Hey, it could be worse. They could have sent Bolton to the World Bank and Wolfie to the UN. You think that we the subject of derision now. How much worse could it have been if they switched them?!

Then, again, after Condie "S&M Barbie" as the US Ambassador-in-Chief, almost any diplomatic appointment is an improvement. Please note that I said "almost"--I would not appoint Henry Kissinger as an ambassador to Syria, for example.

It will be interesting to see if the member states of the World Bank will stand up to the U.S. on this & who will lead the charge if they do.
I would not put it beyond Bush to withdraw from the World Bank if he can't get his way on this.
Even if Bush wins on this if there is a real fight it will be a real signal of how rapidly the U.S. is losing it's position in the world.

Maybe Karen Hughes can help write a position statement.

Between Bolton and Wolfowitz the Bush Administration is giving a one finger salute with BOTH hands to the rest of the world. I can't believe the hypocrisy!

And the den of thieves widens it's territories.

Sheesh, he hates "administrative duties". That's to say he doesn't like the "work" part of his job.

Well, I hate the administrative part of my business too, don't we all?

So he just wants to be the jet setting guru, telling the rest of the world what to do and letting others pick up the pieces?

Will be interesting to see if "old Europe" gives Wolfie the green light.

As well as lacking any relevant experience, he is a deeply divisive figure who is unlikely to move the bank toward a more pro-poor agenda," said Patrick Watt, policy officer at British charity Action Aid.

Well, maybe Wolfie can teach the poor around the world about individual responsibility and the new ownership society. However, I am not so sure I would trust him with $20 or $30 billion dollars.

I don't understand this appointment. Wouldn't you want a banker or financial guy to run the world bank? Did he lie on his resume? Was he a banker in a past life?

This does make sense if you think about it. Condi's job is to spur domination over diplomacy, Bolton's is to handcuff the United Nations and Wolfie to steal the world's money. Rummy's already destroying the military and Goss the CIA while the SEC and EPA are at death's door.

Oh, and last year's Current Account Deficit was 666 billion.

Coincidence?

Just wanted to reiterate on the revealing comparison with McNamara. Both led their country into foreign disasters, but McNamara had been a succesful CEO of Ford Motor. He had the tools. Wolfowitz has been a Dean of a School and an Ambassador. He simply isn't qualified.

And that's what should should really get under people's skin. Not only is he a neo-con nut, he's unqualified for the job that they want him to have. (This is also true for Condi, BTW)

Yes, he is unqualified, and the Europeans are pointing out that he is not qualified. Reason enough for a vote against him.

The European are again wandering about the choice for running the World Bank (184 States members) therefore, is it feasible for them to reject king george nomination. Chirac has been silent in a wait and see mode, Le soir.Be mention that it was not well received and call both Bolton and Wolfowitz hawks?
They look at these 2 nominates as this administration is not really caring to mends the fences with old Europe.

Bush's 'shocking' choice of Wolfowitz for World Bank provokes outrage

Paul D. Wolfowitz once wrote that a major lesson of the cold war for American foreign policy was "the importance of leadership and what it consists of: not lecturing and posturing and demanding, but demonstrating that your friends will be protected and taken care of, that your enemies will be punished, and that those who refuse to support you will regret having done so."

Well, that about sums it up.

I don't understand this appointment.

Money in the pockets of the toppers. Simple enough.

Screw 'em, its our money.