Let's just make it business. Suppose you hired a guy to run your company four years ago. First, he spends the enormous surplus you had built up by giving out bonuses to the top 2% of your employees while losing about a two and a half million job positions needed to keep your production strong. Meanwhile, he exposes your natural resources to his friends, cuts back on scientific research and arranges for other of his buddies to make big bucks rearranging the power grids of several of your subsidiaries. Worst than that, when confronted with a real and immediate threat, he attacks the wrong target, mostly out of personal history, declares victory way too early and manages to lose the tremendous goodwill engendered by the original attack by his obstinate and overbearing attitude and actions. On top of that, he doesn't think he's doing anything wrong, he can't think of a single mis-step he has made, this not according to rumors, but from his own mouth.
Today, with our financials stumbling along, the threat being handled better by
other companies despite his administration's continued meddling* and the strongest members of his team expressing their desire for leaving after the first of the year, isn't it time to fire this guy?
A search committee has provided us with a strong candidate for his replacement. Polls show more than enough support for him and I recommend we make this move right as it starts to get cooler in Crawford.
Joe
* Britian recently had to race to arrest several Al-Queda members because the US was either too stupid to keep a name under wraps or needed to have something to show for it's efforts so exposed the name despite the consequences to the larger effort.
