Back to the question at hand.
I am not a big Dusty as manager fan. But I haven't really been a fan of Reds managers, period. From Sparky to Rose to Lou to Davey to Jack to Dusty, all of them aggravated me pretty much to equal degrees.
My philosophy about managers is that as long as they are not you, they will make many decisions that you disagree about. They will have huge holes in their managerial philosophy that will drive you crazy.
Sparky with his too quick hook, Rose loved to bunt too much, Lou needed that LOOGY even if it was Scott Ruskin, Jack did very little in game managing, and Dusty likes his #1 and 2 hitters to be fast, and refuses to adapt to the newer stats.
But all of these guys did win, even with their faults. I think with managers, you just have to take them as a whole entity, warts and all. They all have warts, but as long as they have a solid long term winning philosophy and plan for the team, I'm okay with them. And despite what some people say, I think Dusty does have a solid winning philosophy. It's not one I would adopt, but it is one that has worked quite well for him.
So if his philosophy, no matter how much it drives me crazy, wins, then I have no problem with him, especially since I am sure the next guy will drive me crazy as well.