A plausible case can be made that institutions often need reforming -- that they may come to serve those who staff them more than the public good; that they spend public money carelessly (under the "use it or lose it" rule); and that agencies have exercised unchecked legislative and judicial as well as executive powers -- and that there …
A plausible case can be made that institutions often need reforming -- that they may come to serve those who staff them more than the public good; that they spend public money carelessly (under the "use it or lose it" rule); and that agencies have exercised unchecked legislative and judicial as well as executive powers -- and that there is, in fact, a partisan tilt in the permanent bureaucracy.
But the serious arguments lose credibility when they're attached to a sociopath with despot-envoy who has little understanding of how our institutions are intended to work, and who's guided by an "I alone can fix it" pretension and a belief that nothing should impede his sovereign will -- and who is supported by fanatical cult followers wanting him to crush their enemies.
Then we get a sustained assault on all rules and institutional guardrails.
A plausible case can be made that institutions often need reforming -- that they may come to serve those who staff them more than the public good; that they spend public money carelessly (under the "use it or lose it" rule); and that agencies have exercised unchecked legislative and judicial as well as executive powers -- and that there is, in fact, a partisan tilt in the permanent bureaucracy.
But the serious arguments lose credibility when they're attached to a sociopath with despot-envoy who has little understanding of how our institutions are intended to work, and who's guided by an "I alone can fix it" pretension and a belief that nothing should impede his sovereign will -- and who is supported by fanatical cult followers wanting him to crush their enemies.
Then we get a sustained assault on all rules and institutional guardrails.