The Los Angeles Times (owned by a Chicago company-- that's *second* city, California, and don't you forget it) called for Bono, front man for U2, to be considered for the job as President of the World Bank.
Here's the editorial.
Here's an article about it.
I think it's great. I love the egalitarian spirit of the editorial, reminding us that government is of the people (not just for the people), not just of the self-identified experts who all too often ignore the public as something to be managed rather than the best manifestation of the public will. Government is for all of us -- and we should be helping to run things. Progressives especially need to remember that, and not leave leadership for other people.
5 comments:
I second the idea. Bono is far superior to the other names I've read recently: Paul Wolfowitz (hey, if Condi can fail upward, why not this asshat?) and Carly Fiorina (she can do for the Bank what she did for HP! Oh, wait...)
I like Bono, mostly because he openly blames "corrupt government" and "communism" for the current state of African misery (not the West or imperialism). Maybe he does this to appease Western money-givers or maybe he has moral courage. Either way it's nice to hear the truth. But I think Paul Wolfowitz is more qualified for the job. And I would think Progressives would be thrilled to get him out of the Pentagon and into a nice bureaucratic sinkhole. I'm sure Syria is thrilled. - CF
Wolfowitz isn't qualified to operate the Squishee machine at the Quickie Mart. He's a demonstrated liar and major architect of the biggest foreign policy failure of the United States in a generation. Of course, if your goal were to undermine the World Bank in particular and global institutions in general, nominating a total incompetent with rigid, unthinking Bush loyalty would be a pretty good strategy.
Fortunately, our sane European friends will probably come to the rescue and scuttle this wretched idea.
Bono has used his fame and access to power to do something positive. Wolfowitz used his fame and access to foment a war that's produced 1,500 dead American soldiers, tens of thousands of dead Iraqis (many of them innocent), and a $200 billion-and-counting price tag.
The correct choice between Bono and Wolfowitz seems quite obvious to me. But I'm not one of the conservative nutbags running the country. (No doubt when they look at Wolfowitz, they see Bono.)
Didn't Bobo die in a skiing accident?
Bono? You gots to be joking. I wouldn't mind a randomly-picked celebrity (I hear Martha Stewart's looking for work), but Bono? What a pompous ass. He would be almost as bad as the kind of person who will actually get the job.
Post a Comment