YouWinGameOver said:
We need to have have some short plans but work on longevity. Throughout the history of the united states there has not been enough focus on longterm
Why bother when you can set the entire mess in your successor’s lap. Depending on your party affiliation, the media will be more than happy to give you a pass and play along in the blame game.
And yes Ephraim you have every right to be worried about Obama’s CIA pick as he has absolutely no experience in the intelligence business. This Newsweek quote should scare anyone with a brain:
Quote:
Not all Democrats on the intelligence panel expressed reservations about Panetta. Sen. Ron Wyden, a senior committee member from Oregon, said Panetta is “a smart, savvy D.C. veteran and a strong choice to lead the CIA.” Wyden said he planned to work with Panetta “to declassify much of the story of what went wrong at the CIA these last eight years, so that we can both take steps to make Americans safer and protect the values that define us as Americans.”
So democrats think he’s a good pick because he’s a DC veteran and is smart. Would it have been better to pick someone already at the agency who has a good handle on what’s going on. This is a pivotal point in how our future will play out and we simply cannot afford to budget cut and screw around with intelligence gathering like Clinton did.
What I predict is that “to declassify much of the story of what went wrong at the CIA these last eight years, so that we can both take steps to make Americans safer and protect the values that define us as Americans.” means they intend to bring to light every mistake the CIA has made over JUST the last 8 years and then warp these mistakes around until they can pin them on Bush. This is not what we need and is something I can’t remember ever having been done in the past.
Btw, new_rayz I’ll get back to your other post in a few.