What does Hastings have on Pelosi? this is weird.
Is the premise really true, or is this just a rumor?

oh, just saw the other post.

You know, PELOSI or HARMON might get away with being mean to poor, old Alcee, if they could bring themselves to be mean to anybody else, like, say, the Neo-Cons, or, for that matter, the self-styled Moderate Republicans they expect to save us all.

Sorry, but this cock-up comes from both PELOSI and HARMON playing junior partner in a coalition government they both pretend they are part of.

So, PELOSI is "caving in" to to demands from the Black Caucus in its relentless quest for sort of patronage and indulgence the old, um, senior, Southern Democrats they learned their trade from wallowed in.

This is new? Who knows, maybe, Alcee is another Charlie WILSON! You cannot say he was not very effective in world of secret wars precisely because he could play off all the corrupt actors.

Now, show me who Jane HARMON has stood up to and actually damaged. Perle? Tenent? Is she a player or a playee?

Steve, the Select Committee deals in secrecy, not intelligence. They don't know a damn thing our enemies do not know. They only think they know how to fool all of the people all of the time.

So, if HARMON knew or cared a damn thing about intelligence, she would want off the Select Committee so she could spill her guts, if any.

Sure, the Democrats could do better than Alcee, but not much. We need to do much better than HARMON or PELOSI, if we are going to be anything but bit-players in some Pentagon porn.

Competence would have been knowing what Harmon had to know by virtue of her position and expertise about the lack of WMD and the nonconnection between SH and OBL and calling Bush out on it.

I'm no fan of Harman's. She spends a lot of time comfortably functioning as an AIPAC puppet and a gullible neocon cheerleader.

Harman hasn't been exposing the "high fear tactics" of the White House, et. al, she has been willingly engaged in promoting and disseminating them since 9/11. She certainly has been comfortable finding "terrorists" under every bed and advocating the need to abrocate civil liberties.

If she were as competent and knowledgeable as claimed, she would not have been such an avid fan of Bush's WOT and the Iraq war. I wasn't "duped" by Bush on Iraq, and I don't even have a security clearance.

I don't understand why the only democrats assumed to have foreign policy and/or intelligence expertise are those who follow along with the republican worldview. Biden and Harman are supposed to have credibility because they agree with the republican agenda except to say that they would execute it better. Not my idea of street cred. Pelosi wasn't duped by Bush. Maybe she has better judgment than Harman?

BTW: The criminal case which formed the basis of the impeachment charges agaisnt Alcee Hastings was tainted by the fact that FBI agants committed perjury during the trial and an agent from the lab tampered with evidence.

PS: I agree with JRB's point about Harmon not ever having stood up to anyone. I sure haven't seen it.

I'm unimpressed with Harmon. In fact, I disagree so vigorously with your assessment of her worth on the committee that I'm skeptical of your motives in this matter.

CS -- I don't mind you disagreeing with me, though you are wrong. Hastings is the absolute wrong person to put at the helm of Intel. Harman is far better. I would applaud another better choice than Harman if there was one -- but I don't see it. So what the heck is this question about being "skeptical of my motives."

My motive is that I'm disgusted by Dems who don't even try to put a good step forward on natinoal security issues -- who on one hand can critize Bush for idiotic decisions and then go blind when their own team is making them.

Steve

You've gotta be KIDDING! Can Pelosi really be that stupid or corrupt? Help us.

Steve,
good job!!! Your analysis is correct, both of the actual competence required for such a post, and the political fallout of putting someone of low character in an important political position.

Steve -- Sorry to be slow getting back to respond. You notice that I don't express a view on Hastings as the alternate choice because I don't know enough about that. I've written to Black Caucus members and Pelosi to ask whether this is some sort of political pay off or if they have substantive reasons for such an appointment. Not that I expect responses, but at least they'll know we're paying attention to the issue.

My sense in reading your blog is often that you are playing a part in setting up and carrying out strategy. Maybe I'm imagining that, but whether or no, I admire it.

About Harmon, we disagree. But I'm listening.

I have been seriously underwhelmed by Harmon and would not be sorry to see her go. Many of us (including many members of Congress) who were paying attention, were informed by available resources, and had even modest sophistication about foreign affairs were vocal in our opposition to the Iraq war, Not so Harmon, who should have had access to additional intelligence but apparently lacked the wherewithal to sort through confusing data or the courage to swim against the stream.

I can't see that much has changed. Her cluelessness and her cheerleading is currently on display at TPMCafe (see posts and comments) http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/9/28/154327/556

None of which is to say that Hastings is a solid replacement. He may not be. And I agree that the position is too important to indulge "gaming" by Pelosi. What she needs to do is look carefully for intelligence, objectivity, and sophistication and forget about affirmative action here. She might start by reviewing the list of Rep's. that voted against the Iraq resolution. Given that the current administration has failed abysmally in the intelligence arena and is always itching to get into another war, we need someone who has a healthy degree of skepticism, can deal with complexity, and provide strong leadership. This is serious stuff. We don't need a club. We need some adults in strategic positions