May 2007
Links
Bio and Articles
National Review Online
Fox News
The New York Sun
The Weekly Standard
The Philadelphia Inquirer
Committee on the Present Danger
Middle East Media Research Institute
The Hudson Institute
EssaysOrwell’s “Politics and the English Language” Hayek’s “The Use of Knowledge in Society” |
May 18, 2007 3:44 AM
Who Next at the World Bank?So, with Paul Wolfowitz ejected by the ethicists of the World Bank, who should be the next president of this beachhead of multilateral morality? Kofi Annan’s ever-helpful former speechwriter has suggested Tony Blair, which is a terrible idea because the man’s a socialist — and anyway, America has to stick up for its traditional right to pick the head of the Bank. Some have suggested Paul Volcker, which is an even worse idea for a number of reasons — but to name just one, because Volcker’s former business partner, James Wolfensohn, served as World Bank President for a decade prior to Wolfowitz, and in that position did plenty to foster a lot of the muck at today’s Bank. It could be —dread words — a conflict of interest. So who? Well, the best solution would be to simply dismantle the Bank and convert its capacious main building into a hotel, convenient to the White House and other Washington attractions. But since that’s unlikely to happen, here’s another thought. While it’s doubtful that Paul Wolfowitz enjoyed his recent experience, the Bank’s fury to oust him did have the salutary effect of attracting enough attention to the institution itself so that all sorts of longstanding sleaze within the Bank was at least beginning to be exposed. Why stop now? There’s a whole roster of patriotic Americans who would have a similar effect, and as we have just seen, they don’t have to actually do anything wrong. The Bank will arrange that for them. In that spirit, if they are willing to sacrifice for the good of our country, and indeed, the good of the world, how about we send John Bolton, followed by Don Rumsfeld, followed by …. well, you get the idea. Comments (4)Aaron :Mahon :Fun, but futile. This is a job for Joe Lieberman. Not even subject to Senate confirmation. Jack Jolis :Don Imus is your obvious man. What with his kids-with-cancer ranch he already knows all about helping needy people, plus with his wife Deirdre hovering nearby he wouldn't be prone to any Wolfie-type lady imbroglios. Quick-quick, Don Imus. quack-quack. Sandy :How about yourself?
Comments have been archived for this page. |
Pajamas MediaAn American Senator in Paris Warning: Opposing Putin Hazardous to Your Health Anti-Patriot Act Poster Boy Kidnaps Own Kids; Civil Libertarians Mum AP’s New ‘Accountability Journalism’ Is a Sham Obama Wows Germans — But Will It Play in Streator, IL? Homeland Security Meets The Sopranos Obama Does Offer Hope — to America’s Foes Yahoo-Icahn-Microsoft Aftermath: Who Really Won?
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
RSS FeedsADVERTISEMENT
|
I think you are really on to something here.
To go a step further, why don't we appoint Bolton for a limited term, say a year and a half or so, and then turn the helm over to an over-qualified candidate sure to get people's attention: George W. Bush?
Seriously, though, yours is a terrific idea and would send exactly the right message.
May 18, 2007 10:02 AM