Recently, the Propaganda Minister called your humble Smallholder a right wing apologist. Lately I’ve also been called a “callous, cold hearted Republican,” by a mom in the playgroup, a “warmonger,” by a fellow parishoner, and “devastatingly handsome” by Evangeline Lilly.

Okay, I made one of those quotes up.

At any rate, I would argue that none of the villains who post at our little bloggy shoppe can be consistently labeled as an apologist for one side or the other. But the Maximum Leader is starting to steer, Turner Joy-like, into North Vietnamese waters.

He says that he does not understand why folks are upset about the Wolfowitz kerfuffle over at the World Bank.

Well.

For those of you who don’t follow Washington arcana, here is the scoop:

Wolfowitz was named head of the World Bank.

One of the World Bank’s primary purposes is to help modernize third world economies by emphasizing efficient capitalism and trying to get third world leaders to abandon nepotism and cronyism.

When Wolfowitz was named to head the World Bank there was a troublesome little problem. He was going to be his girlfriend’s supervisor. His girlfriend, you see, is a career bank employee dealing with the Middle Eastern region.

The ethics board said this was a conflict of interest and the girlfriend would have to be detailed elsewhere during Wolfowitz’s term.

Wolfowitz arranged a deal to transfer her to the State Department during his five year term.

But here’s the crux. He didn’t just transfer her. He promoted her, issued a directive that she be given the highest rating in FUTURE job evalutations over the next five years, a raise that took her annual salary from $133,000 to $190,000, and another automatic promotion when she returns to the bank.

The Maximum Leader can’t comprehend how this might look bad for a guy who is charged with convincing third world leaders to abandon nepotism and cronyism? Great googly-moogly.

Perhaps the Maximum Leader was taken in by Wolfowitz’s claim that he had informed the ethics panel about his actions and was given thumbs up. Of course, Wolfowitz lied:

The former chairman of the World Bank’s ethics committee yesterday accused the institution’s embattled president, Paul D. Wolfowitz, of misleading a panel investigating his role in granting his girlfriend a substantial pay raise.

In a written submission to the investigating committee, the former ethics chairman, Ad Melkert, contradicted Wolfowitz’s assertion that he fully informed bank officers of his handling of his girlfriend’s transfer to the State Department and that his actions had their blessing.

“I am deeply hurt by efforts to manipulate information,” Melkert said in his statement, maintaining that his committee was never consulted on the details of a promotion-and-raise package for Wolfowitz’s girlfriend. His comments to the committee were an elaboration on a statement he released late Monday.

and:

Melkert is now a top administrator at the U.N. Development Program but worked at the World Bank and chaired its ethics committee when Wolfowitz took over as president in 2005. According to Melkert, Wolfowitz had been advised by the ethics committee that Riza, a Middle East expert, needed to be transferred to a job beyond his supervision and that she was entitled to compensation for the disruption to her career. But Melkert said his committee was never told the details of the raise Wolfowitz then approved — a jump from about $133,000 a year to more than $190,000, with guaranteed promotions in later years.

“It is completely incomprehensible that subsequently Mr. Wolfowitz did exactly what he originally had proposed not to do: to engage directly in personnel matters concerning his partner,” Melkert said.

Bennett said Riza came up with the salary numbers herself, basing them on the middle range for someone who had attained her status at the bank. An attorney for Riza declined to comment.

Melkert’s words came a day after Roberto Da?ino, a former general counsel for the bank, told the investigating committee that Wolfowitz had acted “incorrectly” in instructing the bank’s vice president for human resources to extend “an extraordinary salary increase,” according to his written submission.

Da?ino excoriated Wolfowitz, saying he subsequently withheld information about the raise, “apparently trying to deceive the board, the staff, and the general public” and adding that Wolfowitz had “damaged the reputation of the bank and eroded his moral authority to lead.”

Yep. Nothing to see here. Move along…

* My wife caught this stat on the evening news. She exclaimed that she would sleep with Wolfowitz for a $60,000 raise. I of course replied with the Churchillian “Would you sleep with him for a dollar? No? Well, we’ve already established what you are and now we are just dickering over price.” You know, our couch is pretty comfortable…