Replies

Later in his essay, Wallace could have been describing the major players in Operation Fast and Furious when he asserts that "authority without responsibility creates monsters."
And if Wallace's analysis applies, demanding the "I won" administration to tell us "who gave the order" is futile and will lead only to boxes of purged e-mails.
As far as voting for president is concerned, the theory of absolute "it happened on his watch" responsibility has to apply. Of course one of the primary ways the AP journalism monopoly puts its thumb on the scale is by applying high standards of responsibility to Republican and no standard of responsibility to Democrats. A Ronald Reagan can, quite properly, verbally "take responsibility" for a serious lapse which happened on his watch when he does not ascribe negligence or malfeasance to his subordinates. He did so in the aftermath of the truck bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon. But when he did, Sam Donaldson asked him if he was going to resign!
But a Bill Clinton can get caught with an opposition research specialist committing felonies on a wholesale basis in the WH basement, without even admitting that he hired whoever hired Craig Livingstone - if indeed he didn't do so himself. No thought, on the part of any journalist, of absolute responsibility then!!!

Basically, journalists, academics, and others who criticize without any bottom-line responsibility for the results of their supposed panaceas are the worst sort to be put in charge of anything. They will promote socialism, which is the ultimate separation of responsibility from authority. And that is monstrous, as the article suggests.