Lizardbreath is Nancy Pelosi!
How could I have missed it?
Lizardbreath is Nancy Pelosi!
Remember, it's the Senate, not the House, that holds confirmation hearings.
LizardBreath is actually Harry Reid.
There's an interesting question to be asked his support for a war against Iraq before weapons inspectors went back in, after they reported back in the negative, and the always fun "if you knew then what you know now" bit, but I'm sure both that someone else will ask that and that he'll answer it in the most boring way possible (Bush was right in all things).
Something that gets at the point of this Yglesias article seems promising to me, in the sense that his answer to it might actually tell you something and he's not as constrained by Bush's public stand as he might be on other topics.
LB is James Webb!
Generic, obvious: without revisiting the past conduct of the Iraq war, how do you predict your policies w/r/t that conflict will differ from those of your predecessor, and why do you think they are more likely to succeed? What's the best of the plausible outcomes in Iraq given its current status? What has to happen (both in terms of the US military and Iraqi benchmarks) for that outcome to be realized? What troop levels are required, and where will these troops come from?
I hate how this sounds just like one of my exams.
Upon further reflection, "Harry Reid" s/b "Ted Kennedy."
Is it acceptable to increase pay for active military and benefits for veterans at the cost of research into new weapons systems such as missile defense?
(FYI, I would want to hear him say, "Yes, absolutely." I don't actually know how much control he would have over that, but when half our national budget is spent on defense I would much rather see that money used to improve the benefits to, resources for and retention of our military personnel than building bigger toys.)
Seriously? "The last time you lot were in charge of ending a war was Vietnam, under Nixon/Ford and Kissinger. That looked like a civil war that, in part through our efforts, spilled into Laos and Cambodia, with catastrophic effects for those countries, even after our disengagement. What should we have learned from that experience that is relevant to the current Iraqi situation?"
and
"Aren't we stuck just trying to manage a civil war, whatever we do?"
2: I like the Iran-Contra line, although I'd have to do some research to come up with exactly what to ask; I haven't thought much about Iran-Contra since the 80s.
"How has your experience running Microsoft equipped you to handle counterinsurgency?"
6: Curses! Detected.
And this is all good stuff, keep them coming.
10: And what sort of relevant experience does an artwork made up of thousands of pieces of saffron cloth have that prepares it for being the Secretary of Defense?
How about:
"After Vietnam, there was a perception within the military that it was demoralized and broken, that took at least a decade to pull out of. What is your plan to keep that from happening as a result of Iraq?"
Historically, many cities have had gates outside of them to be used in case of enemy siege. Which are you most similar to?
You're all wrong; LB is a Schumer sock-puppet.
13-- oh, right: after you fix the demoralization, how should the military transform itself in the long term to deal with asymmetrical conflict? (I.e., what's your view of the Rumsfeld lighter-n-techier military?)
You've read the advise and consent clause of the U.S. Constitution? Present an exegesis on Senatorial practices under this clause and what it means for how a present day Senate should treat its solemn oath.
"The reputation of the US military has suffered under your predecessor from some shocking revelations. There were revelations of the torture of prisoners including those as Abu Ghraib. There were also revelations of lies and deceptions in the official reports of the death and injury of US soldiers, such as Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch.
Do you think that your predecessor has done everything necessary to assure that such events are not repeated, and to find all those who were in a position of responsibility but failed to act properly? If not, what more would you do?"
"Also, don't you think Ogged is totally gay?"
Hey Bob, heard any good cock jokes lately? (For closed session only)
Ask him about the propriety of bombing Nagasaki. When he starts answering, clarify that you mean doing so in the near future.
Another: "Please describe your involvement in the United States' activities in Afghanistan during the Reagan Administration."*
Another: "It has been said by some retired intelligence officers that while CIA Director you pressured analysts to shape their data to administration policy. If the facts coming in to DoD planners or DIA analysts indicate that an Administration policy is a bad idea, what will you do? Were the administration to move ahead with a policy anyway, what would you do?"
* I don't think this would get much of an answer, but it might prompt some digging.
Where did your predecessor go wrong? What will you do to fix it? What do you need to do that? Do you think it's fixable? Why or why not?
(Answers that begin: 'throughout the course of human history, mankind has always wondered about the nature of counterinsurgencies' will be penalized harshly.)
If you had to choose between consensual sex with a Senator, of your choice, on this committee or the death of a random Iraqi civilian, what, and in the case of the former, who, would you choose?
The correct answer to 24 is, of course, "You, Senator."
Explain what happened at the 2004 battle of Fallujah. What mistakes were made, and by whom? How would you have approached the problem differently?
"What kind of fucking idiot are you, that you would even consider taking this job under the circumstances?"
That's a good one, Kotsko.
Howsabout this one: seeing as though we keep losing key personnel to Don't Ask Don't Tell, and seeing as though that dumb-ass rule is basically an invitation for blackmail and intimidation, would you support a fucking reconsideration of what has clearly been a disaster of a policy?
Hey, college football-understanding people, don't we need an Aggie joke or something?
28: And a reinstatement of benefits/rank to soldiers who were discharged under said policy and wish to return, if it is lifted?
Something about how that two-finger salute resembles a Satanic gang sign?
It was recently reported that a general who was under consideration for command of Central Command withdrew his name from consideration and retired in part because your predecessor insisted on maintaining a direct line of communication with General Casey in Iraq. Will you continue your predecessor's practice of communicating directly with field commanders?
Follow-up: How long will General Casey remain in Iraq? Are there any plans to appoint a successor?
[A friend of mine who returned from Iraq not too long ago was exhausted after a year. IIRC, Casey's in his third year there. My friend came into contact with Casey every now and then and had a lot of sympathy for how long he's had to endure there.]
"Would you and the President be willing to negotiate with Iran and Syria to bring a successful resolution to the current situation in Iraq? Are you willing to offer terms that those two countries would actually consider to negotiate? What do you imagine such an agreement might look like?"
Most of what happens in a confirmation hearing is utterly pointless; the only questions that might be useful are ones that attempt to elicit a commitment to a very specific (preferably measurable) goal. "Can you promise the committee that you'll double the number of Arab linguists by 2008? If not, why not? Do you need more funding for that?" Or (assuming you have relevant knowledge that I don't have) "The Super KickAss Fighter Robot is currently $3 billion over budget, at what point will you cut further losses and ask for the program to be discontinued? You're not giving me a number, are you willing to spend $20 billion more on this project?" You either want to force them to try to do something, or have something indisputable to clobber them with.
People put down grandstanding, but this is one case where grandstanding is the best option for the democrats. Just say stuff like "I hope you do better than Rumsfield", "It is important to move our efforts in Iraq in a new direction"
"Can you promise this committee that you'll sit down and discuss Iraq with the Gayatollah? Do you need cover to get in to the Mineshaft budgeted by this committee?"
Joe O: Do you favor the existence of confirmation hearings? Do you think both the majority and minority party should just use them for grandstanding, or just the minority?
29: There's a "cut and stack" joke somewhere in here but I'm off my game today so I'm not coming up with it.
'Smasher?
I'm sorry I let gender bias cause me to mistake Ted Kennedy for Nancy Pelosi.
I think a certain level of grandstanding by both parties is acceptable, even good. But it shouldn't get in the way of the substantive questions that need to be asked, both about the nominee's past (iran-contra, afghanistan, cooking intelligence about the soviet threat) and his plans for the future (what is the least bad way to get out of iraq?)
Also, substantive questions don't need to be as narrow as ogged described. Yes, ask about the SuperKickAss Fighter Robot. But also ask the deeper question: what role could SuperKickAssFighter Robots play in a world where most warfar is asymetric counterinsugency stuff?
We should make him opine on the Fafblog exit plan.
Given that the military needs every able-bodied person possible, how will you instruct your commanders to balance their need for active forces with individual soldiers' needs for mental health care?
Are you comfortable with the policies currently in place for addressing serious mental illness and suidide attempts among military personnel, or would you change them?
Are you satisfied that personnel suffering from mental health and/or substance abuse problems are receiving proper treatment, both as active-duty soldiers and as veterans?
(What I want to figure out a way to ask is: "Is it true that soldiers with mental-health needs are not having those addressed, and then when they start to self-medicate, they are "randomly" chosen for a drug test and when it is positive, given a dishonorable discharge with no benefits?)
If you were an animal, what animal would you be?
When do you intend to put KSM on trial?
When do you intend to put John Yoo on trial?
Do you have any tips for us in terms of whether we should impeach Bush first, or else impeach Cheney first so that we don't run the risk of Cheney being president (officially, that is) even for a moment? Is there any way to do this simultaneously, so that the nation has a chance to grow accustomed to having a "castrating harpy" as president for two years?
I (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
When you take the oath of office, how will you interpret your sworn promise to defend the Constitution? Do you interpret executive orders as being capable of overriding as congressional legislation or judicial rulings?
It was widely reported that your predecessor offered his resignation some time ago and it was not accepted. If you felt it was appropriate to resign, would you follow through with your resignation immediately?
[Somebody please clean up my English]
If you had one question you could ask Hillary Clinton after sex, what would it be? (Anonymity issues prevent me from explaining further.)
I am somewhat optimistic because of this:
and this:
And I don't really want to ask Gates any hard questions about Iran/Contra, gays in the military or anything else peripheral to the war in Iraq.
Moderate Republicans have been shut out?! What, all two of them?
How is Iran/Contra peripheral to the war in Iraq? Isn't a person who screwed up one secretive, illegal mid-east military project likely to screw up another?
re 50
one of the two moderate republicans:
Don't Attack Saddam
It would undermine our antiterror efforts.
BY BRENT SCOWCROFT
re 51
Gates wasn't the architect of Iran/Contra; he just lied about when he first found out about it.
Isn't a person who screwed up one secretive, illegal mid-east military project likely to screw up another?
Haven't we already crossed that bridge?
So how did you and Kelsey Grammer get along on the set?
49: I might extend that to trying to keep Vietnam analogies to the minimum, though the "broken army" question is a pretty good one.
Maybe ask for specifics along the lines of improving retention and initial recruitment standards as both have fallen off drastically because of or at least during the Iraq War?
I guess I would also ask LB what the purpose of the questions might be, as that significantly impacts the sizzle-to-wonk ratio?
Would you try to hire back the gay Arabic linguists that were fired under Bush?
On the same subject: What do you think about "don't ask don't tell"?
How's Ollie North doing?
Ask if he'll give me a sweet sinecure.
31: The Hook 'em Horns hand thingy is NOT an Aggie thing. You some kind of Aggie double-agent or something?
"Sir, what do you and the president see as Mr. Rumseld's most significant errors? What changes in priorities and strategy do you propose, and how do you see those contributing to the establishment of civil order in Iraq for the first time since Hussein's surrender? We have the president's long-standing opposition to specific timetables in mind, so instead we'd like you to address conditions, however long it might take to get there. What's most important is how you connect actions by our men and women in Iraq to the reduction of conflict and improvement of living conditions there."
Not that I don't like "Sir, please convince us you're not just another lying sack of shit who will further the degradation of Iraq and the ruin of our own country's precious resources and lives. Putz."
Not that I don't like "Sir, please convince us you're not just another lying sack of shit who will further the degradation of Iraq and the ruin of our own country's precious resources and lives. Putz."
Obviously, we all want to know what his sekrit plan is for winning the war, but we also know there is none; questions about what he'll do differently are a good opportunity to bash the administration's failures so far, but not likely to reveal a whole lot about what's to come.
I'd be asking tons about military tribunals and torture (as in, does waterboarding, etc., count, or is it a Cheneyian no-brainer?) and why the Detainee Act is necessary. Seems like detainee/interrogation policy is one area where a Defense Secretary can have some immediate, significant impact, at least in theory (not that I'm hoping for much). The war's lost, everyone knows it, but at least we could maybe stop torturing people on our way out.
And along the lines of 27, I wonder a bit why he'd take this job when he turned down DNI a couple years ago? Something he didn't like about the (then) new intelligence restructuring? How does he feel about the 9/11 commission report, and do the rest of its recs need implementing?
Questions about Iran/Contra would be nice, but he's already been through them 15 years ago when he was confirmed as DCI, and I can't imagine any progress will be made on that front.
Full disclosure: I am a coward.
Question that I should have asked Paul Wellstone, Noam Chomsky and Salman Rushdie:
"When was the last time you cleaned a bathroom?"
Friends, if you ever want honesty from me, this is as close as you're going to get.
RUMBUSTION!!!
When I was a manager/editor, I actually asked potential hires: "If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?"
Unless, of course, you were manager/editor for Arborealist Weekly or something like that.
actually, it was Arborealist, Weakly the magazine for people who can just barely give a damn about trees.
(The following questions ramble on like crazy, but I think there's a lot to be explored here.)
It has long been said that the Pentagon and the CIA are often at odds on both tactical and strategic issues. When intelligence operations were re-organized under the DNI, your predecessor went to some trouble to ensure budgetary control over a substantial proportion of intelligence operations. What operational role does military intelligence play independent of the CIA? Do you feel the current budgetary and operational authority of military intelligende under the Pentagon is sufficient? why or why not?
Having spent much of your distinguished career at CIA, how would you characterize the proper relationship between the Pentagon and the Agency in the field? What steps can you take to ensure a relationship of trust between yourself and career officers who may have longstanding suspicion of the CIA?
More specifically: the CIA is becoming increasingly active in tactical operations, as with the development and use of unmanned drones. The CIA has also taken a leadership role in holding and interrogating detainees. How can you guarantee that military and CIA personnel will be operating as partners, rather than at cross-purposes? And with regard to prisoners: do you feel it is the responsibility of military personnel to safeguard the protection of prisoners detained by the U.S. military under the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law?
My "intelligende" is apparently somewhat reduded at this hour.
In re 29: Now that you have taken the recipe with you, how will Texas A&M continue to have enough ice?
At Texas A&M, did the mule make a greater contribution to the faculty of driver's ed or sex ed?
"Mr. Gates, given the spectacular failures of the 'dont-ask-don't-tell' policy—not to mention a slew of other Republican policies that privilege heteronormativity—there remains one question of utmost importance: why do all these homosexuals keep sucking your cock?"
The Commie Pinko Network had a great backgrounder on Gates.
Also, James Mann of Rise of the Vulcans fame says he's more of a Cheneybot than most people think.
"When will you get all the bugs out of Windows 95?"
So off topic, but... I am an occasional commenter here. LB will remember me. I affect to having a crush on another of the commentators and I actually taught a third... anyway, I am en route to Europe from NZ---and I am typing on free (!) internet in the Singapore airport. The point of telling you all of this is that I am just thrilled to be in mysterious Alameida territory. Oh excitement! That, dear ones, is all. [Ya' think I'll see her? Nah. She is mysterious.]
What do you have to say to Senator Harkin's testimony in opposition to your nomination to be CIA Director in 1991 http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1991_cr/s911107-gates.htm