If we lived in a primitive age, the ground at Langley would be laid waste and salted, and there would be heads on spikes. As it is, the answer to the CIA insubordination is not just to move a few boxes on the office flow chart.

David Brooks is clearly taking the President's side, and while I disagree with him on some of the larger issues here, I do share his complaints about this strategy.

What David doesn't say is that this solution is applied everywhere, and not just to deal with "insubordination," but with anything and everything. It's become a general-purpose tool.

In modern business and government, there are only two essential tools to achieving problem solving success:

1. If people aren't getting along, try rearranging the organizational chart.
2. If people aren't doing good work, try a new process.

These are the NOR and the NAND of American corporate circuitry.

The answer is to define carefully what the president expects from the intelligence community: information.

To paraphrase what Jules once said to Vincent, "if your answers disagree with mine, then I will cease asking for your opinion."

k wrote:
] My history makes it clear that I'm not at all
] convinced, partly from general cynicism about political
] figures in general and partly from my interpretations of the
] past 4 years worth of actions. So this doesn't come as a
] surprise to me, particularly. -k]

I'm non-plused about the firings of serveral people who apparently disagreed (and correctly I might add) with Bush's military plans. If it turns out they are shaking up the CIA to be more pliant this is dangerous. Dissent is healthy. You need people who will criticise your judgement. If you fill the federal government with yes-men they'll be singing your praises as the world falls down around your ears.

Decius wrote:
] Dissent is healthy. You need people who will criticism
] your judgement.

[ It is this very concept that I am not confident Bush has embraced. From the very beginning, the reports of how the president conducts business has painted a picture of a man who, in general, prefers to be insulated from disagreement or confrontation. Numerous articles have discussed his absolutist demeanor and the certitude in which he couches all his activities. The majority of the public responded well to this perception of clarity. To me, anyone who's absolutely certain about almost everything, is almost certainly either missing something, or willfully ignorant. This is my fear. -k]