates nothing of value. His sole motivation in amassing wealth was to further his own political ambitions, which have an obsessive streak bordering on unhealthy. The only serious canadidate he ever ran against, former U.S. Sen. John Warner, beat the stuffing out of Mark Warner. All his other campaigns have been a cakewalk.
"committed crimes before they were recognized as such" Doesn't that apply to all of us in some way?
Warner was an innovator- but became an elitist. He is low key, but far from being an "everyman" who should know what the commoners go through.
I like Mark Warner, and think he is one of our better politicians, but how is he a business innovator, if all he had to do was use his democratic contacts to find a loophole ?
" Mark Warner Makes Millions in Business Deals:
By 1983, Warner realized that he needed wealth to pursue public office. After 2 failures, he struck success with his 3rd venture. Using political contacts, he learned that the government would be giving away radio frequencies for wireless phones. Warner organized investor groups to apply for licenses, and took a slice of the profits. Regulators have since outlawed such insider arrangements.
Warner made a $100 million fortune from these deals, and then rededicated himself to politics."
http://usliberals.about.com/od/peopleinthenews/p/MarkWAaner.htm
@ Nancy Drew
You make a very good point about Mark Warner....he made his money utilizing public resources (as many wealthy people do, directly or indirectly).
As Kevin Phillips points out in Wealth and Democracy (2002):
"From the nursery years of the Republic, U.S. government economic decisions in matters of taxation, central bank operations, debt management, banking, trade and tariffs, and financial rescues or bailouts have been keys to expanding, shrinking, or realigning privately held assets."
Conservatives, mostly Republicans, want to believe it is the magic of the mythical "free market," the so-called "invisible hand." Not so, and never was.
University of Cambridge Ha-Joon Chang economist notes the long American history of government involvement in the marketplace (willingly supported by entrepreneurs), and relates that "between the 1950s and the mid-1990s, US federal government funding accounted for 50-70% of the country's total R&D funding ”Š" involvement in the marketplace without which "the US would not have been able to maintain its technological lead over the rest of the world in key industries like computers, semiconductors, life sciences, the internet and aerospace."
So what is the problem?
Phillips goes on to say the following, which more recent events (since 2002) and financial data confirm:
"Occasionally public policy tilted toward the lower and middles classes, as under Jefferson, Jackson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Most often, in the United States and elsewhere, these avenues and alleyways have been explored, every nook and cranny, for the benefit of the financial and business classes."
Warner, it seems to me, tries to strike a balance. He seems to understand from whence his wealth came.
The current crop of conservative leaders have no such compunction, even as they raid the public treasuries.
I think the guy in the back right should get credit for the photobomb.
Call me cynical, but I think all these politicians game the system to get where they are. Just glad Warner is a democrat.
Mark Warner doesn't know an Intel chip from a giga-byte-me. He's a Budweiser-swilling rube who leveraged his "Hah-vad" connections to get money to exploit insider knowledge on Capitol Hill, as pointed out previously:
"Warner organized investor groups to apply for licenses, and took a slice of the profits. Regulators have since outlawed such insider arrangements."
In essence, Warner committed crimes before they were recognized as such. That pineapple face is nothing more than a slap-happy, grinning felon who flew under the radar before the government said "whoopsie" and created some laws to address scum like him.
@ cookieJar Nice.
@ Politico Cynic look up ex post facto
Mark Warner is no big "business brain" or "self-made man," at least not in the usual understanding of those terms.
But as governor he did clean up the budget mess left behind by Jim Gilmore (and it was a biggie).
And he does seem to be trying to broker bipartisan legislation in the Senate.
As I mentioned before, he does seem to understand the origin of his wealth.
@Pilitico Cynic: "The only serious canadidate he ever ran against, former U.S. Sen. John Warner, beat the stuffing out of Mark Warner. All his other campaigns have been a cakewalk."
If Mark Warner is such a pushover, it is indeed curious that George Allen elected not to take him on in 2008. Hmm?