On January 5th, 2009 at 5:57 pm, lgm said:
…Either way, a competent outside administrator will be good for the agency. That’s what Panetta is.

Wrong. The CIA does not need an administrator; it needs a competent and experienced leader.

Given his background, Mr. Panetta is a somewhat unusual choice to lead the C.I.A.

That should read, unusual unless you want to undermine or destroy the C.I.A.

… While Leon Panetta doesn’t have experience in the intelligence world, he served on the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel that released a report at the end of 2006 with dozens of recommendations for the reversing course in the Iraq war. … …

But it does not logically follow that I’d welcome someone solely because they’re an outsider.

A quandary. Having “experience” means having been in the intelligence world, hence, not an outsider.

Did the CIA make assertions about Saddam’s capabilities, pre-war? Yes.

This information is classified. But there have been reports that what came from the CIA was more accurate than what was fed to the American people. Without knowing for sure, I guess that the “inaccuracies” were in fact “distortions” by the White House.

I understand if you think I’m wrong, but I doubt that you know for sure. If you think you do, that speaks ill if you.

They did (get pre-invasion intel wrong), period. That’s an objective fact.
—–
(Thinking means doubting. Certainty is for fools.)

No, mindlessly parroting cliches is for fools.

Did the CIA make assertions about Saddam’s capabilities, pre-war? Yes. Were those assertions incorrect? Yes. Can one therefore say that they botched pre-invasion intelligence? Yes.

Contrary to the dearly held notion of Liberals, there are such things as facts.

But then you should agree with my larger point: If you think the CIA is incompetent, you should welcome an outsider coming in to fix it.

Sure I would. But it does not logically follow that I’d welcome someone solely because they’re an outsider. I’d prefer someone who’s, you know, actually qualified for the job. Call me crazy but that’s what I think.

Hey, maybe they’ll bring back Janet Reno for Commerce Secretary!

Oh, please MM…don’t give him any ideas! *shudder*

Even as a Conservative, she has always impressed me with her service on the House Intelligence Committee. She would have been a superb choice. She would have been unanimously confirmed in 10 minutes.

But then Pelosi hates her so…..

If you think the CIA is incompetent, you should welcome an outsider coming in to fix it.

Panetta: No experience, no acumen, and no innate aptitude to be instrumental and forceful in a job that demands nothing less to keep us all safe!

He’s a loser nominee and will not be approved by the senate; Senator Feinstein as much as said so.

If you’re a conservative, you think the CIA botched the Iraq invasion intelligence, so that the agency is incompetent and needs an outside leader.

No. If you’re a conservative, you know for a fact that ……

James Felix said (#73):

They did, period. That’s an objective fact.

(Thinking means doubting. Certainty is for fools.)

But then you should agree with my larger point: If you think the CIA is incompetent, you should welcome an outsider coming in to fix it.

Either way, a competent outside administrator will be good for the agency. That’s what Panetta is.

Hahahahah! You definitely need to read what Dick Morris has to say about this nominee, as well as several of Obama’s other designates.