...or is it truly galling when a villain does something worthwhile?

Like all the neocons I know, I like the world in black and white.
I want to believe that everyone associated with the Bush administration including the gardener at the Crawford Ranch, is a dirty rotten scoundrel. They have mismanaged foreign and domestic policy to the point where it will take decades to repair. They slept through the summer of 2001 then blamed predecessors for the lapses. They attacked a country who's primary crime was that they shared a religious affiliation with our enemy. And that was just in the first term.

There is a whole host of characters to dislike in Washington, but one of the sneakiest is Paul Wolfowitz. From his Rasputian perch as deputy Secretary of Defense behind Curious George, he was the principal architect of the misguided invasion of Iraq.

Shortly after the President won a second term he nominated Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank. There is no doubt that Mr. Wolfowitz has the academic chops to do this job. His impressive resume includes study at the University of Chicago, teaching post at several prominent universities and several important positions at the State Department. Nevertheless his appointment to the World Bank was not universally applauded. Unlike his former boss in the White House, Paul is a divider not a uniter.

Since assuming his new post Wolfowitz has kept a low profile. Nevertheless, his administration has been notable in that the World Bank has engineered the shocking notion of withholding funds from countries whose corrupt leaders divert most of the cash to their own Swiss accounts.

Nothing annoys Americans more than the thought of sending our money to "presidents" and strongmen in Asia and Africa who then use it to finance their families villas in France. We are a generous people but we have long suspected that most of our largess is being wasted in countries where the population continues to suffer and the leaders continue to shop on Rodeo Drive.

Wolfowitz is trying to put a stop to this and it's pretty hard to find fault. (God knows, I've tried) What's amazing is the resistance that his policies are meeting from other members of the Bank. Apparently, requiring the leader of a third world country to actually spend IMF/World Bank funds on the projects for which the money was approved is a novel concept. Why are we surprised when the plight of people in Namibia or Guinea never changes in spite of the millions we send in aid. Sally Struthers does a better job of helping.

The charter of the World Bank is to provide funds to ameliorate poverty around the globe, but most of the dictators that get checks from the Bank don't look like they've missed too many meals lately. Forced regime change is a bad idea whether coming from Dick Cheney or Paul Wolfowitz. Countries will have to figure it out for themselves. We should not, however, provide the money to keep oppressive leaders in power, even if they support current Bush policy.

Therefore, much as it pains me to say it, congratulations to Paul Wolfowitz and keep up the good work. I hope that Frank Rich can forgive me.