[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

How exactly did Newt go overboard? I see nothing in this article to either re-affirm any respect I had for the State Department in their diplomatic competency or their ideological integrity with regards to freedom and representation. Its the State Department, in their desire to please all governments that has dirtied the American name overseas by always dealing and negotiating, no matter corruption. In my opinion; The State Department itself is a cancer, and I'm serious when I say it is inherently Unconstitutional.

Newt seems to have made alot of people uncomfortable that the media was going to rip the Admin apart, I think if people would stop personalizing the issues and focus on the details he gave about State's record, the nation would be better off for it.

[hchutch]

To me, the problem is not folks like Powell and Armitage, but a lot of the career folks below them.

Joel Mowbray had a good piece on how State was undermining Bush's foreign policy, "Not Pledging Allegiance", that went into the matter pretty well.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/911132/posts

That is the real problem, and right now, we have serious problems at State. When allies are being abandoned, and others are being pressured, we need to rethink the folks who are giving the advice.

[marron]

How exactly did Newt go overboard?

I'm with you. Newt did a very good job of "not" personalizing it. We are blessed to have a very popular, very talented Sec of State, and his problems in trying to steer this ship are very evident. If someone of his caliber can't do it, the problem is institutional. And of course, the problems pre-date his arrival by, oh, sixty years? So the attacks are well focused, well aimed, and well needed.

State's problems are similar to those of any institution that is not held to account. A peace-time Pentagon becomes very political, because war-fighting becomes a secondary skill. But a war-time Pentagon, led by someone determined to win, begins to find its soul again, and war-fighting skills begin to find themselves in appreciation again, if only for a season.

The same thing should apply at State. A war-time State Dept should find itself needing and promoting the kind of men that win diplomatic wars. Either that, or it finds itself sidelined and bypassed, with the important negotiations being handled by the Pentagon, or the CIA, or the President's insiders, and it will find itself being publicly criticized and mocked.

State isn't used to being pounded publicly, and held publicly accountable, but it will be good for it... builds character.