Quote:
Originally Posted by MTI
And A Word From the Other Side of the Story
We tracked down Cembalest to ask about his methodology. He said any effort to address the topic is heavily subjective, and he expressed regret that his work had been used for political ends, saying that it was not his intention to provide fodder for bloggers and talk show hosts.
Cembalest said that he did discount the corporate experience of the three lawyers we identified — Clinton, Vilsack and Locke — and added that he awarded nothing for Donovan, Chu or Salazar, even though we found they had a fair amount private sector experience. Cembalest acknowledged fault in missing Salazar's business background, saying he would have given him a full point if he had it to do over again. But he added that the kind of private-sector experiences Chu and Donovan had (managing scientific research and handling community development lending, respectively) did not represent the kind of private-sector business experience he was looking for when doing his study.
|
I wonder what his intentions were then, if not political. Hard to believe a writer of political figures would think what they are writing will not be used for, well, politics. I gotta discount his statement there after he realized that his conclusions were not what he intended. Kinda like when global warming scientists find data that does not fit their theory- they tend to ignore or downplay it- just as you two are for the same reasons.