Replies

I certainly have read enough of them to be an expert. Yours qualifies through its inane attempt to divide the administration and weaken it in the eyes of the American people.

And how exactly am I doing that? Do you deny that the State Department works tirelessly to undermine the West Wing on matter of foreign policy? If you say no, you are either purposely ignorant or merely unaware. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on this, despite your nasty and accusatory tone. The Arabist and Internationalist factions in the DoS are islands unto themselves, with agendas which do not reflect the President's views. The battle behind the scenes just to ostracize Arafat in 2002, for example, was fiercely fought by Foggy Bottom, and was Cheney's first major victory.

While the State Department is concerned with long term diplomatic issues which can occasionally differ from short term political ones, there is no divide within the administration.

Most of the blowhards who push these claims that there is are not reputable or knowing. There is no "undermining" of Bush's foreign policy by State no matter how many fantasies you or they might have.

When there are differences of opinion on matters of foreign policy they are worked out and agreed upon.

Why do people have such a hard time figuring out that State is NOT Defense nor vice versa? Why do people forget the "soft cop" vs "hard cop" routine?

WRT Arafat your contention is pure bs. Where did you gain access to meetings with Cheney indicating his opposition to State? Where did you get the idea that Powell is not as roundly condemned as the rest of the administration by the
RATmedia?

If Powell is good enough for W he is good enough for me.

"Do you deny that the State Department works tirelessly to undermine the West Wing on matter of foreign policy? If you say no, you are either purposely ignorant or merely unaware."

A little bit of A, a little bit of B...