The neocons want to dump Condi?

As part of my ongoing fascination with the oddly anti-Bush articles appearing in Insight magazine, an off-shoot of Sun Myung Moon’s far-right Washington Times, the latest issue suggests the neocons, who consistently railed against Colin Powell when he led the State Department, are none too pleased with his successor.

Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against [tag]Secretary of State[/tag] [tag]Condoleezza Rice[/tag], saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.

The conservatives, who include Newt [tag]Gingrich[/tag], Richard [tag]Perle[/tag] and leading current and former members of the Pentagon and National Security Council, have urged the president to transfer Miss Rice out of the State Department and to an advisory role. They said Miss Rice, stemming from her lack of understanding of the Middle East, has misled the president on Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

“The president has yet to understand that people make policy and not the other way around,” a senior national security policy analyst said. “Unlike [former Secretary of State Colin] [tag]Powell[/tag], Condi is loyal to the president. She is just incompetent on most foreign policy issues.”

According to Insight — which is far from impeccable in the credibility department — Iran is “exploiting Miss Rice’s inexperience and incompetence to accelerate its nuclear weapons program,” and Rice’s shortsightedness has exacerbated the problems with North Korea.

Gingrich said (though it’s not altogether clear if he spoke to Insight or if the magazine was quoting him from a different interview), “We are sending signals today that no matter how much you provoke us, no matter how viciously you describe things in public, no matter how many things you’re doing with missiles and nuclear weapons, the most you’ll get out of us is talk.”

It’s culminating in scuttlebutt that that Rice’s policy, such as it is, will fall apart in the coming months, leading to her dismissal after the midterms.

The critics within the administration expect a backlash against Miss Rice that could lead to her transfer in wake of the congressional elections in 2006. They said by that time even Mr. Bush will recognize the failure of relying solely on diplomacy in the face of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

“At that point, Rice will be openly blamed and Bush will have a very hard time defending her,” said a GOP source with close ties to the administration.

This strikes me as highly unlikely. If Gingrich, Perle, & Co. believe poor job performance and/or policy failures would be enough to prompt Bush to fire Rice, they just haven’t been paying attention to this administration’s tolerance for incompetence. Besides, their version of a poor Secretary of State is “someone who stands in the way of more war,” which is probably a minority view outside the Project for a New American Century.

On a less substantive point, for those keeping score at home, this is the ninth Insight article since November that casts the Bush gang in an unflattering light. In May, there was an article about division between the president and the first lady about a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. In late March, there was an article about Bush effectively delegating his responsibilities. Two weeks before that, it was a piece on Cheney becoming a political liability who will be thrown overboard after the midterm elections. Two weeks before that, it was “the largest crackdown in decades against whistleblowers in government.” The week before, it was an item on Karl Rove threatening to “blacklist” any Republican who goes against the president on warrantless-wiretaps. In January, Insight quoted “administration sources” talking about internal turmoil at the Bush White House. In November, Insight ran an item explaining that Bush has become melancholy and paranoid.

It’s odd, considering that we’re talking about the far-right [tag]Washington Times[/tag]’ “sister publication.”

So the Neocons didn’t like Colin Powell because he was competent but not 100% W’s lapdog. They don’t likke Condi because she is 100% W’s lapdog but is incompetent. So what they are looking for is someone competent who is W’s lapdog? I’m confused.

“Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.”

Exactly how is it that Rice had reversed Bush’s policies?
#1 Bush has no foriegn policy
#2 The only thing they are doing differently is that they are not invading other countries based on false intelligence

It sounds like their problem is that the government is not executing their plan exactly as they like it. Well boo-hoo.

I wonder what they make of the new alliance between Venezuela and Belarus (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/07/25/belarus.chavez.reut/index.html) and the new arms deal between Venezuela and Russia (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/07/26/chavez.russia.ap/index.html)

How long until we invade Venezuela?

  • While I might agree with the neocons about Condi’s incompetence, though likely for slightly different reasons, I don’t agree that Bush ever had a foreign policy agenda (at least beyond getting Saddam).

    I do agree with you CB, the neocons haven’t been paying attention. Bush has never fired someone for incompetence, political reasons yes, but not incompetence.

  • The problem with Condi is that she’s the scape-puppet for “the Bush Plan.”

    Contrary to the beliefs of others, there actually “is” such a thing as “the Bush Plan.”

    There’s no formal name for it, but I suppose it could be referred to as “Blazing Saddles Diplomacy.” This is where you circle the wagon (yes—just one wagon here), look outwards from the circle, and tell the rest of the world that “we’re winning and you’re all meaningless!” No matter how “loyal;” no matter how “competent”—neither Condi nor anyone else can sell the Bush Plan. It’s a farce.

    Another way to look at the Bush Plan might be to consider the Amish. When an individual repeatedly violates the tenets of the community, that community actively “shuns” the individual. But, with the Bush Plan, it’s the individual who’s declaring the community to be shunned—and again, Condi just can’t sell the Bush Plan to the world….

  • Condi just finished a whirlwind tour of the Middle East, a tour which she did not want to go on (interfered with shoe shopping) and which accomplished absolutely nothing (except the chance to show off some new outfits in the photo-ops). Time to declare “Mission Accomplished” and “Heckuva job, Honey Condi”.

  • In reality Condi has about as much sayso with the Bushies as Hattie Mc Daniel had at Tara. As for the rest of these neo-con assholes who have no real war experience among them, their day has come and gone with the major fuckup in Iraq that they engineered.

  • What is Richard Perle’s foreign policy? Invade enemies of Israel, make as much personal profit as possible, and leave them as failed states. That’s it. His Iraq money has probably been spent and he needs more.

    Human scum.

  • The only thing worse than Condi’s job as Secretary of State was here job as National Security Advisor.

    Perhaps she would have done a good job advising on US/Soviet relations (her specialty) but she has been an unmitigated disasaster in other areas.

    What a shame. She seems like a nice person with many good qualities. It seems to be an example of the Peter Principle.

  • The Gingrich quote comes from his July 16th appearance on MTP.

    It could be that they are setting up a scapegoat not for the failure on Iran, but for the failure of their Iraqi policy. Should everything fall apart in the Middle East due to Iraq, they will claim that Condi’s failure to take bold action on Iran was responsible.

  • Iran is “exploiting Miss Rice’s inexperience and incompetence to accelerate its nuclear weapons program,”

    Rather than the fact the all America’s military capacity is tied up in Iraq and we literally can’t do squat about Iran?

    Yep, Insight, the Times and the Moonies are losing grip on reality. Not a surprise, really, considering their owner is a self-proclaimed Messiah.

    Condi Rice is pretty bad in some ways. Some of it’s been touched on here. She’s a Soviet expert in a world without a Soviet Union. She lacks, by her own admission, the imagination to foresee an attack on America even after reading a Presidential brief entitled “Osama Determined to Attack America”. The only reason Cheney and Rumsfeld haven’t gotten her sacked is that they have NOTHING left to mess up the world with.

    But Boy George II is not going to let her go if the Middle East collaspes into general war. No accoutability is the watch word of this administration.

  • Hey Neocons: Maybe the reason why Condi can’t threaten anybody with more than tough talk is because our military might has been flushed down an Iraqi toilet.

    Maybe you should sign up for a rotation in Baghdad and then come back and tell us how we need to threaten Iran and Syria.

    Please, newspeople: Ignore the idiots who tried to tell us Iraq would be a cakewalk, and instead, interview the people whose predictions about the quagmire were accurate.

    Please?

  • “Please, newspeople: Ignore the idiots who tried to tell us Iraq would be a cakewalk, and instead, interview the people whose predictions about the quagmire were accurate.” – racerx

    Spend some time with Jim Webb please. 😉

  • I just find the idea of Richard Perle accusing anyone of incompetence to be one of the funniest things ever…

  • I know that it sounds a bit sexist but am I the only person who thinks that sending a woman in short tight skirts to deal with Islamists and Orthodox Jews might be counter productive?
    With the Taliban gaining in Afghanistan, North Korea firing missiles with impunity and the US Army stalemated in Iraq she has no strength to overcome the cultural perceptions of those who she is trying to influence.
    Oh yeah, being incompetent doesn’t help much either . . .

  • Wasn’t she Dr. Rice when they thought she was a genius?

    Now that they want to portray her as a lightweight, “Miss Rice” is screwing it up.

    I’m with RacerX on this one, why are we supposed to take criticism from the architects of the Iraq debacle seriously?

  • Not unlike the Harriet Miers situation, a Bush pal has been tagged by a group of neocons for rejection. While this may be full scale speculation, it isn’t an impossibility given the neocon agenda goes back some thirty plus years to Team B and they believe they are close to finalizing their influence on foreign policy.

    One is inclined to wonder if the delay in U.S. efforts to broker a cease fire in the current Middle East conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is an indication of a waning confidence in the direction of the efforts of the Secretary of State as well as some further expanding neoconservative influence with the President. The fact that the administration has indicated that there must be an enduring solution rather than any rapid efforts to negotiate a cease fire seems to support the neoconservative belief that threats must be dealt with from a position of strength…even if that includes a lengthier period of military engagement. The delay in dispatching Rice to the region seems to be significant.

    Read the full article here:

    http://www.thoughttheater.com

  • “The president has yet to understand that people make policy and not the other way around,” a senior national security policy analyst said. “Unlike [former Secretary of State Colin] Powell, Condi is loyal to the president. She is just incompetent on most foreign policy issues.”

    Holy hell! Maybe these are the end times. I find myself in agreement with the neocons. Condi is incompetent.

    OTOH, I don’t know where they get the idea that Powell wasn’t loyal to Bush. Not loyal to the neocon cabal? Sure. But not loyal to Bush? He torched every ounce of his own credibility in his loyalty to Bush.

  • “The president has yet to understand that people make policy and not the other way around,” a senior national security policy analyst said.

    Does this strike anyone else as about the stupidest comment ever?

    How, exactly, is policy supposed to ‘make people’? Does Boy George II think that policy makes people?

    And besides, Boy George II is the Decider, he makes the policy. Dr. Rice (thanks short fuse for reminding us) is there to implement Boy George II’s policy.

    What these sick dumb and proven incompetent NeoCons are really complaining about is that Condi is the one selling her ‘State Department’ policies to Boy George II while Rummy and Cheney can’t sell their ‘War Department’ policies. Perhaps that’s the only accountability you get in the Bushite Administration, screw up and Boy George II turns his spiteful scorn upon you.

  • Wow, I can’t prove it, but I suspect we may have a little case of prejudging going on amongst the conservatives. God forbid the party even consider putting a single (why is that?) black woman at the head of its presidential ticket in 2008. They’re looking to take down Condi now. It’s also possible that they’re also looking for a scapegoat for all of Bush’s foreign policy disasters. Better to blame the “black chick,” the conservatives are thinking, than have Bush’s foreign policy failures be ascribed to the conservative necon-men.

  • Why do you all believe the neocon foreign policy has failed ?
    Afghanistan has been successful , why ?
    1) The pipeline got built , hundreds of millions of dollars profits to the construction/support industry.
    2) hundreds of millions of dollars to the arms suppliers and ongoing.
    3) uncooperative government removed and replaced by Karzhai oil-friendly gov.
    Success.
    The language of business is money. For example Exxon-Mobils 2nd quarter profits for 2006 was how much? In excess of 10 Billion dollars.
    Collateral damage , military casualties etc do not affect those maximising their business interests.

    Iraq has been a success , why ?
    1) Saddams switch to Petroeuro as currency of oil sales reversed to petrodollar immediately after invasion, petrodollar is foundation of american financial strength.
    2) See item 2 above. for hundreds of millions insert tens of billions of dollars.
    3) See 3 above. for karzhai insert Chalabi ( current iraqi deputy minister of oil.
    Success , 2 out of 2.
    next stop Iran. objective 1? eliminate Iran oil bourse which threatens petrodollar, see above
    objective 2, see 2 above
    objective 3 , see 3 above.
    This is the measure of success for the so called neocon foreign policy. So far business is booming.

  • Comments are closed.