To them everyone is a political opponent unless they agree 100% of the time. As political opponents they can be destroyed without regard to consequences.

Do not question Our Leader. I have contacted Hayden directly. Rest assurred this webpage is being monitored.

Isn't Hayden the guy who only applies the term "unreasonable search" to unsolicited proctology exams?

Not just ODNI. Add Homeland Security to your list of agencies created during this period which are/will be unmitigated failures.

Though Goss long ago served as a CIA case officer, he arrived from Capitol Hill with a phalanx of conservative aides, soon dubbed the "Gosslings," who viewed the agency as a liberal, leak-prone opponent of conservative causes.

Reality Based Analysis tells us the Gosslings were correct.

Mary McCarthy: Donated money to liberal Democrat John Kerry and leaked classified information to Dana Priest.
Valerie Plame: also donated money to liberal Democrat John Kerry and married to well-known Bush Hater Joe Wilson. Hired Joe Wilson to go to Niger as a way to spread lies about Bush and Iraq.

When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community and accept that the CIA is infiltrated by liberal Democrats?

"..tempted to shoot Democrats on sight.."
Cheney was a CIA operative?

Ya think Pelosi suffers penis envy? That secret hostility to the 'old boys club'? Is she going to bring her broomstick to the hearings?

Michael Hayden will, as someone has pointed out, have to go through confirmation hearings. He's tightly involved in the NSA spying, and is the guy who kept incorrectly citing the 4th Amendment, and insisted he had it right. Who's after Hayden on their list?

Al, are you for real?

Did anyone say that the CIA doesn't have liberal democrats in it? Of course, it's even more preposterous to think that the CIA shouldn't have liberal democrats. Unless, of course, you think that fealty to the Leader is more important than a minority opinion.

A couple days ago I was talking to a chemical engineer who now works for the Peace Corps in Africa. He said he was frightened by what was happening in the US. I said, "you mean, what happened." "Yeah."

Even with the wheels coming off, we're five years into the Bush Revolution. How bad are things for American Democracy when you have to have a debate with a prospective CIA head on whether the 4th Amendment mentions probable cause?

Amazing, Al, simply amazing. The CIA spends three decades overthrowing, subverting, and annihilating peaceful socialist movements, trying to assasinate and blackmail foreign leaders, running Latin American death squads, etc., etc., and because they dared to disagree with boneheaded fact-free wishful thinking on Iraqi WMD, they suddenly become 'infiltrated with liberal Democrats'.

really, are you embarrased with yourself? the reality-based community? have you ever even *visited* such a place?

Kevin Drum, timid duck though you sometimes are, you've got the zeitgeist nailed here. But I'm more optimistic than you. Goss' meltdown makes Hayden more likely to play it conservative, and most of the damage has already been done, that can be done. What we need to be doing is laying the groundwork for a serious anti-DoD backlash in 2008. DoD will always be the most gung-ho, wish-away-the-costs, warmongering chunk of the federal government, and we need to soften the ground for a Democratic President to roll back their grip in '08.

Is Bush going to be one of those presidents, like Harding.

They always inserted the political cartoon of the era, Tammany Hall was one I remember from sixth grade.

So, in the year 2070, a little kid reading his shool text gets this image of lil Bush, happy, dumb with his Alfred E smile, while sneaky men run around with bags of money and hookers on one arm?

The smell of oil, closet homos, all of them.

Kevin,

Everyone seems to be counting the CIA out. I just don't think so. The new intelligence structure has really not had enough time to establish itself. Hayden or no Hayden I wouldn't count the CIA out just yet.

Does anyone know how many intelligence agencies we have?

Within and without ODNI. (article says ODNI oversees 14 plus CIA, and then there's DOD agencies and ???)

What little dissension there used to be will be steadily planed away, and in the future presidents won't need to deal with even the occasional "minority opinions" that were so pesky during the runup to the Iraq war. There will be only the ODNI and the Pentagon, singing like a single Greek chorus into the president's ear.

The potential for abuse hasn't changed much, and will depend entirely on who the president appoints as the DNI, and how the president uses them and the rest of the intelligence community.

If the president wants the truth, he should still be able to get it; if he wants pre-chewed, pre-digested and pre-shit opinion devoid of dissent to fit a political agenda, he'll still be able to get it.

Can we remember that the idea for plopping all these functions and agencies into one large bucket wasn't exactly all Bush's idea?

So Porter Goss comes in and fatally weakens the CIA and then resigns when CIA's pride of place is taken away because its too weak? Didn't he just screw himself out of a job? I think by the time he figured out he'd been played he looked up just in time to see the knockout punch coming. He was so busy trying to plug leaks, he didn't realize they were draining the lake.

"Republican Party is driven sometimes by ideology, sometimes by corporate fealty, and sometimes by nothing more than stubbornness..."

The trifecta that keeps on giving.

Tilli -- Guess it depends in part on what you count as an "agency". The best ODNI organization chart I've seen is here, identifies 17 distinct entities for which ODNI has either direct overesight or tasking authority.

The ODNI (e.g., here) shows 16 seals at the bottom of the page. However it includes the DEA, which the other org chart doesn't show.

So 16 or 17, not including the ODNI itself or the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), which is part of the ODNI.

The short form looks like...

ODNI has direct oversight over the CIA.
ODNI has tasking authority for all other agencies (direct oversight is provided by the following departments)...

• Department of Defense: DIA; NRO; NSA; NGIA; Intelligence; Surveillance and Reconnaisance Directorat (USAF); G2 / Intelligence Office (Army); Intelligence Department (Marine Corps); Director of Naval Intelligence (Navy)
• Department of Enercy: Intellgence Office; Counterintelligence Office
• Department of Homeland Security: Intelligence and Analysis Office; Intelligence DIrectorate (Coast Guard)
• Department of Justice: Office of Intelligence; Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence (FBI); Drug Enforcement Agency
• Depart of State: Bureau of Intelligence and Research
• Department of Treasury: Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Office

Theresa Heinz Kerry was speaking at her husband's July '04 campaign rally in Milwaukee, WI, when she was loudly heckled by pro-Bush supporters who were chanting, "Four more years!"

To the raucous cheers of thousands of supporters, Ms. Heinz Kerry answered them bluntly, "Yeah, right -- four more years of Hell!"

Now, even right-wing talk show host Doug McIntyre of KABC-AM in Los Angeles is publicly agreeing with her.

"So, I’m saying today, I was wrong to have voted for George W. Bush," he recently posted on his program's website. "In historic terms, I believe George W. Bush is the worst two-term President in the history of the country. Worse than Grant.

"I also believe a case can be made that he’s the worst President, period. After five years of carefully watching George W. Bush I’ve reached the conclusion he’s either grossly incompetent, or a hand puppet for a gaggle of detached theorists with their own private view of how the world works. Or both."

Welcome, Mr. McIntyre. Only two years and eight months of Hell to go!

Correction to previous post: "16 or 17" should be "17 or 18".

tbrosz: "Can we remember that the idea for plopping all these functions and agencies into one large bucket wasn't exactly all Bush's idea?"

Quit whining, tbrosz.

President Bush was perfectly willing to take credit for it during the 2004 presidential campaign. What's more, Bush's Hallelujah Chorus of adoring and unthinking supporters -- such as yourself -- were more than willing to give him that credit.

How late in the game you learn that taking credit also means shouldering responsibility.

It's time to grow up, guy, and realize that you can't have it whatever way it suits you at a given moment.

When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community and accept that the CIA is infiltrated by liberal Democrats?
Posted by: Al

Fuck off you cunt

Al: "When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community ..."

We can't. NASA grounded the Shuttle fleet until further notice.

Matt: "Ya think Pelosi suffers penis envy? ... Is she going to bring her broomstick to the hearings?"

If she does, her GOP colleagues better be ready to catch.

In this reorganization, the CIA is going to have to leverage and (fully identify with) its points of exclusivity: wetworks and human intelligence. The analysis capabilities of CIA will become less general and more a lens through which human intelligence is focused to DNI and other policymakers. This could, in the long to medium run, be good news for the agency, which has traditionally been forced into a jack of all trades role.

It might need to change it's name though. Not really 'central' anymore, is it?

Rest assurred this webpage is being monitored.

We know that - that is why the Albot (located in the basement of RNC headquarters) is able to respond so rapidly to everything Kevin posts.

Under your thread :"TURF WAR?":

Yeah, but what does it all mean?

The CIA supposdly failed "us" although we have no way of knowing how or in what way.

This administration (poor choice of word) appoints a complete idiot to run the CIA. Experience flees or is pushed to one side. We "reorganize" intelligence and create new entities and a whole new layer of "management".

During the Moussaoui trial we find out (again) how inefficient the FBI is.

Anybody want to guess how effective our security services are right now?
Anybody want to get a grip on this?

Not likely!

Posted by: notthere on May 6, 2006 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community and accept that the CIA is infiltrated by liberal Democrats?

Posted by: Al on May 7, 2006 at 2:50 AM | PERMALINK

Al -- as ever -- pure crap.

Anybody here understand what sort of stability it requires to conduct foreign intelligence operations long-term under cover. This admin has done unbelievable work in the last 5 years to disturb the whole field (not just Plame, etc.) that has damaged all US intelligence gathering and international cooperation.

This "administration" is totally inept to a degree the US population has even yet to discover. They know no depths of incompetence. It's impossible to predict.

Anybody want to get a grip on this "war" (nobody else has declared war on terrorism).

Not Bloody Likely!

tbrosz: Can we remember that the idea for plopping all these functions and agencies into one large bucket wasn't exactly all Bush's idea?

That wasn't the idea. The idea was to shift a small number of selected roles and functions to the ODNI, with minimum overhead. The ODNI is quite limited in the number of new personnel it can add, and the total staff--one reason why Negroponte has gotten serious pushback from some in Congress. While the design may have had a few problems, the result is more a product of inept or deceptive execution; but as that is an administration hallmark, it's not surprising.

The Albot.

You know, I like that -- it has a nice right-wing ring (try saying that three times really fast).

Al, my ol' reality-challenged buddy, henceforth consider yourself labeled The Albot.

What is one of the major problems of US intelligence? They don't share information. Second, they don't recognize and act on it when they have it.

How does this come about? Too little communication, too much turf.

US response. More departments. Another layer of oversight/management. A deeper and darker hole.

These guys are totally hopeless. But then it's probably our lives!

If this weren't so serious, I would be amused to learn of the exact moment when Al and tbrosz and comrades discover their own loyalty is under continuous scrutiny by this monster they've enabled.

Yes, dear ones, your new masters will require total loyalty--and from you most of all.

Crack that whip!

notthere: "Anybody want to get a grip on this "war" (nobody else has declared war on terrorism)."

Well, there was a senior official at the Dept. of Homeland Security who apparently had a grip -- but unfortunately, he was online at the time and immediately arrested for propositioning what he thought was a 14-year-old girl.

But that wasn't nearly as good as the DHS official who headed up "Operation Predator", which was supposedly ferreting out online sexual predators in our midst. He was arrested after exposing himself to two teenaged girls at a high school where he was scheduled to speak.

Just think the potential DHS could've realized if Gambino Family friend Bernard Kerik had become its director in Dec. 2004!

I'm sure David Ignatius thinks that "ex-military officers who would be tempted to shoot Democrats on sight" is amusing hyperbole.

It offends the hell out of me, on several grounds, one of which is the background assumption that military officers are never Democrats. Another is that Democrats are automatically assumed (by Ignatius, by the hypothetical 'ex-military CIA officers', and therefore intended to be assumed by you the reader) that Democrats are inherently opposed to the goals and operations of the CIA and military.

@Maxhats: You're living in a dreamworld if you think that "wetworks" (euphemism for assassination, kidnaping, beatings, torture, and disappearance) and human intelligence are points of exclusivity with the CIA.

Rumsfeld's "intelligence" apparatus, containing special forces from all the services, engages in exactly these activities. Read the Sy Hersh account of 'Copper Green' in the May 2004 New Yorker, or his December 2003 account of 'Task Force 121' aimed primarily at Iraq (and compare with the NYTimes account of the task force's activities and secrecy this past March).

"Presumably Michael Hayden will be more tractable"

Isn't he the one who oversaw, and consequently defended, the extra-legal "terrorist survielance program?"

AlBot... I like that. Definitely fitting.

@Maxhats: You're living in a dreamworld if you think that "networks" (euphemism for assassination, kidnaping, beatings, torture, and disappearance) and human intelligence are points of exclusivity with the CIA.

Posted by: Nell on May 7, 2006 at 6:25 AM | PERMALINK

Rumsfeld's "intelligence" apparatus, containing special forces from all the services, engages in exactly these activities. Read the Sy Hersh account of 'Copper Green' in the May 2004 New Yorker, or his December 2003 account of 'Task Force 121' aimed primarily at Iraq (and compare with the NYTimes account of the task force's activities and secrecy this past March).

Posted by: Nell on May 7, 2006 at 6:25 AM | PERMALINK

This government, more than any previous gov't, has enabled the idea that they can operate above and beyond the law. As individuals we slap them down every day and we feel good. At a higher level they don't get slapped down at all and the message never gets through; the general populace never wins.

Is that unusual in US electoral terms?

The fig leaf of bipartisanship does not cover this administration's choice to treat every management change as an opportunity to install party hacks in government. We are going to be spending a generation de-Republicanizing government thanks to this crew's embrace of machine politics. They have created a federal problem similar to the problems in DC's government that were created by Marion Barry in the 70s-80s.

Has anyone ever considered the possibility that George Bush hates America?

Upstream, there's a reference to closet homos, and it isn't entirely novel to think that the Republican Party is the party of closeted homosexuals. (Similar to the way that the Catholic clergy became a haven for pedophiles.) There's a bizarre, funeral director smarminess to Republican candidates that eerily echoes Rod Steiger's Mr. Joyboy from the movie made from Waugh's The Loved One. The cant, the plasticine hairdos, the lugubrious piety, and the anger and thirst for revenge. Most of all, the anger and thirst for revenge. If their lives are going to be blighted by implaccable demons, well, they'll share the wealth of misery with the unfortunates below them.

When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community

I gotta disagree with those who are angry at Al for using the term, "reality based", for it actually shows desperation on his part. Amusement should be the proper response. For he's trying to co-opt a liberal position, and some are falling for it.

"Reality-based" originally was the Bush Admin's criticism for (educated) liberals. Here's the info (reality based even):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_based_community

A DEM president can restore the CIA and FEMA and make government work again.

2006 election slogan....Had Enough?

Regarding the ODNI:

Is there any reason to suspect that future ODNIs, or directors of military intelligence, will be under the control of the White House? If I remember correctly the Clinton Administration had a lot of trouble dealing with the Pentagon when it came to planning military interventions, in part because the analysis he received rarely gave him viable small-scale options.

Also, while I agree completely that the Bush Administration will likely go down in history as one of the most impervious to facts in American history, the reign of George Tenet (head of a "strong" CIA) hardly encouraged the upward filtration of minority views.

I guess what I'm wondering is how much of this stuff reflects the Bush Administration's attempt to put intelligence under control of the White House, and how likely any change in the beaurocratic structure is to influence future presidents once the characters filling the positions have changed.

I don't know much about this, so I'm genuinely curious to here another's perspective.

There are people in the CIA who leak classified information to the media.

Those people need to be found out, fired, then prosecuted.

When the history of the Bush years are written, I suspect the biggest untold story of the era is going to be the one that John DiIulio warned us about almost at the beginning: The Death of Policy.

That makes me wonder what Bush's fans think are his most effective policy initiatives. I'm not a policy wonk, but from where I sit it seems that everything he touches turns to shit. But then I'm sure that's a matter of perspective.

I think the Democrats should hammer on this theme--

How can a president who purports to be so strong on national security weaken the CIA, Homeland Security, and FEMA in such dangerous times?

It's frightening.

I just had sex last night for the first time since 1971. Yeah, it sucks to be me.

Kevin,

the biggest untold story of the era is going to be the one that John DiIulio warned us about almost at the beginning: The Death of Policy.

The ideological basis of that is the conservative idea that groups don't exist. Organizationsd do act, individuals do. Everything depends on the actions of individuals. That makes policy a waste of time. The solution to problems is to choose the superior individual and place him in charge, then step back and let him act without interfering.

Policy is replaced by leadership. Leaders are people who change reality to achieve what they desire.

Unfortunately, this is combined with the idea that the so-called superior individual is one who has the right ideology and the correct friends.

Oh, and you encourage those superior individuals by unlimited awards to those who make it to the top rungs of the various organizations. That implies high pay to CEO's and tax cuts to the wealthy.

There is a certain internal consistency here, but it unfortunately ignores facts and hurricanes.

What's puzzling me about this whole thing is particularly the owner of the limosine service, and how his company could have been contracted by the department of HOMELAND security??

I've read numerous articles that commented that they don't do background checks on who they hire, but depend on a government "list".

In this day and age, how could our nation's Homeland SECURITY agency not do background checks of companies they hire, particularly a company that ferries government officials around D.C.?

Has the thought ever occurred to anyone that Al is really a Liberal plant.It doesn't seem possible that any sentient being with an I.Q. above that of a chipmunk could really beleive the propaganda line that he spits out.

That image is mostly nonsense — many of the people forced out by the Gosslings were ex-military officers who would be tempted to shoot Democrats on sight

isn't that interesting -- not that it's a surprise, but it's soooo reassuring that those who have ascended to such posts are so fucking intolerant and ignorant of democracy.

Guys. Al is Kevin. Ever notice how he is always able to post just moments after a Drum thread goes up, regardless of what time that occurs? He's here to spur posts on a site where posts seem to be dwindling.

Add Homeland Security to your list of agencies created during this period which are/will be unmitigated failures.

For rational, sane people who love their country HS might appear to be a failure. But to the Bush administration, Homeland Security is a thriving success—a fortuitous political slush fund to dispense practically unlimited cash to GOP constituents as rewards for Services to (and from) the Party (viz. limousines), and grants for hazmat suits, shiny new Hummers, and patronage for red-state loyalists everywhere.

Sadly, the Bush White House mostly applauded his jihad on what they viewed as CIA naysayers.

Applauded it? They freakin' ordered it!

My pet Al conspiracy theory is that it's a pseudonym contributed to by several young Republican interns. They've got RSS feeds to liberal blogs and can jump right in when Kevin posts something new.

When the history of the Bush years are written

won't matter -- we'll all be dead.

Al sez:
"When will liberals finally join the rest of us in the Reality Based Community and accept that the CIA is infiltrated by liberal Democrats?"

And your point is?
There are historical pages of proud, loyal and brave "Liberal Democrats" that have been there for this nation on all levels of service throughout our history. Al, you are a true ass of a man and a credit to your corrupt political leanings.

Porter Goss gone...yet another Bush/Cheney dysfunction brought to the surface and seen for the stumbling inefficiency that earmarks this pathatic administration.

He's here to spur posts on a site where posts seem to be dwindling.

I haven't seen any evidence of that, and I've been reading Kevin's blog since he was Calpundit. I like it because he posts frequently on subjects that interest me, while not being as groupthink - prone as Atrios and Kos.

That's because there's no 'os' in his name.

I can't wait to see the depressed Libs after Tony Snow's first press briefing on the Goss replacement. David Gregory and Helen Thomas will go mental. Snow will run rings around them and get coverage on the cable outlets.

Later that day, Kevin Drum will come here and blog more depressed and negative posts.

I'm so glad we've learned our lesson from Iraq.

The ODNI is headed by an ideologue, John Negroponte, not a guy who is exactly respected outside of his ideologue world. He is the kind of person the Bush administration keeps giving us. The common job qualification possessed by Bush appointees is a solid history (i.e., your entire adult life) of popping off at the mouth in true conservative ideologue style.

If you have developed an affinity for competence, that sort of job qualification probably does not much impress you.

If you are not satisfied with GWB, Cheney, Negroponte, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et. al., you know what to do. Try to elect a different type of President and a different type of Senate and House.

I like Kevin, and his writing, too. But the fact is that posts ARE dwindling. Scan down the page and see how many threads are above 100 comments. Two. Most others are waaaaaay down. And if you have been reading as long as you say, you know that is a change. I'm not saying its good, bad or permanent, but it is going on and it can;t be denied.

It's easy to say that the Bush WH represents the Death of Policy.

But I think the truth is subtler and deeper than that.

The Conservative movement itself embodies the Death of Policy. The point is, Conservatism, as such, requires the complete, abject subjugation of fact and reality to ideology.

In my view, there is no way to reduce Conservatism to policy. Policy is, by definition, the implementation of theory in societal and political reality. Yet there is no means whereby that gap can be bridged; the disconnect is total and inescapable.

That, for example, is why the Conservative Bush and Republicans simultaneously vote for drastic tax cuts for the rich, but refuse to vote for corresponding reductions in government programs. They cannot implement such reductions because societal and political facts render it impossible, as they well know.

What's even a possible policy for them here? There is none. So they are left with political spin, and nothing else.

And if one looks at all the other areas of governance, in domestic and foreign affairs, one sees again nothing but the fissure between ideology and reality. There is no home for anything resembling authentic policy, anywhere.

frankly0,

that sounds right, but it's not clear to me what the end goal is of subjugating fact and reality to ideology. Is it some sort of fascist state?

Ah, Kevin

Another one of your crackpot lefty conspiracy theories.

Why I'll bet Cheney at this moment is in his evil labortatory formulating a special brand of anthrax that will destroy all liberlas and muslims. Oh the Horror!

Give me a brake.

frankly 0,

Interesting premise and I agree with your example, and certainly several other policy moves made by this administration. I also agree that you can not reduce Conservatism to policy, but that may be said of other ideologies. In a more literal view, I do believe when they able, they do in fact install tenants of certain conservative beliefs into a policy action in a very real sense. Case in point would be the billions of dollars that have been funneled directly to religious organizations to address social needs and promote basic Judeo-Christian values. What I find in the “Death of Policy” concerning this bunch, is that they prey on and instigate the cause of their cure, creating a reactionary response in their base, hoping that it spreads into the mainstream. They do this in a clever way and have been quick to capitalize on any given issue that may feed their base or moneyed constituency. This attitude does little to dent the realities of the true issues and problems our system faces in the immediate years ahead. Legalities, protocol, traditions… all these mechanisms mean nothing to this group of reactionary Conservatives when it comes to policy and what they can and do get away with.

I'm not so sure, Kevin, that Bush was all that satisfied with Goss's termination. He didn't seem appear happy.

Ignatius says, “ What may have hurt Goss most inside the White House was sharp criticism from a hush-hush group known as the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. This blue-ribbon group is headed by Stephen Friedman, a former chairman of Goldman Sachs and former White House economic adviser. Because its members include many prominent business executives, the board could offer a nonpartisan, CEO's view of how Goss was running the agency. I'm told some of the board's judgments on Goss and his management team were devastating.“ (Interesting guy, Stephen Friedman, but that's besides the point, I guess.)

Back on point, having been in such circumstances, one only goes to a "board" for a reccommendation when the guy at the top is not in agreement with the right thing. It's a way for the guy at the top to either quell the onslaught of change or save face when changing course.

Figure Goss was the hatchet man (as demanded by the 9/11 Commission) who would always come out stinking like a rotted rose with no roots. But he was also Cheney's man, so politics prevailed over the the high road. But when Goss fired someone from CIA's internal investigation unit (McCarthy), investigating a case in which Goss himself was implicated, a case boiling over into the press, he had to go from Negroponte's position. Right now, it seems that Mr. Negroponte has all of the data and, while never all of the cards, a pretty strong hand.

Bush didn't look so happy to me.

Egbert,

Have a better theory?
The Pentagon certainly has had no affinity towards the CIA once the OSS was put out to pasture back in the late 50's.

Oz is correct: Posts on this blog are dwindling.

Why? it's simple - Kevin Drum isn't keeping up with the competition.

On the right, Michelle Malkin's blog is bright, interesting, and current. She has more photos. Hugh Hewitt has personal interaction with newsmakers that he blogs about. PowerLineBlog has more analysis and the 3 lawyers who run that blog are better writers than Kevin Drum. Instapundit has many more links, which is great for readers who want more info.

On the left, Atrios and KOS are more angry, loud and shrill.

Anybody know where I can find data on blog traffic?

Michelle Malkin??
That one is so Whacked, I don't even bother to monitor her anymore...got to come up with someone better then that.

Frankly0 - your statement

The Conservative movement itself embodies the Death of Policy. The point is, Conservatism, as such, requires the complete, abject subjugation of fact and reality to ideology.

In my view, there is no way to reduce Conservatism to policy. Policy is, by definition, the implementation of theory in societal and political reality. Yet there is no means whereby that gap can be bridged; the disconnect is total and inescapable.

Since policy is about actually governing, and they subordinate governing to succeeding in the next election, they do not need policy. In fact, since policy is about working out the inconsistencies in a set of proposed actions, this works against winning elections. They specifically do not want to eliminate inconsistencies, since they need them to get elected. The inconsistencies hold their alliance together and help maintain Congressional discipline.

Del,

The conservatives set getting elected as the ultimate goal. There is nothing of higher priority then the next election, and no further goals. That is key to conservative election success, and to maintianing their rather disparate alliance of factions - i.e. fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and small government libertarians.

Mr. Drum --

Please go to a used book store and buy any old college anthology of translations of Greek drama and learn what a chorus (tragedy or comedy) really was.

"Gosslings"? An ex-Company man on TV the other night said they were referred to as the "Hitler Youth."

Quantity of posts doesn't necessarily indicate Quality of posts.

Most of those 200+ post articles from the old days consisted of repeatedly putting Al, Charlie, Patton, Alice, and other assorted airheads back in their place.

Political Animal isn't the troll breeding ground it used to be. They've found that they can't win their arguments, and they finally got tired (most of them) and went elsewhere.

Though we still have Al, tbrosz, fitz and freedom fighter (fighting against freedom).

but from where I sit it seems that everything he touches turns to shit.

Back in 2000, I was like a tape loop repeating the same message, "George Bush is a Midas in Reverse." Everything he touches turned to shit while he turns to gold.

The mystery to me is why the "smart guys" in the GOP went along with him. He's a lazy, ill-tempered clod. Back when the Texas Rangers deal was being put together, the guy coming in as majority owner made it a provision of him coming in that George Bush would have NOTHING to do with operations. As near as I can tell, he was the last person close to Bush who had any semblance of sanity.

I suspect the biggest untold story of the era is going to be the one that John DiIulio warned us about almost at the beginning: The Death of Policy.

How can a story this old, repeated every month, be called "untold"?

Besides, every president has been criticised for having no policy other than partisanship and expediency. Years before the Pearl Harbor attack FDR was criticised for the "death of the New Deal". But it started with GW -- that is, George Washington.

frankly0: You are not alone in wondering what, really, conservative policy could be. Both the Reagan and Bush administrations seemed to run completely out of gas after implementing tax cuts. They just don’t know what else to do. Seeking consensus on a tax cut is the easiest thing a politician can do, but then what?

Here’s my theory on what is at the bottom (the very bottom) of conservative ideology: a general, ill-defined, free-floating, and sometimes only half-conscious ethnocentric angst that “people who are not like me and that I don’t really like are benefiting from government spending”.

Contra to a "he really didn't do too much permanent damage" post from a way back, is Kevin now in agreement much was accomplished by now?

Cheney -Bush are power hungry .They declare they can go against law with their written comment on the particular law.They approve of rendition, o f FISA violation and surveillance of peaceful groups.They are faith-based and anti-science: they favor abstinence only sex education, intelligent design ,reject global warming embryonic stem-cell research.They are plutocrats:their "Lauffer" curve is a joke.They are incompetent: look at their Katrina fiasco and their disastroud handling of the war in both Afgahnistan and Iraq.And no telling what else they committ wrongly![Griggsy]

Maybe Fukuyama will grace us with a sequel...

The End of Policy and the Last Chimp

I take it Al swims in the backwash?

Excellent site. all the best. good job.
job opening http://jobopening.lookseekpages.com | insurance online http://eteamz.active.com/insurance-online | european cruise http://europeancruise.lookseekpages.com | hotel philadelphia http://eteamz.active.com/hotel-philadelphia | cozaar http://cozaar.angelcities.com |