I know, I know. This might be considered by some to be Bush bashing. Yes, yes, there have been other less than perfect presidents (Buchanan, 1857-1861), but Bush seems to be setting a new record. This is our country and a lot of people are tired of what’s happening to it. If enough of the real crap that’s happening under his watch is exposed, perhaps even his supporters will want him held accountable.
The Hackocracy: Why our MBA president can’t manage the government
Recent personnel changes under Joshua Bolten, the new White House chief of staff, have already begun to follow a pattern. An anonymous official speaking for the president indicates that the time has come for a senior head to roll—be it that of Scott McClellan (ushered out last month as White House press secretary), John Snow (still clinging to his job at the Treasury Department), or—in the drama that has been played out over the last several days—Porter Goss at the CIA. The unnamed senior administration official avers that we need someone competent and qualified in this important position, as if this novel idea had just occurred to the president and his advisers.
Perhaps Bush is to be commended, even at this late stage, for attempting to place more capable people in positions of authority in his administration. But for a presidency that has already entered its graveyard spiral, this human-resources initiative comes too late. Bolten’s belated focus on better leadership merely points up what a travesty Bush’s vaunted management style has been. Entirely aside from debates over his policy and spending choices, the first president with an MBA has proved inept as the federal government’s CEO.
In Bush’s sixth year, the executive branch resembles a smoldering landscape after battle. The staffs of various agencies and departments have been routed by a combination of political interference, neglect, and failed leadership.
New agencies that Bush has launched, from the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives to the Department of Homeland Security, have failed to find their footing, to put it charitably, primarily because Bush has not structured them properly, found competent leadership, or otherwise followed through on his plans. (In a 2005 survey, employees ranked the newly formed DHS second-to-last among the large federal agencies as a place to work.)
In practice, Bush tends to appoint mediocre people he trusts to be loyal, delegates hardly any decision-making power to anyone beyond a few top aides, and seldom holds anyone accountable. These failures are related. If you don’t give people real authority, you can’t reasonably hold them responsible for what follows. What has grown up around the president as a result is not an effective political machine, but a stultifying imperial court, a hackocracy dominated by sycophants, cronies, and yes men.
100% agreed. This is the man’s chief flaw as a leader.
This says it all…”In Bush’s sixth year, the executive branch resembles a smoldering landscape after battle”.
I think Gary Aldrich’s UNLIMITED ACCESS set the record straight on management. If getting Republicans control of Congress, maintaining a majority of governors, and increasing the number of Senators and House members two elections in a row is ‘not an effective political machine’, then what happens when they run the government properly? The death of the Democrat Party?
Very interesting article in today’s NYTimes “All the President’s Books” By MICHIKO KAKUTANI.
He goes through multiple recent publications by liberals and conservatives documenting patterns of insular, ineffectiveness of the current Regime in Washington. Diehard neocons need to think about what is happening to the label “conservative” as a result of BushCo’s and Congress’s incompetence. Within another year it will be more poisonous than the word “liberal” currently is.
If the Republicans hadn’t put such a dweeb in the White House, they certainly could have the government locked up. Praise the Lord he’s inept! The last thing we need here is a one-party state!
What, anti-Bush people on THIS site? No, get out…I can’t believe that they would comment on this kind of post.
I think all you liberals are dead wrong! The President is merely lulling the terrorists into a false sense of security, making them think he’s utterly incompetent so they’ll let their guard down. You just wait and see, he’s ready to spring into action at a moment’s notice, and soon we’ll be able to declare unconditional victory in the war on terror.
I’m writing up apologies for you all to sign when it happens.
Better than Clinton
Is this all Republicans can say now? Well, atleast he was better than Clinton!
Clinton never had a 31% approval rating. So if you are using that as you basis, then Clinton was better than Bush. What else are you going to base it on? The National Deficit was going down under Clinton, Bush….next! Gas was cheap under Clinton, Bush….next!
At the end of the day, it seems that Republicans will try and use the “Clinton Defense”. It really is sad. They paint Clinton as this evil person, even though he was never found guilty of anything wrong. What Clinton did or did not do is nothing compared to what Bush has done.
Faith based department? What the hell? Since when did that happen? I guess thats why we dont get results in the real world they are too busy with their imaginary friends.
“Faith based department? What the hell?” Isn’t that a contradiction?
Smartalix,
You bring up another point… The media being in Clintons corner(guffaw). Can you imagine how the media would have reacted if a gay male prostitute had been to the Whitehouse over 100 times, and the security logs only showed him leaving a few times?
Nevermind that the only reason we know about the other hooker gate is becaues of the internet, it barely gets any play on traditional media at all. By Clintonian standards it should be wall to wall coverage for months, nay years, on end. Barely gets any play at all.
AB CD: Being good at politics and being good at governing are two different things. I’ll admit the Republicans have always been better than the Democrats on the former.
Consider:
100,000,000 persons VOTEd.
Thats about 33-40% of those in the US.
Of those 1/2 were Demo, and the 1/2 repub…
The article said he was ineffective at politics.
>The media being in Clintons corner(guffaw). Can you imagine how the >media would have reacted if a gay male prostitute had been to the >Whitehouse over 100 times,
How many networks covered rape accusations against Bill Clinton? I think NBC dropped it after the first interview, which they held until after the impeachment trial, losing the exclusive. I call that being in Clinton’s corner. Some of it was just good work by Blumenthal and Lanny Davis in playing the media, b ut they were willing to be played.
“I think NBC dropped it after the first interview”
In otherwords more TV play than Jeff Gannon has gotten or for that matter, Hookergate.
“NASA, where a 24-year-old college dropout was until recently in a position to order senior officials to make references to the Big Bang compatible with the possibility of “intelligent design.”
The Clinton rape allegations are covered in this Wiki article that also talks about the ones against George W. Bush
“Everyone’s taken a slice of it, and after looking at it, everyone’s knocked it down. The woman has changed her story about whether it happened. It just wasn’t credible.”
Bush’s accuser is also referred to as a schizophrenic…
Uncle Dave.
I am appalled at your unmitigated audacity. The brazen gall for you to infer that James Buchanan is a worse President then his highness, King George the Worst.
Buchanan had the country self-destructing over slavery during his term. This was a much more divisive issue then abortion is today. He was also paralyzed with a Republican anti-slave House and pro-slave Democrat Senate, and a Supreme Court seemingly out to get him. Nothing could get through Congress. Buchanan was more a victim of the times then the bumbling failure he is made out to be. Buchanan didn’t thumb his nose at the law. He never suggested that he wasn’t obligated to uphold the law or Constitution.
Today, Bush’s party controls both houses of Congress. Yet the initiatives he managed to get through have only benefited large companies and the richest while hurting common, middle class Americans and the poor. He has gone from an approval of 89% in September 2001 to 31 % in May 2006. A record high and approaching the record low.
H (I hope I can be so audacious as to refer to you so informally):
One of the facts of life around here is that Dvorak (who sometimes gets it in his head that he owns this blog — cripes!) gets to make changes, additions, etc. to what we lowly contributing editors post. Editing the editors, so to speak. Until you mentioned it, I hadn’t noticed that John had added the parenthetical. Given the context, I can’t disagree with the addition.
Having said that, if you reread the words outside the parenthetical, you’ll notice that they don’t say Buchanan was worse than Bush. I would never let my gall become so “brazen.” Quite the contrary, if you look back at some of my previous posts, I’ve made it abundantly clear that I consider Bush to be the worst president this country has ever known.
I hope this clears things up. I wouldn’t want you (or Paul) to attack my gall unjustly.
No one died when Clinton lied.
May 11, 2006 – ‘ Number of U.S.A. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In Al-Usa’s Iraqi Occupation Procedure is 2433 ‘
Allen McDonald, El Galloviejo®
As far as I can tell Buchanan was actually worse…but Bush does have a few years left. Personally I think Bush is more in the league of Coolidge — the reason for the 1929 crash and subsequent depression.
Dvorak
One of the facts of life around here is that Dvorak (who sometimes gets it in his head that he owns this blog — cripes!) gets to make changes, additions, etc. to what we lowly contributing editors post.
Aahh bosses. They always think they know best, don’t they?
…if you look back at some of my previous posts, I’ve made it abundantly clear that I consider Bush to be the worst president this country has ever known.
I know, I was just feeling a little “contrary” last night. Hey, but what the heck, do you know anyone else who has defended Buchanan? Actually, I wrote a paper on him back in the olden days in an effort to get a better grade. The Prof told me that if I could make somebody like Buchanan look good then he would give me an “A”. I almost did it, I got a B+. To do the same for Bush you would need to offer me cash as well as an “A”.
What do you expect from a generation that listens to rap and hip-hop — instead of music?
I’ve always thought the Hey hey ho ho chant was stupid myself. Is this the best they can do? How did it catch on?
29 / 30, The musical chant makes it easier to remember the words.
Why don’t we just impeach the bloody fool and get it over with!