Wednesday, September 07, 2005

The Weakened Standard

David Ignatius quotes William Kristol:
"Almost every Republican I have spoken with is disappointed" by the administration's response to Katrina, Kristol told The Post's Jim VandeHei. "He is a strong president . . . but he has never really focused on the importance of good execution. I think that is true in many parts of his presidency."
If I may be completely unfair in my translation of that remark:
He is a strong president...
This seems to mean, "I agree with Bush's agenda."
but he has never really focused on the importance of good execution.
This seems to mean, "But he's completely incompetent." A CEO President who can't execute? The head of the Executive Branch of government who can't execute? You can't be more damning than that.

Kristol also previously weighed in on Bush's performance on Iraq while on the Daily Show - "He did drive us into a ditch" - while continuing to insist that Bush should be the guy we let attempt to drive us out. (Surprisingly, we still seem to be in the ditch.) Granted, some might argue that it isn't Bush who has failed so much as the effort to put Kristol's preferred philosophies into practice. But either way, it is high time to stop mincing around the facts, and to acknowledge the extent of the failure.


  1. The Bush executive style sounds to me like a cover-up for the fact that he doesn't know crap about the business of the government.
    Shove responsibility downstream so you don't have to understand the issues, emphasize form over substance.

    There is a big distance between being strong and hiding weakness behind a facade of force.

  2. I couldn't have said it better myself.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.