“An orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people”

The Obama Administration invites Hosni Mubarak to take a hike.

For those of you who haven’t studied Diplomatese, that translates, “So long, Hosni. Don’t let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya.”

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com

4 thoughts on ““An orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people””

  2. Every politician knows that an "orderly transition" can take years, decades. Clinton was in fact telling Hosni exactly what he wanted to hear.

  3. Two questions:

    1. Without trying to score partisan points, and going back to your sensible: "…the alternative to a corrupt autocracy could easily prove to be a corrupt, theocratic, anti-American autocracy. But the short-term gains from propping up one of 'our sonsofbitches' have to be weighed against the long-term costs of further alienating those Egyptians who agree with Americans in disliking tyranny”, what policy does Professor Kleiman suppose the US can enunciate which will impose costs on dictatorial governments while simultaneously offering incentives to move toward more open and democratic societies?

    2. If dictatorship is not "responsive to the aspirations of the … people", why has President Obama appointed so many czars (= "tsars" = Caesars)?

  4. If dictatorship is not “responsive to the aspirations of the … people”, why has President Obama appointed so many czars (= “tsars” = Caesars)?

    Because he hates language and wants us all to believe that the Tsar of all the Russias was appointed by an elected president rather than inheriting the position by birth.

Comments are closed.