Towel
02-17-2005, 01:04 PM
The nomination (http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/17/intelligence.chief/index.html) is in, and the new all-powerful Director of National Intelligence is going to be...
John Negroponte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Negroponte)?
I can't say I'm steamed so much as astounded by the sheer hubris of it. Arguably the third most-powerful man in Washington, in charge of all US intelligence activities, is going to be a guy implicated in some of the worst intelligence and Constitutional abuses in the last century? Are you kidding me? The guy helped train and support death squads in Honduras and acted as a funnel and liason for the illegal Iran-Contra arms deals. I'm sure that makes him fluent in certain inner workings of the intelligence apparatus, but I don't think those particular inner workings - usurption of power by the executive branch and facilitation of human rights abuses - are the ones we should be focusing on right now.
In a broader context, here's yet another powerful job going to a close personal associate of the President. This is one job where I do not want personal loyalty getting in the way. But maybe that's the point - That Negroponte can be relied upon to cook the books? (*cough*Syria*cough*) And yet another highly controversial nominee for the Democrats in the Senate to gnash their teeth over. Is the strategy to just throw worse and worse picks at the Senate so the public becomes immune to Democratic criticism? Or just to exhaust the Democrats so that when the SC nominations come up, they'll lack the will and the public support to put up a real fight?
Thoughts? What's the real motivation for this pick? Can this guy be seen as a "good" choice? How?
John Negroponte (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Negroponte)?
I can't say I'm steamed so much as astounded by the sheer hubris of it. Arguably the third most-powerful man in Washington, in charge of all US intelligence activities, is going to be a guy implicated in some of the worst intelligence and Constitutional abuses in the last century? Are you kidding me? The guy helped train and support death squads in Honduras and acted as a funnel and liason for the illegal Iran-Contra arms deals. I'm sure that makes him fluent in certain inner workings of the intelligence apparatus, but I don't think those particular inner workings - usurption of power by the executive branch and facilitation of human rights abuses - are the ones we should be focusing on right now.
In a broader context, here's yet another powerful job going to a close personal associate of the President. This is one job where I do not want personal loyalty getting in the way. But maybe that's the point - That Negroponte can be relied upon to cook the books? (*cough*Syria*cough*) And yet another highly controversial nominee for the Democrats in the Senate to gnash their teeth over. Is the strategy to just throw worse and worse picks at the Senate so the public becomes immune to Democratic criticism? Or just to exhaust the Democrats so that when the SC nominations come up, they'll lack the will and the public support to put up a real fight?
Thoughts? What's the real motivation for this pick? Can this guy be seen as a "good" choice? How?