It takes time – or ought to, anyway – to amass the policy gravitas and political chops required to function effectively at the cabinet level. It’s not typically a young man’s job. It helps to have moved up the political ladder in previous administrations. Which might have been a challenge for the Obama transition team, had not Bill Clinton’s eight years in the White House interrupted 28 years of Republican leadership on either side. It helps to explain why we’re seeing so many familiar faces from the old days.
It does come with a downside, however: Character references.
Maybe Leon Panetta will do a better job at CIA than Clinton-era holdover George Tenet did – it’d be hard to do worse. But I bet he privately wishes that Sandy Berger could keep opinions on his qualifications to himself.
I’ve been impressed so far with Obama’s picks – or rather I should say pleasantly surprised that they at least seem to be more moderate than I feared they would be. But I think it is a sad state of affairs when all we can seem to populate the government with is a revolving door of the same old crowd we have seen before.
I understand the “experience” argument and the need to “know your way around Washington”, but with deficits projected over $1.2 trillion, a percentage of GNP not seen since WWII, I’m lacking confidence in the same crowd of people (on the left or right) who led us in this mess (over the last 20 plus years) somehow getting religion and now leading us out.
It is hard to beleive that there are not leaders in business, the academy, and the non-profit world who could not bring some fresh perspective to our government. They may get chewed up and spitten out by the bureaucracy and the masters of tired recyling, Congress, but I’d like to see someone try it.
I’m sure Obama thinks Panetta is the “change we can believe in” at CIA but I just don’t get it. The Clinton crowd devasted our Intelligence capabilities through budget cuts, hostility, and neglect. Why in a post 9/11 world you’d want ANYONE connected with that regime in the seat is beyond me.
But I never was a good politician and, despite having lived in close proximity to the center of gravity of it all for 25 plus years I never could understand it.
How Berger got out of jail time is beyond me.
50 thousand bucks and 100 hours of community service for stealing out of our National Archives and destroying documents?
What did he have to trade to get off so easy?
Me, I would have chained him to a wall for a couple of years…
Since when does character matter with the current generation of liberals? Moral relativism is a cancer to Integrity.
Also, remember what Carter did to our Intelligence Community when he got his hands on it in the ’70s. It cost us big time and took a generation to fix. Here we go again.
Hard to do worse than George Tenet?
Try Paul Bremer, who among other felony-stupid actions inexplicably lost $9 billion that was never accounted for, and disbanded the Iraqi Army without even disarming them. His inexperience and unqualified bungling cost American lives, and seriously increased and prolonged the fighting in Iraq.
Of course for their exceptional “service” President Bush gave both Tenet and Bremer our nation’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Go figure.
Flit,
Even if you did have a point to make outside of your normal tactic of political prism relativism, I still don’t get it.
Do you think, based strictly on his resume, that the consumate politician Panetta is the ideal pick for CIA?
b2
B2, you made a typo:
Panetta is the ideal prick for CIA.
Ciao
Zane-
November Sierra!
b2
Babs/
Surely you jest……Just a couple?
#5 B2,
“Ideal pick?” No.
Good pick? I say yes. But only time will tell, won’t it?
I’m with lex in that he can’t be any worse than Tenet. GT at best was a staffer. Panetta should be better than he and some other questionable Directors in the CIA’s history. Panetta has leadership qualities, stature, and political moxie that the Company desperately needs at the moment. I expect he will be just what the Agency needs.
I also don’t think Panetta is the “consummate politician” you make him out to be. But if he were, that would be a plus rather than a negative, and hardly a disqualification. I do seem to remember a greater and more famous politician, who served as CIA Director in 1976-1977. It didn’t slow him down, did it?
regards…..
Hey Virgil – I guess I really should reply to you by now.
I’m happily married so, marraige is out of the question.
We are compatriots, clearly that is the case .
On the other hand, if you wanted to buy me a drink; I just might be persuaded… Lex could tag along, for appearances…