Instead of getting good people, Bush hires people out of political favors, political nepotism, pay back or loyalty, NOT competence or qualifications. Cheney and Rumsfeld both where Bush #41 guys.

I hate to say it, like all of Bush’s other decisions, his appointee choices are bad, almost all are totally incompetent (”Brownie you’re doing a heck of a job”, Gonzalez (never been in court and can’t lie or tell a story the same twice, a lawyer that can’t lie), Harriet Myers (inexperienced friend of family), Bernard Bailey “Bernie” Kerik (Former NY Police chief with Mob ties and used 9/11 apartment for his liaisons with his mistress), John R. Bolton (Hates the UN and reputation is for un-diplomacy, known to have “spun” (lie) WMD story for administration.)

We see it’s a bad idea hiring yes men and political operatives for important positions. When Lincoln won Presidency, he brought in his worst detractors, critics and political rivals into his cabinet. Clinton had republicans in top positions in his cabinet. Bush? Partisan, political and incestuous appointments. The enabler cabal put Bush in a bubble; all dare not say the king has no clothes. What happened when people disagreed or spoke what the king did not want? He fired them, Colin Powell? Where did he go. (He was not fired but quit) But what about the other Generals that said they needed 300,000 to 400,000 troops? Fired.

Condi has nothing to do with foreign policy or being secretary of state except in name only. Karl Rove and Cheney have more power and call the shots in Bush’s cabal. Do you really think she is pulling strings? She does what she is told to do.

The Iran 5, is a quid pro quo for the Brit 15, duhaaa. You know what I am not that upset about it. Sometimes you have to deal and do things you don’t like.

I’m with the VP on this one.

Cut Condi some slack. She’s a diplomat – not presidential material. Her job is to seek out a working solution for bringing stability to the region.

That’s precisely the problem. We don’t want no stability in the region, but quite the opposite – a total collapse of most of the current dictatorial and/or fascist regimes in the region, starting with the Mullahs in Teheran.

MirCat on April 13, 2007 at 11:46 PM

LOL. No, really, LMAO! The more I read your comments, the more I discover how delightfully evil you are. Always enjoy the dark humor. Can’t understand why some don’t.

Me too. I once thought Condi was presidential timber. But I knew I was wrong by the way she handled the negotiations over the war between Israel and Lebanon. So sad.

petefrt on April 13, 2007 at 10:02 PM

And I once thought of helping her out with the Barbara Boxer thing . . .

- The Cat

Cut Condi some slack. She’s a diplomat – not presidential material. Her job is to seek out a working solution for bringing stability to the region. Her suggestion to free those five men was offered as a means to achieve the goal. Agree or disagree with doing it (even call it short-sighted), but do so in the larger perspective of why her suggestion was offered in the first place. It’s not that hard to see her point. By the way, I agree with W that these men should remain in custody. Releasing them now would be a huge mistake.

thedecider on April 13, 2007 at 5:50 PM

I couldn’t agree more.

The Financial Times confirms the broad outlines of the earlier PressTV story—and adds a bizarre new twist:An American fugitive living in Iran since he murdered an Iranian opposition activist in the US in 1980 has revealed that he met a former Federal…

In the early spring of 2006, in part as a result of the disintegrating situation in Iraq, America faced the prospect of a newly resurgent Iran, which was supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shiite militants in Iraq, and suspected of building nuclear weapons. As the administration considered its response, it was divided between the regime changers (a faction of hard-liners who argued internally that Washington should continue to shun Iran and work ultimately to replace its leadership) and the so-called behavior changers (the moderates in the bureaucracy, Congress, and the wider foreign policy elite, including Rice’s former boss Brent Scowcroft, who strongly advocated for negotiations).

It’s WaMo, but it makes an interesting point early on: that Condi’s Iran is very similar to Powell’s Iraq. The Bush Doctrine is functionally dead, and while there’s still a strong contingent of regime-changers in the White House’s policy mill, the impulse to apply that methodology lacks sufficient power now. Bush and by extension Condi just don’t have the motive power to pull the trigger, and they increasingly lack the power to stand up to the State establishment.

The Irbil five are members of the elite Quds Force, an arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps charged with Iran’s clandestine foreign operations. The Quds Force has ties to the Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad militant groups as well as to several of the Iraqi political movements that the United States has supported.

Let’s hope they keep these guys in solitary before they get tenure at terrorist U.

PS More on Belfield/ Salahuddin here. Makes you even more leery of groups like Malik Shabazz and what they might capable of.