Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (37119)	5/3/2007 7:44:01 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541931

Brooks' point was too tame for me. But the frame within which he put it, ever so slightly adjusted, is much better than the "he broke the rules" frame. Wolfowitz will lose his position because he is a terrible manager. The latest public issues are simply triggers that made it possible to take all that stuff public. I don't mean to say he was bad; best I can tell from what I read, he was just flat out terrible. Brooks is making the same argument I made earlier which is that in any organization you have a set of folk who are viewed by everyone else as the "levelheaded" ones. I'm not an admirer of those folk since they rarely get things done. But they are the last to take up the cudgel. When they did, and publicly, Wolfowitz' many terrible management practices were clearly coming to an end. One of the many striking things of the moment is that any present sin that now appears to mark Bush's legacy brings with it long lists. He is a president of very bad patterns. In this one, he has absolutely no gift at picking the right people for the right job. Rather, it's as if he was cursed with the opposite gift. The very worst pick is picked. And how many months remain??