[Buskerdoo]

Originally Posted by StupidScript

So ... only George or Dick should be the ones to go ... also without any training? (Condi's only foreign relations training was on-the-job ... and what a whiz-bang job she's been doing!) And what about our diplomats who are trained in foreign relations ... since they weren't elected to represent the country, but are appointed by the Administration ... they shouldn't go, either?

Interestingly you could have simply stated the fact that the United States Constitution divides foreign policy powers between the President and the Congress so that both share in the making of foreign policy. Unfortunatley, it is very murky water. The bottom line is that Congress does not execute policy. Period. That is the job of the executive branch of the government. Anything that undermines this, like going out and stating policy that is not condoned by the current administration, and many citizens of the country, is wrong.

So who should go? Or maybe you're thinking that any type of diplomacy is a bad idea?

Not worthy of comment.

I'm thinking that every type of diplomacy should be given a chance. It's way better than no attempt to build bridges.

Not if if hurts the country. The next democrate president isn't going to be too happy when a republican goes off and tells another country whatever. But in that case, the democratic pres will have the presses support.

And if Pelosi was swindled by Olmert (and who hasn't been, in those circles) it's more of a sign of immaturity than stupidity. In her case, unlike in GWB's case, at least she can become more mature through experiences like this.

We'll see. I have my doubts.