Posted on 03/18/2005 8:12:50 AM PST by Right Wing It
As many of you are aware, Paul Wolfowitx has now been named head of the world bank. Many individuals are opposed to this, and i am curious as to why there is such a strong since of opposition in this man's new government position. Can someone answer my questions?
1. What makes this man qualified for head of world bank?
2. Why are so many people opposed to his position.
Your questions make me tired.
For one thing, he doesn't believe that giving money to kleptocracies is a good idea.
Additionally the World Bank specializes, or is supposed to specialize, in infrastructure projects. Mr. Wolfowitz managed to get Iraq's infrastructure up and running again in extremely adverse conditions.
(2) Some people hate him because he's a Jew. Some because he's an American patriot. Some because he's conservative.
To paraphrase Mark Steyn: "The first part of his name is a scary animal and the last part sounds Jewishley."
1. He has diplomatic experience. 2. Those opposed to the appointment will know sooner rather than later that money doesn't grow on trees.
Good questions.
Besides all the good reasons posted by others above, it's also Bush flipping the international community the "bird". It's a sign that the party for the tin-pot dictators of the world, using international money to live like a rapper, is about to end. And nobody can do anything about it. Even the Democrats. It's real "W" chutzpah!
Quotes from Bush:
Bush said at a news conference that he chose Wolfowitz, 61, because he is "committed to development" and is "a compassionate, decent man."
The president also said that as No. 2 at the Pentagon, Wolfowitz had demonstrated skill for managing a large institution.
Other administration officials cited Wolfowitz's experience as ambassador to Indonesia, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs and dean of the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University as evidence of his expertise and involvement in development issues.
"I've said he was a man of good experience. He helped manage a large organization -- the World Bank is a large organization, the Pentagon's a large organization. He's been involved in the management of that organization," Bush told reporters at a news conference on Wednesday.
"He's a skilled diplomat," Bush added. "Worked at the State Department in high positions, ambassador to Indonesia, where he did a very good job representing our country."
2. One Word: Hawk. The only ones complaining are the anti-war crowd.
"He has shown himself a capable administrator of an enormous budget as manager of the the US Pentagon. The World bank is smaller and has fewer resources than his previous post."
This is the same guy that said the war would pay for itself. How many hundreds of billions has it cost so far?
Say what you will about his ability to run other aspects of the pentagon, managing a budget is not his strong suit.
This is a BANK, it's all about managing a budget.
He didn't say it would pay for itself simultaneously with its prosecution.
Warfighting isn't daytrading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.