Jul
06
2013

I am of two minds about this John Kerry Nantucket story.

It’s a puzzler:

John F. Kerry’s credibility took on more water on the second day of his Nantucket vacation flap, as the State Department backed off its initial denial the embattled secretary of state was yachting during the Egyptian military coup — and President Obama tweeted a photo of himself kayaking in a hat, sunglasses and polo shirt.

The Herald reported yesterday that Kerry spent the Fourth of July cavorting on his island getaway even as chaos from the military’s ouster of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi rocked Egypt.

In the wake of the Herald story, a State Department spokeswoman admitted yesterday that Kerry was “briefly” aboard his $7 million luxury craft, the Isabel, on the day of the coup, after previously insisting the yacht sighting was “completely inaccurate.”

You see, on the one hand: John Kerry went yachting, instead of getting involved in the Egypt none-dare-call-it-coup. On the other hand: John Kerry went yachting, instead of getting involved in the Egypt none-dare-call-it-coup. And on the gripping hand: I had and have precisely zero confidence in Susan Rice when it comes to any sort of foreign affairs involving the continent of Africa. To use the classic military formulation*: John Kerry is Stupid/Lazy; Rice is Stupid/Energetic. Which is to say: Kerry can be counted on at least to generally not deliberately go out and do something (and thus mess things up); you would have been able to count on Rice to do precisely that.

I know, I know. Heck of a thing, to be thankful that at least State apparently didn’t make things worse. Welcome to the world we live in, now.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*Exactly who first came up with this rule of thumb is apparently a matter of some debate. For those unfamiliar, it goes like this: officers are either stupid or brilliant; and either lazy or energetic. Brilliant, lazy officers should be sent to the field; they are best at winning as efficiently as possible. Brilliant, energetic officers get Staff positions; they are the best at planning campaigns. Stupid, lazy officers get handed the dull, boring, yet easy/straightforward jobs; they’ll just do them and not cause you any trouble. GET RID OF ALL OF YOUR STUPID, ENERGETIC OFFICERS IMMEDIATELY. They’re usually a major factor in military defeats, as any dispassionate reading of, say, the history of the Army of the Potomac would demonstrate.

4 Comments

  • Catseyes says:

    The whole Morsi disaster for O’Bama is he forgot about Anwar Sadat. Not too hard he was assainated by the Moslem Brotherhood remember them in 1981? Sadat restored honor to the Egyptian Military with his leadership during the 1973 Egyptian-Israeli war, when the Egyptian army fought the Israelis to a stand still. Anybody who thought the Military in Egypt had forgotten or forgiven the Brotherhood, well they Know better now. And oh, yea why do you think Al-Zawahiri did time in an Egyptian prison before joining Al Quida anyway? Those who forget their History will pay the piper.

  • BigGator5 says:

    No Quarter For Democrats.
    .
    Those people won’t give us an inch, so why should we give them any? I say, make Obama pay for his lack of vision in picking John Kerry to be State Secretary.

  • cg says:

    The first time I ran across the smart/stupid // lazy/energetic way of classifying people was in the series of novels “The General” by David Drake and S. M. Stirling.

    I’ve never seen it mentioned anywhere else until now. Thank you for posting it, along with the expanded description; the description I saw before was that three of the four types you could work with, but the fourth type of stupid and energetic was always a disaster.

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com