yep -- totally agreed. bad day for those who oppose Congressional oversight...

was he talking about the latest from gates?

Hillary is still swinging and now she has Kerry helping her:

CLINTON VS. PENTAGON CONTINUES

The latest in the controversy over that Pentagon letter to Hillary Clinton... Clinton and John Kerry held a conference call with reporters this afternoon to announce legislation that requires the Pentagon to brief -- classified if necessary -- the Congress with contingency plans for redeploying troops from Iraq. Clinton said she was forced to draw up the legislation because she felt the issue was being politicized instead of receiving the answers from Secretary Gates she felt she deserved. In fact, she called Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman's response in the letter "offensive and totally inappropriate."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/20/280767.aspx

I'm sure you can find a more flattering photo of Senator Clinton to go with this story -- unless your intent is to portray her as crestfallen.

You know, in the pre-Bush days, no would ever think of telling a sitting U.S. Senator to shut the fuck up, which is what Edelman basically did. And even if that was considered, it would almost never happen to a Senator who appears to be a nominee for President of the United States.

I'm sure we'll hear more about this really, really soon. I read somewhere that Gates is trying to go behind Bush's back to end the Iraq war. . .that's probably not true, but one can hope.

Before we go bestowing sainthood on Robert Gates, let us pause for a moment and reflect on the fact that he took the job and is busy executing the continued occupation of Iraq.

I've had enough of sympathy for these people. It's like Carl Levin said in Woodward's book, "Plan of Denial", "don't talk to me about Colin Powell's anguish."

Hmm... That's very interesting. What are those websites?

More importantly . . . The premise of Edelman's chest thumping combined with Bush 43's regal decree from a coupla days ago means our Executive Branch will be taking Hillary & Bill's house this weekend . . . Probably while Commander Codpiece is having his colon probed tomorrow and Darth Dick is in charge - FAUX News @ eleven for all the details.

By Jove, I think you've found something. His term expired in January! Why is he still there???

I used to work in a minor federal agency (the National Marine Fisheries Service) and as a mid-level staffer I drafted dozens of response letters to congressional inquiries on dozens of subjects. Usually it was some Senator or Congressman forwarding some letter from a constituent asking us to look into some issue. Rarely did Congress ever take up serious policy questions via letters, they had hearings for that. Even for a typical letter from some Congressman who was just forwarding a letter from some constituent fishermen with a gripe about some regulation I had to get about 6 reviewers to read, edit, and sign-off on the draft response before it was ready for printing on letterhead and signing by the head of the agency.

Point is, these sorts of letters never go out on one person's signature, no matter how high up. They get passed around through a clear and pre-established review process and are probably signed off on by half a dozen people before going out, one of whom is absolutely certainly a high-level DOD attorney who's job it is to review every line of every letter to make sure it is in line with DOD policy. I absolutely guarantee that sitting on the desk of the secretary outside Edelman's office is a big fat binder and inside is printed up the established process for the drafting and reviewing of controlled correspondence with members of Congress.

In any event, I can certainly believe that Gates never saw or heard of the letter before it went out. The flow of paper through these sorts of bureaucracies is immense. But that's not really the point. He should have had one of his own people in the review chain for this sort of thing to say, "hey, let's dial this back a bit here." The man is not inexperienced when it comes to managing bureaucracies.

Point is, either Gates was fine with the original letter, or someone's nuts are hurting about right now.

Yes, we agree.

My point is that no one goes off half-cocked on their on in this sort of bureaucracy. Too many people are in the review chain for even minor letters. For major policy stuff I'm sure there are even more folks involved.

Whether or not Gates personally knew about this letter is sort of beside the point. A whole bunch of people signed off on it before it went out, including, presumably, some of Gate's own people.

Check Edelman's bio. He's in Cheney's clan. The letter is completely in line with Cheney and Addington's view of anything Clinton, Congressional oversight and Executive Authority in a time of war.

Don't ever forget that Cheney and Rumsfeld packed the DOD. It was Cheney's faction in DOD that won the internal battle over Iraq in 2001-2002. Putting Gates at the top hasn't changed that dynamic. Some of Cheney's people have been lurking in DOD since Bush I. It is entirely possible that the Cheney cadre reviewed Edelman's letter and ok'd it without Gates even being involved.

I'm not suggesting that we get all paranoid and run into the streets screaming "Darth Cheney", but we should not ignore reality, either. For some real fun, take a look at what is going on in the CIA as well. Anyone want to consider whether Rove and Cheney split up the executive branch with Rove going DOJ/Domestic agencies and Cheney going Defense/Intelligence with both of them making sure Condi (and Powell before her) has no standing at all?

I totally agree about the respect due any sitting Senator and have not interest in defending Edelman. But it is important to acknowledge that many Senators are now are first and foremost active candidates in an unprecedented two-year campaign for president. Much of Hillary's motivation is looking for advantage as a candidate, not serving as a responsible Senator. This dispute could likely have been resolved with statesmanship and without headlines. Both of the warring partisans (Clinton and Edelman) wanted headlines more than resolution or good contingency planning.