Letters to the Editor
-
Take our ball, and go home.
This manufactured 'scandal' was never about any unofficial impropriety by Wolfowitz. It is about a determined group of Euro-bureaucrats staging a coup, over their dislike of the Bush Administration.
I feel strongly now -- let the Euros run the World Bank. And let the Euros pay for the World Bank. All of it. One of the best things that could ever happen in the effort to ameliorate world poverty would be the dismantling of the World Bank.
-
How about a real leader?
I realize this is just wishful thinking, but wouldn't it be wonderful if Muhammad Yunus became the replacement?
-
Elephantman
Elephantman, do you really feel that Wolfowitz's actions were not scandalous? You don't think the bleeding of his personal life into his professional life was a problem? Or that it just wasn't a big enough problem to merit his ouster/resignation?
I mean, I understand you're upset by a "cabal" trying to get rid of him, but in this case, it isn't a manufactured or falsified scandal. These things actually happened. He's admitted it.
The question is, do you think he didn't even do these things, or just that they don't merit much attention?
-
Don't they just laugh all the way to the bank?
Even when Wolfowitz or others like Gonzales, etc, get forced out for all their outrageous activities, don't they just laugh their way all the way to the bank while continuing to pull in generous government pensions for having held these positions?
-
They're trying to spin it
There was something bizarre I noticed in this AP story, http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8P5HR500.html, White House: World Bank Bruised by Fight. There was this paragraph:
"This has certainly been a bruising episode for the bank, and what you have to do is figure out a way forward to maintain the integrity of the institution," White House press secretary Tony Snow said. "And, therefore, when you do it, you're going to discuss everything. That's what you would normally do," he added.
Clearly they're trying to spin this as the bank has had something go seriously wrong, and it's the bank that has suffered damage. It seems to me that succeeding in clearing out the corruption that came in with Wolfowitz shows the bank has some strength and integrity as an institution, and it's sure to come out of this stronger since the Bush administration's ability to dictate to it will be greatly weakened. Maybe if it can't gain some freedom from US supply-side nonsense, it can change its policies and start doing a lot more good.
-
Re:How about a real leader?
Wishful thinking yes but that would be perfect.
-
Oops
Just read that the world bank is traditionally run by an American and the IMF by a European so there's no hope for even wishful thinking for Yunus.
-
Why there never was a "Wolfowitz scandal"
Wolfowitz wanted no part of any conflicts with Shaha Riza's supervision at the World Bank, where she worked before Wolfowitz ever got there.
Wolfowitz, before he moved in at the World Bank, asked the bank to handle his conflict. The plan was then to reassign Ms. Riza, by all accounts a capable World Bank emplyoee, to the State Department. Her pay would continue to come from the World Bank, but she would be away from any Wolfowitz supervision. (Even though she was two levels removed from President Wolfowitz anyway.) Ms. Riza's move outside of the World Bank also took her out of the usual promotional line that she would be in for at the World Bank. (You can argue that World Bank mandarins are scandalously overpaid if you want to, but the fact is that Ms. Riza was never overpaid by World Bank standards.) Ms. Riza's move out of the World Bank was a big penatly for her. (Arguably, she may also have known that her relationship with President Wolfowitz was also going to penalize her, given all of the entrenched Bush-hating Euros at the Bank, and the UN, etc.)
All along, Wolfowitz wanted the potential conflict problem removed, but the Bank expected him to deal with it directly. (The Wall Street Journal has exposed far worse conflicts in couples' employment at the Bank, none of which resulted in any terminations. That Wolfowitz would be fired over this is a bad joke.)
Here is page after page of the WSJ's brilliant coverage of the Wolfowitz case:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/search/exec/htsearch.cgi?words=wolfowitz+world+bank&db=db&where=oj
-
You've Got To Luv 'Im
Imagine this. Instead of fighting corruption the old-fashioned way, why not try something completely unorthodox: Fight corruption by being corrupt? Get your bullish girlfriend a six figure salary at the agency you head (at tax payers' expense), while beating poor countries over the head to cut back on spending for social services.
Wonder what Wolfowitz will be doing next? I'm sure that Bush & Co. will find something new and exciting for this innovative genius to do. Just wonder how much corruption we can take from this "Christian" administration.
-
Elephantman
It seems that Riza was vastly overpaid by State Department standards, since her salary was significantly higher than that of the Secretary of State.
I do not understand how one can work for the State Department, but be paid by the World Bank, without a reasonable person thinking something is off-kilter. I am also suspicious of the two promotions and two pay raises that happened since Wolfowitz began his tenure at the World Bank.
I'm not saying his girlfriend isn't good at her job, and didn't deserve these rewards. But, if this was happening in my office, I'd demand an explanation. If an explanation was withheld, was intentionally vague or misleading, I'd call that more suspicious. And if I was then attacked as being "out to get" my employer for asking reasonable questions, I'd be hiring a lawyer and looking for a new job.
If I were dating my boss or my employee, I'd either end the relationship or end the job. It's pretty clear that those are the only honorable options. Either party in this case would probably find employment pretty easy to come by.
This isn't a manufactured scandal (as in, state troopers lying about what a former governor did while under their protection). It's an actual scandal. And, in my view, it's scandalous behavior.