Quote:
Originally posted by Rick Lee
Rumsfeld is an interesting character indeed. Love him or hate him, you can't call the guy dull or lazy. I've been around him a little and he is just like the book describes him. After Bush leaves office, I would love to see Woodward and Tom Clancy team up to write a book about the Pentagon culture and how to reform it. Rumsfeld, like Bush and Cheney, is one of those guys who just doesn't care about being liked. And I think that's something to look for in a reformer with a huge, entrenched bureaucracy to fix. So far I think Jay Garner left way too early and Paul Bremer made a few irrepairable errors. But again, I'm only halfway through it.
Bandar plays a huge role in many of Woodward's books, which seems to go unnoticed outside the Beltway. His successor, Turki al Faisal was one of my dad's classmates at prep school, so my dad and I are always forwarding each other mentions of him in news clippings. But I don't think Turki can ever replace Bandar. Maybe that's a good thing though, as Bandar had an almost scary amount of influence in the last 3-4 WH's.
|
Yeah, Bandar seemed to have a scary amount of influence. I doubt 2% of Americans had even heard of the guy until now.
I'm with you on Rumsfeld- I definitely wasn't referring to your original post in my last sentence about character. It was more about the spinmeisters on cable and the WH staff. And like you said, Woodward had an about-face that needs explaining.
On Rumsfeld: it must be incredible to be so sure you're right all the time, and really not give one whit what other (respected) people think about you. In some ways it would make it so much easier to lead people...if the people don't rebel. I guess all CEO types must have this trait to a certain extent.