Conservative prof. chides Bush’s management style.
By on Jul 3rd, 2006 at 11:08 am
Conservative prof. chides Bush’s management style.
Charles Kesler, a conservative professor at Claremont McKenna college, pens an op-ed in the LAT today, arguing, “[I]t’s not clear that being a master of business administration has made [Bush] a better chief executive. … Bush’s management style is long on decisions and short on explanations. He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.â€
That’s because he DOESN’T UNDERSTAND their views. This guy is a textbook C-student. He doesn’t question anything b/c he doesn’t grasp the science, the logic, the reasoning, and the foresight of such arguments. Just that dumb smirk on his face.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:18 am“a master of business administration”
WTF?
Another aloowance of the framing of the debate. HE HAS NEVER BEEN, AND NEVER WILL BE A MASTER OF ANY BUSINESS. HE HAS FAILED AT EVERY BUSINESS HE EVER WAS PUT IN CHARGE OF.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:18 amWhen will we STOP allowing these reframing of the debate?
He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.
He’s not listening, he’s waiting for them to stop talking so he can be…wait for it…
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:27 amThe Decider.
and it took this guy SIX years to figure that out?
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:33 amDuh!
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:35 amI’m glad to see a conservative say what I’ve always known: You can’t run a government like a business. The goals are completely different. Businesses operate for the purpose of making a profit. (According to Milton Friedman, this is a corporation’s sole purpose for existing.) But a government has to operate to serve its citizens, and you can never know how much that may cost in advance. But that’s one reason why the Constitution authorizes our Congress to borrow money.
Of course, the big argument is “What should the function of a government be?” Should it exist to serve all of its citizens? Or should it exist to serve the interests of businesses? The correct answer is to serve its citizens, but I know the conservatives see it differently.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:39 am“He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.â€
…and their motives…
but then, they all think alike, i suppose…
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:42 amThe MBA was invented in the Progressive era as a way to abort future generations of robber barons.
And today bush, and his ‘pioneer’ ilk, have but become the robber baron society of privitization and corruption.
It’s a sad day for the conservativesm they see that bush and company have become what they feared most the neo liberal-ratocracy
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:44 am“He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.â€
…and their motives…
but then, they all think alike, i suppose…
Comment by katy — July 3, 2006 @ 11:42 am
Which is why they’re in the jobs they’re in. Precisely because they all think alike. This president does not enjoy the benefit of alternative points of view from his staff.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:44 ambeing a master of business administration
does that mean that w has a master’s degree in bus. adm. ?
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:45 amcause he sure hasn’t mastered any business that i know of -
oh, except the business of bullshitting…
On another note, MSNBC is continuing to report that Cheney’s heart health has been found to be stable and that the Vice president received a good report on his pacemaker at his annual physical.
Phew! I haven’t slept well the past few nights worrying about him.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:47 amWhich is why they’re in the jobs they’re in. Precisely because they all think alike. This president does not enjoy the benefit of alternative points of view from his staff.
Say isn’t that just the opposite of democracy?
When bush says he’s the decider, I think what he really means is the dictator.
A neo-liberal dictator. had I voted for Bush, which I didn’t, I would be feeling very used, and quite concerned what path America is taking along this unplotted ‘course’.
======================================
More ‘MBA’ madness;
Scheuer is one of more than 100 national security and terrorism analysts surveyed by Foreign Policy magazine and the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank.
Asked whether the United States is “winning the war on terror,” 84 percent said no and 13 percent answered yes. Asked whether the war in Iraq is helping or hurting the global anti-terrorism campaign, 87 percent said hurting. Eighty-six percent said the world is becoming “more dangerous for the United States and the American people.”
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:51 amOn another note, MSNBC is continuing to report that Cheney’s heart health has been found to be stable
Black holes are relatively stable.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:56 amPhew! I haven’t slept well the past few nights worrying about him.
Comment by Joe Sixpack
The hospital must have very finely tuned instruments and machines, in order to detect a heart so hard and small.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:57 amexcept the business of bullshitting…
Comment by katy
There’s a difference between bullshitting and lying. Bush is a liar.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:59 amI heard when the doctors put the stethescope to cheney’s chest they did not hear a beat, they instead heard a strange tune…the grinch song.
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:00 pmThere’s a difference between bullshitting and lying. Bush is a liar.
Comment by Zooey aka Zookeeper — July 3, 2006 @ 11:59 am
yep – that he is… but his lying is plain to see…
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:03 pmhe is a master bullshitter though…
it went like this;
You’re a mean one, Mr. Cheney.
You really are a heel.
You’re as cuddly as a cactus,
You’re as charming as an eel.
Mr. Cheney
You’re a bad banana
With a greasy black peel.
You’re a monster, Mr. Cheney.
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:08 pmYour heart’s an empty hole.
Your brain is full of spiders,
You’ve got garlic in your soul.
You’re a mean one, Mr. Cheney.
how about this:
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:38 pmYou’re a mean one, Mr. DICK…
or
You’re a mean one, you’re a DICK…
MBAs are so overated. I got mine inside of two years and I was high most of the time.
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pmBritons see US as vulgar empire builder
By Ben Fenton
(Filed: 03/07/2006)
Most Britons see America as a cruel, vulgar, arrogant society, riven by class and racism, crime-ridden, obsessed with money and led by an incompetent hypocrite.
Britons have never had such a low opinion of the leadership of the United States, a YouGov poll shows.
American troops are failing either to win “hearts and minds†in Iraq or bring democracy to that country.
More than two-thirds who offered an opinion said America is essentially an imperial power seeking world domination. And 81 per cent of those who took a view said President George W Bush hypocritically championed democracy as a cover for the pursuit of American self-interests.
A spokesman for the American embassy said that the poll’s findings were contradicted by its own surveys.
“We question the judgment of anyone who asserts the world would be a better place with Saddam still terrorizing his own nation and threatening people well beyond Iraq’s borders.
“With respect to the poll’s assertions about American society, we bear some of the blame for not successfully communicating America’s extraordinary dynamism.
“But frankly, so do you [the British press].â€
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:03 pmAmerica has come to terms that they have elected a dullard to the post of Chief Executive. Bush has neither the intellect, drive, nor desire to lead. He was the prop the neocons used to put a face on their failed policies. Bush looks more and more like a man who wants out. He has allowed the ill-fated advice of his “brain” Karl Rove make him the laughing stock of the entire world. It doesn’t help that his “talking point” note cards are wriiten for a 7-year old.
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:08 pm22# if Bush wants out he should just leave and impeach Rove and cheney for feeding him lies then EH? BUT oh no hes still mouthin Iran off and being the big Idiot
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:32 pmI never once thought for a moment that Bush’s long suit was listening to others.
Paul Krugman, like me, is still on vacation, but will Bob Herbert do? In his latest, he takes on an issue that really ought to be taken up by the Democrats as a campaign issue both this year and in ‘08: The plight of the lower-income working class.
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:33 pmBush and higher education, what a joke. Bush has an hands off approach to running the country. The people around him tells him what to think and say. Anyone with half a brain would get sick of repeating the same thing over and over again. MBA my ass!!!
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:47 pmOoooohh – a conservative Professor “chides Bush Management style” ?! Now that is a headline worth ignoring!! His statement speaks to the fact that he, too, is an idiot!!
Several things stand out in this paragraph~~
Having an MBA does not equate with being “a master of business administration”.
The first sentence says nothing because it is comprised of vague, nonsensical, context-free phrases… …”not clear”, “being a master of business administration has made…”, “chief executive”.
The next two sentences are equally as light on content, and intelligent thought.
I almost would like to read what else he had to say, to see if there is anything redeeming there.
July 3rd, 2006 at 1:49 pmHe’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views. – - Bush is the embodiment of the phrase, “a little light in the piazza.” (How’s that for an obscure cinema metaphor?)
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:02 pmAn MBA degree is nothing more than a stinking piece of paper.
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:05 pmAn MBA was yet another gift in exchange for large donations. What Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bolton, and Negroponte learned came from Machiavelli, Goebels, and Stalin.
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:09 pmOne would have to have some grasp of the subject matter before one can ask intelligent questions, much less critical questions. Sure, he’s better at “listening” than “questioning” because he doesn’t have the comprehension.
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:21 pmWe have a moron for president, folks. And that should not be news to anyone – he is a belligerent fool, an incompetent, a dry drunk with all the foibles and characteristics of one who is battling addiction without submitting to proper treatment. He was a poor student in his time and he is still a poor student of world affairs. He was a spoiled rich boy who never had to work for a living, who was handed opportunities because of his family name, and who has spoiled everything he has had a hand in throughout hs life. He is false to himself, false to his god, and false to America. He is a living Potemkin president, all facade, propped up by his friends and cronies, but the wind is growing stronger and the cardboard of Bush is about to fall down.
#30 Don’t hold back, Marie. Tell us what you really think. :)
Actually, I agree 100% with everything you said. I read that a friend of Bush’s (possibly Don or Doug Weams, I forget the name) said that Bush once said to him, “I don’t understand how poor people think. I’m just a rich white kid.” If accurate, that quote is telling on so many levels.
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:24 pm#30 – Marie
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:39 pm*standing ovation*
All right, so I pulled a GOP move and attacked the messenger, rather than address the message…I just thought it such empty criticism that I should address that aspect.
It is a good thing that Bush is being ridiculed in a bipartisan manner!! He deserves all the derision, disrespect and distrust he gets. He really should be hospitalized.
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:52 pmWayne … I haven’t commented in a while, but I wanted to add to your statement
I’m glad to see a conservative say what I’ve always known: You can’t run a government like a business. The goals are completely different. Businesses operate for the purpose of making a profit. (According to Milton Friedman, this is a corporation’s sole purpose for existing.) But a government has to operate to serve its citizens, and you can never know how much that may cost in advance. But that’s one reason why the Constitution authorizes our Congress to borrow money.
To clarify, Friedman specifically said, “There is one and only one social responsibility of business — to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud”. The only value that needs to maximized is, thus, shareholder value. While Friedman’s certainly an economic genius, not all “free-market” advocates share his opinion … moreover, a growing number of corporations believe that value should be added for all stakeholders … a vastly wider net. There are those that could very much run a government entity similarly to a corporation (and the corresponding efficiency, fiscal responsibility, etc.) … many argue that Guiliani did just that with NYC … to me, Bush’s MBA is more incidental than instrumental to his policies.
Of course, the big argument is “What should the function of a government be?†Should it exist to serve all of its citizens? Or should it exist to serve the interests of businesses? The correct answer is to serve its citizens, but I know the conservatives see it differently.
This need not be an either/or argument … “to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity” … is as valid a description as there will ever be. What I do like is that your comment speaks to “interests” … which, when one looks at our government today, are seldom discussed. Neither party argues interests … it’s all about positions and why this party won’t budge here and the other won’t budge there … in circumstances such as these, common interests are lost amidst the cloud of the position (the entire pro-choice/pro-life argument is deeply entrenched in this positional mindset). All that to say … there is a balance between corporate and individual interests … our economy has, thus far, been one of the best at finding it. Which is to say, the answer to your role of government question is BOTH …
Cheers …………
July 3rd, 2006 at 2:57 pm#34 Hi, Giacomo,
Long time, no see. Thanks for the clarification. I admit that the “condensed” quote I got was from a book whose author is not sympathetic to corporate interests. (Who the author is isn’t important; that he may have led me astray is.) I am not an expert on Milton Friedman.
I am not certain that I agree that there should be a balance between corporate interests and individual interests. Our country was founded so that people could be free; not so that businesses could be free. I feel that the “balance” (as you put it) has shifted too far towards the interests of corporations having more importance in this country than the individuals for whom it was supposedly created. Businesses have no vote under our current Constitution.
I agree that “interests” aren’t discussed enough in public. If they would agree to pass legislation regarding the things they agreed upon (as long as the legislation could “stand alone” like that), and not keep fighting to have everything they want, then maybe they could do a better job of serving the people who elected them. (They should be reminded once in a while that they are supposed to be serving people, not corporations.) But instead, they try to do an all-or-nothing approach where each side gets what it wants not because that would be best for the people, but because that’s the only way that something could be done. And, of course, to get support for a bill they have to promise to spend our money in that person’s district. It would nice if our lawmakers could do something just because it’s the right thing to do, and not because they’re going to get something out of it. I know, I’m heavily dreaming here.
July 3rd, 2006 at 3:20 pmBush has had the advantage of birth into wealth, private school and university education thru a master’s degree and he still can’t speak fluently. It was predictable from the day the supremes appointed him to the position he now holds that he did not have the ability, the stature, class and skill that previous presidents brought to the position that enabled them to communicate competently and accurately their policies and program. If being a bumpkin were his only fault, one could excuse his ignorance. However the country is in deep trouble abroad and at home and his failed policies and programs have only highlighted a brand of incompetence that can only bring deeper problems for the American people and their children and grandchildren to face. Malfeaseance and misfeasance in the highest office in the land have been visited upon the American people over the past 5+ years and most Americans now know it.
July 3rd, 2006 at 4:14 pmIn many ways, we need to look past the King (Bush) to the king-makers (Rove, Cheney, Rumsfield, etc) who are the Project for a New American Century folks. That’s where the intelligence, strategies, philosophy, and Danger are. Bush is just the sail, these guys are the wind of change that we need to stop if we are going to save this country.
July 3rd, 2006 at 4:35 pmI feel that the “balance†(as you put it) has shifted too far towards the interests of corporations having more importance in this country than the individuals for whom it was supposedly created. Businesses have no vote under our current Constitution.
I certainly am not going to argue that businesses as an entity are somehow protected or blessed by the Constitution, but to the extent that businesses are nothing more than groups of citizens joined by the common purpose of producting of a particular good or service … well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, so to speak. I would cede that the advent of multi-national corporations and geo-economics muddles the nice neat connection I’ve created, but I do believe that the over-riding principle holds. Uncheked corporations could trample the individual while over-checked corporations muddle opportunity and options for the same … as I stated earlier, this balance is often elusive but one that our economy has been mostly succesful with … certainly, reasonable minds may beg to differ.
As for Bush, he’s certainly a capatalist, but I’m not sure if that’s what troubles most of those who are vehemently opposed to his practices and points of view. Rather, it seems, to me at least, that for whatever reason, Bush (and those who advise him) feel that the executive branch has experienced a rolling back of constitutional authority … clearly, he paints with a much wider constitutional brush than his recent predecessors. This, I believe, is not necessarily due to some facist tendencies, but to the idea that the post-Nixon supreme court and congress mitigated executive authority to a point thre framers never intended. No one would say they didn’t have reason for doing such, but just the same, they rolled back presidential authority. It appears as though Bush believes that said rollbacks now inhibit the executives ability to do his/her job … I cannot say he’s correct b/c I do’t know the full extent of what he faces. Truth be told, none of us do. For those out there who don’t adhere to Bush’s ideology or outlook, this certainly does appear to be “executives gone wild” but what he’s done is not without historical precedent … Lincoln did much of the same (and actually far more). I guess what it comes down to is this; 1) Do you trust Bush? 2) If so, do you agree that the excutive branch was hindered by unconstitutional (because they infringed on executive rights) post-Nixon decisions such that a “perfect” (e.g. imminently trustworthy) hypothetical president is unable to fulfill his/her duty? 3) If so, should the current President then right the proverbial ship? Most people now answer NO to question one and thus never consider 2 or 3, but they should be asked (and I’d say as much if it were a Democrat in the presidency).
Bush is hardly a facist, but he’s definitely changing the excutive branch … is he returning it to the Constitutionally mandated place, or his he unlaterally adding himself powers. For those who say the latter, I would submit that the Presidency has never been about the man, but about the position … the precedents that are now set guide (and offer opportunity to) future presidents … be they liberal or conservative. Time will tell if Bush has made wise choices re. the nature of the Presidential role … I guess the point of this entire rant is to say that those who just reduce Bush’s decisions to Bush=Hitler haven’t really considered the nuances of his job or the many interpretations that are considered to be Constitutional (and please note that “Constitutional” doesn’t mean 100% of the citizens agree or like the decision).
Anyhoo, I think THAT’S why many hate him … or it may just be the corporation thing you mentioned :-)
Cheers.
July 3rd, 2006 at 6:26 pm“Bush’s management style is long on decisions and short on explanations. He’s apparently better at listening to others than questioning their views.â€
This is just another way of saying that Bush is a dim bulb.
July 3rd, 2006 at 9:53 pmShow me an MBA who’s not a screwup.
July 3rd, 2006 at 10:51 pmBush is as close to fascist as I have seen in my fifty nine years…I agree with #30, he is an untreated alcoholic surrounded by enablers who pick up the pieces to what he breaks…they tell him it okay to be the miserable failure he is and he goes about his miserable way.
July 4th, 2006 at 12:24 amBush, like all the public servants, took and oath to uphold and defend that constitution he is trying to get around. If he breaks that vow, what other vows will he break. Bush and his cabal are not to be trusted.
The deeper the secrecy, the greater the crime being covered up…it is the responsibility of the press to shine a light upon the darkness of government and I see more darkness here than ever. Richard M. Nixon even looks good nowadays.
Bush is as close to fascist as I have seen in my fifty nine years…
Then you have zero experience with facists. Facists; don’t allow reporters to leak secrets, don’t allow other political parties to exist, don’t cut taxes to add wealth to anyone other than themselves, don’t meet with the families of dead soldiers, don’t answer questions to the press corp., don’t try to institute social security reform, control the topics which are educated in public schools, don’t ask for ammendments to the constitution, don’t ask for congressional support, don’t apologize to reporters when they mistakenly make fun of their disability, don’t allow their spouses to champion libraries and reading initiatives …. most importantly for you, though … a facist would never allow some ordinary “citizen” to denigrate them on a website, let alone allow Think Progress to exist.
If he’s a facist, he’s the worst one in history … 6 years and he can’t even get so ordinary a citizen as “Kasinca” in shackles … what an abject failure.
Put your big boy pants on and win the next election, Kasinca … the fact that some leftists can believe Bush to be a facist while also counting on/planning for the Democrats winning in October show they have no idea what facism is. Or, they just like to spout emotional nonsense.
July 4th, 2006 at 12:29 pmNice lesson, Giacomo. You know a lot about fascists. But it’s spelled faScists in english. If you can’t even spell their name, how can we trust in the other things you say about them?
July 4th, 2006 at 12:59 pm…the TRAITOR Bushiva’s “talent” (via his MBA)…
…is the ruination- sucking the life’s blood out- of business enterprises..
…a’ la Gordon Gekko (and without the shrewdness of purpose)…
…the Traitors Bushiva and L’il Dick have pushed too far…
…and the country is crumbling…
July 4th, 2006 at 1:40 pmYou know a lot about fascists. But it’s spelled faScists in english. If you can’t even spell their name, how can we trust in the other things you say about them?
Ouch … right you are. Nice non-sequitur at the end there though. Avoid the substance, avoid the substance, avoid the substance ……….
July 4th, 2006 at 8:16 pmThat’s because an MBA is only fit for management of *private* industry, Sir Kesler the Genius, and government is the antithesis of private industry.
Ever heard of an MPA?
/jesus… dude’s almost as dumb as Bush’s voting bloc
July 4th, 2006 at 11:07 pm