wow, a half hour later and no comments. that wolfie, he's an exciting fellah. but i would like to ask why any of us, kevin included, still harbor an inclination whatsoever to give any of these bushies the benefit of the doubt? have they ever proved to have deserved it, even once?

i concur. toss him from the island and into shark-infested waters.

no, they haven't. but we don't want to adopt their standards.

I say that we take Wolfowitz, Hitchens, Perle, Chalabi, Beinart along with a few other fellow travellers and strand them on some remote desert isle, where they can hold votes to their hearts' content and thus do their part to spread democracy to barbarous lands.

The guy, aside from starting a senseless slaughter and then walking away from it without consequences, has been treating the World Bank as yet another arm of the U.S. Government, thereby ruining our reputation in another large arena. And that's without the corruption. Or the bad teeth.

Kevin,
I find your post a bit puzzling. The staff dissatisfaction is one thing, but since the story broke, a surprising lot of editorial pages have called for Wolfowitz's resignation -- the Washington Post, NYT, and more interestingly the Financial Times and the Economist. There are also others that have done the same. Hell, the European Parliament passed a motion calling for his resignation. Surely, measures like all this are not undertaken lightly. The WB is a multinational organization with a multinational staff, and with a very comprehensive set of policies to manage all the different cultural norms. Wolfowitz violated a number of staff rules. As President of the organization he is expected to set an example both for the employees and for the countries that receive monies from the WB. He has done neither. It is quite telling that non-US folks recognize right away that this is an unacceptable model of corporate governance. Are things really so bad in the US that such a blind eye can be turned to CEO behavior? Its a sorry state of affaris if it is.

"I haven't commented on the Paul Wolfowitz/World Bank affair because I wasn't sure what to think about it. I may not like Wolfowitz much, but it still seemed plausible that he had acted properly in a difficult situation and was now being railroaded by Bank employees who don't like him any more than I do."

I'm just utterly astonished by that statement. I suspect that, other than Wolfowitz and his allies, no one has found such a theory to be plausible for a considerable amount of time.

Are you being willfully obtuse for the sake of "balance" ?

Kevin, you have a reputation of being cool tempered and looking before you leap... but excessive hesitation to make an assessment is a fault, not a virtue.

Nothing in Wolfowitz's background should lead you to trust him with your lunch money, let alone public funds.

Hasn't it been obvious that Wolfie has been a typical Bushcrook for some time? Didn't DoD money go to Riza back when he there?

Moderation is no virtue in judging people like Wolfowitz who do not take any responsibility for the deaths and destruction their decisions have directly caused.

He's one of them. Therefore, he must be a liar.

q.e.d.

As I understand it Wolfowitz's bed buddy was paid a lot of money for her "work" under him. I wonder how many poor people could have been helped if he had simply called the DC Madam and paid for a hooker on his own dime?

I find it interesting that these arch criminal masterminds like Wolfie who plot the murder of hundreds of thousands of people in order to meet their evil policy objectives are also engaging in such penny-ante shit as this. This crowd is so thoroughly corrupt that there is literally no crime too small for them to commit. I expect that Wolfie uncontrollably kicks every dog that crosses his path.

From the Steve Clemons link:

Secondly, allegedly on June 1st, Wolfowitz becomes eligible for some large financial bonus -- for performance and time on the job. One estimate puts this figure at about $400,000. Wolfowitz wants to make sure those funds are credited to his private bank account before saying farewell to an institution that has come to despise him.

So, greedy. No surprise. But this seems absolutely characteristic:

Wolfowitz is angry at the Bank at all those other than his closest spear-carriers. At one level, he does not want to resign and wants to tear the World Bank apart by forcing escalation in this war.

Fel: "... i would like to ask why any of us, kevin included, still harbor an inclination whatsoever to give any of these bushies the benefit of the doubt?"

We do so because liberals still have a sense of fair play and justice, one tenet of which is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

I will admit, however, that my own sense of fair play is now very badly frayed, thanks in no small part to the repeated and violent abuse of that particular notion by "these bushies", of which Wolfowitz has been a habitual offender.

In what Presidential Administration would it have been okay to let somebody keep their girlfriend on the payroll? Except of course Bush's? AND why, cause Kevin expects the Bushie to be able to do whatever they want? Things no other administrtation would dream of doing.

Would anyone have gotten away with this favortism in another admininstration? I mean EXCEPT Bush's?

NO, of course not.

The World Bank should fire Wolfowitz, because it's a sordid, nasty little deal no matter how you look at it. Wolfowitz was NEVER qualified for the damn position anyways.

Unbid contracts are not OKAY either, and it's not just a partisan thing that we, Americans should somehow simple allow Bush to do, because this administrtion does things like that, all the unethical stuff and we, "liberals" need to be more understanding of Repugs who lost all the right to talk about morals. I think it's great the rest to world knows how to tell Bush to go F--- himself.

Just cause Americans put up with people that don't know what they are doing, and all the uneithical wims of this administration, why should the rest of World be made to suffer the wims of a US right-wing cult fellowing?

Wolfowitz, kiss your nastyness goodbye.

No irony in the fact that Wolfie's concubine is Iranian, is there? Maybe thats what the neocons meant when they said "Real men go to Tehran". Ya think?

Fuck resignation. Kick the fucker out the door head first onto the pavement. This guy should have no future anywhere.

I've never understood what the argument against firing Wolfie was. I mean, if you find that the local sheriff has been having his deputies work on his house while they're on the clock, you fire him no matter how good a sheriff he is. Yet I've seen a number of pieces saying, "No, we can't be hasty in firing Wolfowitz, we've got to consider what's best for the World Bank."

lisainvan - I could swear that one of those was a WaPo editorial, but their search function is a pain. Do you have a link to their editorial that you say calls for his firing?

Fire Wolfie.
Fire Condi.
Fire Cheney.
Fire Bush.
Now, we can breathe again.

Ah, Kevin.

Just look at the cast of characatures that have voted to remove Mr. Wolfowitz from power. The World Bank board: a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats. It was this corruption that Mr. Wolfowitz wanted to clean up. Then the EU wants to get rid of him. This is in no small part sour grapes on France's part over the Iraq War.

That alone is enough to prove his innocents in my eyes.

That alone is enough to prove his innocents in my eyes.

egbert, do you own a toothbrush?

If so, do you know how to use it?

Conservative Deflator:
Shaha Riza is not Iranian. She is a British citizen of Libyan birth. Get the story straight.

I dont know what to think about Wolfie. Kevin, why dont you ask your buddy Imus, while he make n*gger jokes. Or perhaps Wolfie speaks for all the Jews, the way Sharpton speaks for all blacks on the planet.

So this is what the liberal attacks on a dedicated public servant like Wolfowitz are reduced to: he helped a friend get a job. Who hasn't done that?

Contrast that to the oil for food program that helped corrupt lefties the world over skim millions from United Nations coffers.

Ah, Kevin at 11:06 AM, typing as Al, comes in to stir the pot -

Off thread - This morning, MSN has an article about how "MBA programs do not prepare you for life" - Nor, apparently, President, Oil Company owner, Baseball General Manager as well, or even staying the course in a F-102 seat.

It's to Wolfowitz's credit that the corrupt, overpaid employees of the World Bank have come to despise him. This rotten organization wastes billions and billions of dollars every year. Yet, its funding continues and increase with little real review of its usefulness.

By all means, let's vote Wolfowitz off the island. Then, let's vote to demolish the island itself.

Kevin:

And the fact that Wolfowitz is a war criminal who has been wrong about every single aspect of the Iraq War Crime wasn't enough to convince you that he never should have been appointed in the first place?

A Hague Tribunal is what this SOB deserves.

It's to Wolfowitz's credit that the corrupt, overpaid employees of the World Bank have come to despise him. This rotten organization wastes billions and billions of dollars every year

ex-liberal,

Your willingness to spout off worthless opinions based on pure, unadulterated ignorance is contemptible. You show no evidence of having any shame or self-respect at all.

Are you ready to make an argument based on evidence, or are you simply a worthless gasbag?

it still seemed plausible that he had acted properly in a difficult situation….

…engaging in such penny-ante shit as this… Disputo at 2:53 AM

…Perle’s business machinations provide a glimpse into the staggering levels of corruption and greed within and around the Bush administration.
On March 21 the New York Times revealed that Perle had a conflict of interest involving Global Crossing, the telecommunications firm that filed for bankruptcy following revelations of accounting fraud and other illegal practices. ... Global Crossing hired Perle as an adviser and agreed to pay him $725,000, of which $600,000 was contingent on his success in using his influence to obtain US government approval for the transaction.
...In a March 7 signed affidavit that was to be filed in Global Crossing’s bankruptcy proceedings, Perle claimed that his position as chairman of the Defense Policy Board gave him “intimate knowledge” on the process whereby Global Crossing could obtain the needed clearance.
... Perle had previously fallen under suspicion of stacking the Defense Policy Board with his own business associates, using his influence over US policy in the Middle East to secure business for his firm, Trireme Partners, favoring an Israeli firm that had previously paid him $50,000 for a 1983 defense contract, and funneling classified information to the Israeli embassy in the 1970s…
Perle was also involved as a lobbyist for Loral, a company that provided classified satellite technology that was used to launch a Chinese rocket.

It's to Wolfowitz's credit that the corrupt, overpaid employees of the World Bank have come to despise him… ex-lax at 11:47 AM

So this is what the liberal attacks on a dedicated public servant like Wolfowitz are reduced to: he helped a friend get a job. Who hasn't done that?

That's funny.

You know, it's really a shame. It would have been interesting to see what a newly reconstituted World Bank would have been able to do if there wouldn't have been this scapegoating of Mr. Wolfowitz.

Notice how politics often thwarts progress.

I may not like Wolfowitz much, but it still seemed plausible that he had acted properly in a difficult situation and was now being railroaded by Bank employees who don't like him any more than I do.

There is some truth to that. While I am also no fan of Wolfowitz, there have been questionable actions on both sides.

Mr Wolfowitz's aides claimed in recent weeks that all arrangements concerning Ms Riza were made at the direction of the board and with the knowledge of the ethics committee.

The first part of that statement is true; the arrangements were made at the direction of the ethics committee. The second half is partly true; the ethics committee was not apprised of the details of the Ms. Riza's contract--and arguably they didn't want to be.

You can read the sordid details in the paper trail published by the World Bank last month here.

It says something about the moral bankruptcy of someone like Wolfie that he is willing to say the made a "mistake" - but he is unwilling or unable to say that what he did was "wrong".

Wolfowitz is quite fortunate.

For most of history's self-appointed messiahs, having sacrificed truth and goodness to the pursuit of extravagant fancies, the final chapter is not so nice.

…Notice how politics often thwarts progress… eggbutt at 1:39 PM

Opening, fel, mudwall jackson, lampwick, kenji (as ever), then lisainvan (right on!) sum it up. MaxPower sums it up. Why read further?

egbert and fellow travellers, if norm coleman was on the committee and this was a durn ferener, there would be no hell to pay. This would be grounds for closing the bank. (Oil for Food?)

About time the US stood for what it says it stands for.

Crony/familiar neocon. One more player in a Bush/Cheney culture of corruption.
Well, enough already. He was part of the neocons endless military intervention rhetoric from the PNAC of the late '90s...Endtimers and Neocons. Delusions free of facts and realistic analysis...
why George went to war..a cabal focused on consolidating the empire while seeking to enrich Halliburton through blood drenched fraudulence. Kevin--you don't like to discuss Halliburton.
That organization united for global American imperialism included Wolfowitz--he was one of the signatories, along with Cheney, Jeb Bush, Rumsfield, Forbes, Bennett and the disgraced Scooter Libby, among others.
They felt it was "important to shape circumstances before crises emerge." Enough said.

"ex-liberal" at 11:47 AM, that was one of your more loathsome comments.

"ex-liberal" likes to maintain a measured, reasonable tone, but note how vehement "ex-liberal" becomes when it comes to defending one of his fellow neocons.

Tool.

egbert: "Notice how politics often thwarts progress."

So you are waking up to the evil that is George W. Bush, bully-boy of the Western World? Congrats!

Sorry not to respond sooner; I was in transit.

The 2006 Annual Report of the World Bank shows commitments of $14 billion and Loans Outstanding of $103 billion. Heaven knows how much of that $103 billion will be paid back and how much will be defaulted. Any way you look at it, that's a lot of money.
link: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTABOUTUS/EXTANNREP/EXTANNREP2K6/0,,contentMDK:21045361~menuPK:2915545~pagePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:2838572,00.html

What has the world gotten for this enormous sum? What countries have been lifted out of poverty thanks to the World Bank?

What I see is a group of very well-paid employees who are giving out stupenous sums of money, yet most of us have no idea how effective their generousity is.

I am dubious about spending by international organizations, because there is a lessening of accountability. If the US screws up its foreign aid, we could blame Bush. But, none of us knows if the World Bank is screwing up their aid. And, if we did know, who would we hold accountable?

I'd rather see the US provide foreign aid directly.

ex-thinker: "I'd rather see the US provide foreign aid directly."

And that's what we are doing--in the form of boots and bayonets. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is turning away from the United States and finding ways to move forward (or not) without us. That may be great for saving money now, but you won't like it so much when you are forced to take Mandarin lessons.

By the way, joined the army yet, big talker?

I'm all for hanging Wolfie, but we should give him some credit for romancing an exceedingly plain woman.

TIME TO VOTE WOLFOWITZ OFF THE ISLAND....Like Mark Kleiman, I haven't commented on the Paul Wolfowitz/World Bank affair because I wasn't sure what to think about it.

What to think is that he never should have gotten the job to being with. In fact, given that a number of the member nations were against the Iraq war and Wolfowitz was its prime "architect," why the hell did they confirm him to begin with? Who gives a shit if it's "tradition" that the U.S. supply the head? First of all that's stupid. Second, if you must maintain that tradition, they still could have made it clear, publicly or otherwise, that Wolfie was an unacceptable choice.

This is absurd. I know the liberals want to go back to the good old days of selling missle technology to the Chinese for illegal campaign fundraising. Or that old standby of the liberals rent out the Lincoln bedroom for campaign fundraising.
We can hire interns to the White House based on their ability to give a blow job.
Wolfkowitz did nothing illegal. Donino resigned because he he was told he would actually have to show up the earn the enormous salary that he was being paid. OMG just think of it what an unusual request from your boss. Since you are being paid over $300,000 a year tax free show up and earn it.
Also he is twisting the events of what happened. Why anyone would believe any of the directors or high officials of the world bank is beyond me. They have historically been labelled year in and year out as the most corrupt international organization on the planet. All of the past directors have gotten phenomenally rich from loans and grant from the Bank. As always the US gives the most money and we get nothing back from it. This is a simple message being deliverd by the rest of the world if you attempt to clean up the corruption we will defame you, and destroy you. The liberals on this had no problem with Robert McNamara being head of this corrupt organization and his laissez faire attitude for it. I guess the war he brought to the US which was nothing but lies from start to finish is something you can more easily stomach.
Liberals are such hypocrites and liars.

Although I was an Executive Director at the World Bank, 2002-2004, I arrived there directly from the private sector and so I might not know much about the nuances of diplomatic affairs but, the way I see it, perhaps I am better off so.

The Ethics Committee proposed a solution to Mr Wolfowitz’ conflict of interest that could have entailed having the poverty fighting World Bank to pay out US$1.950.000 over ten years (US$ 130.000 plus 50% benefits) and that, no matter how we read it, is just plain crazy. Then Mr Wolfowitz, whom as President should know that something does not have to be right just because an Ethics Committee says so, raised the potential cost for the bank of what is delicately phrased as a secondment to US$2.700.000, or more.

Both the Ethic Committee and Wolfowitz were wrong and neither of them should be allowed to hide out under some pro or against Wolfowitz banners. If the World Bank is to come out well of this, as the world needs it to do and as its overwhelmingly good staff, management, board members and presidents, present or past, absolutely deserve, then the issue should exclusively be about what is right or wrong.

Jack-Ass: "Or that old standby of the liberals rent out the Lincoln bedroom for campaign fundraising."

Old standby is right: mass murder compared with unproven tropes about fundraising. This, coming from someone who supports the most criminally corrupt admin in U.S history. Speaking of Monica (and were we?), fellate much lately? I hear Jack Abramoff is looking for a new bitch.

…I am dubious about spending by international organizations… ex-lax at 10:59 PM

….Wolfkowitz did nothing illegal….Jack on May 7, 2007 at 11:43 AM

interesting social commentary to date. would be interested to know whether Wolfowitz ever lead a company before joining the Bush administration???

and why does this have to lead into neocons versus liberals??? the main issue is business ethics and whether his actions warrant separation of employment...

Breaking news: Wolfie has finally resigned from the WB.

ExBrit: where ya get the news before the media launch???

and why does this have to lead into neocons versus liberals??? the main issue is business ethics and whether his actions warrant separation of employment... Posted by: thiopental ken

No. The main issue here is that Wolfowitz is a war criminal. Therefore, he shouldn't have any kind job let alone be head of an international aid organization.

Hey, if he's nailed Capone-style, that's fine. Just get the horrible fucker away from the international scene.

where ya get the news before the media launch???

I haff my sources...
Actually, I mispoke. I heard it on NPR, but later realized they reported a top aide of Wolfowitz's had resigned. Apologies.

For an example of the World Bank's dishonesty and ineffectiveness, read this article: http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010046

meridia weight loss meridia weight loss
hoodia gordonii weight loss hoodia gordonii weight loss

What about the girl friend? Does she stay in the job with the raises etc? I haven't seen anything about her as she was at the World Bank for 4/5 years before Wolfie and surely knew the rules.

(Comments sourced in part to Los Angeles Times latimes.com May 11, 2007 article "World Bank Workers See Wolfowitz as a World Apart" by Nicole Gaouette,LA Times staff writer). Wolfowitz was such an arrogant manager that he brought his own assistants from the Defense Department to the World Bank, and made them his primary advisers, in spite of the fact that they had no economic background. These persons along with Riza, were paid excessive wages in spite of their lack of economic experitsse. Furthermore, he tuned out, disregarded, and refused to read the well researched position papers of the most experienced experts and the World Bank. According to the LATimes article above, Wolfowitz was brought in by George Bush I, while Bush was CIA Director, as a sort of backchannel advisor to set up his own networks and challenge conventional wisdom. It seems that Wolfowitz has such an ingrained distrust of all conventional wisdom - so much so that he throws all of it out, doesn't listen to anyone except his few trusted advisors, and comes up with absurd solutions that fit his preconceptions, rather than the facts as they are. His preconceptions and disregard for conventional wisdom and facts created a disaster in Iraq. Is it therefor any suprise that these exact same ingrained behavioral tendencies created a similar disaster at the World Bank. He is detested not merely because he completely disregarded the advise of the World Banks experts and experienced managers, and didn't even bother to read their papers pressented after thousands of hours of work. Furthermore, he paid his inexperienced hatchet men excessive wages; and finally lied that his favoritism was sanctioned by the World Banks internal lawyer and Ethics Committee. Now he claims he is unfairly treated by the whole Board. Is it any wonder that he is almost universally detested by World Bank personnel; and by the Governments of "Old Europe" as well as Asia and South America? Yet Bush II supports him despite all the prevarications, hidden agendas, miscalculations, arrogance and incompetencies; even at the price of the goodwill of America's most precious allies.